What do you think this means

[Mr Gray]

No evidence to conclude anything definitively. That's where the investigation was in 2008, and it's where it is still.

thats right...no evidence against the McCanns of any crime

[Lyall]

thats right...no evidence against the McCanns of any crime

But something happened to the poor child, and if nothing can be proven definitively - nothing has been ruled out.

[icabodcrane]

You are posting what you guess it means.....it states very clearly there is no evidence that they committed any crime...

Whilst leaving the possibility of neglectful homicide  open 

In other words  ...   It can't be proven that they were involved ...  but they might have been 

[ferryman]

There is no evidence that they did not commit a crime  ...  if there were,  the Prosecutor would not have left the possibility of neglectful homicide on the table

Directed against the McCanns, they didn't!

Obviously the prosecutors could not account for the actions of an abductor, hence the possibility of homicide

[Mr Gray]

But something happened to the poor child, and if nothing can be proven definitively - nothing has been ruled out.

Of course...but there is no evidence against the MCcANNS

[Lyall]

Of course...but there is no evidence against the MCcANNS

Or anybody else.

Do you get it now?

[Mr Gray]

Whilst leaving the possibility of neglectful homicide  open 

In other words  ...   It can't be proven that they were involved ...  but they might have been

Who says the possibility of neglectful homicide is still open

[Mr Gray]

Or anybody else.

Do you get it now?

I got it a long time ago when idiots were writing pages about the dogs proving Maddie was dead...they've all gone quiet now

[stephen25000]

Who says the possibility of neglectful homicide is still open

It is still listed by the FCO as 'type of crime unknown'.

It is interesting that SY doesn't reflect this.

On this basis options are still open. >@@(*&)

[icabodcrane]

Who says the possibility of neglectful homicide is still open

It was when the case was archived   ...  and so it has remained without fresh evidence  (  of which there has been none  ) 

[gilet]

It is still listed by the FCO as 'type of crime unknown'.

It is interesting that SY doesn't reflect this.

On this basis options are still open. >@@(*&)

And you think the FCO are better informed about the case than SY?
Yeah OK!

[Mr Gray]

It was when the case was archived   ...  and so it has remained without fresh evidence  (  of which there has been none  )

you stated...

"The Prosecutor concluded that there was no evidence of any crime having been commited by the Mcanns 

Yet he leaves the possibility of neglectful homicide on the table "

Could you tell me where the prosecutor says he leaves the possibility of neglectful homicide on the table...I haven't seen it

[Lyall]

Isabel Diarte first has to establish damage.  It's a long trial.  I don't think it finishes until November.

That's true but at 1 or 2 days a week there are not many days in court between now and then.

Does it not look like Duarte isn't actually going to try to demonstrate there are inaccuracies in the book? She, like you, is relying on that 2008 document.

[LagosBen]

it states very clearly there is no evidence that they committed any crime...

Incredible isn't it? I sometimes think they must be reading a different extract to us. 8-)(--)

[gilet]

This is the full summation at the end of the conclusions in the archival report.

- Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
 
But therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann – apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment – or to hold anyone responsible over its authorship.
 
Finally, it should be underlined that this case, unfortunately, is not a police novel, an appropriate scenario for a "crime" that is tailored for the success of the investigative work of a Sherlock Holmes or a Hercule Poirot, guided by the illusion that the forces of law and justice always manage to re-establish the altered order, returning to society the peace and the tranquillity that were only accidentally disturbed.
 
The disappearance of Madeleine McCann is rather an implacable and intricate case of real life, which lies closer to the lucid narrative by Friedrich Duerrenmatt, - "The Pledge. Requiem for the police novel" – because reality and everyday life owe little or no obedience, most of the time, to logic.
 
Life's events do not conform to stereotyped novel-like schemes, it is rather the case that its outcome is often the product of chance or conditioned by accidental and unpredictable factors, and therefore, hard to envision.
 
The investigators are well aware of the fact that their work is not exempt of imperfection; they have worked with an enormous error margin, and what they have achieved is very little in terms of conclusive results, especially concerning the fate of the unfortunate child. Nevertheless, they always knew that action was necessary and in reality they acted intensively and with commitment, even at the risk of erring.
 
Nevertheless, anyone who feels unsatisfied about the epilogue of the investigations, will have the possibility to react against it, having the possibility of eventually changing that epilogue, by prompting diligences based on new evidence, as long as that person has the legitimacy to request them and the requested diligences are serious, pertinent and consequent. They may do so in three ways: by requesting the reopening of the inquiry, under article 279, number 1 of the Penal Process Code; by appealing hierarchically against this dispatch under number 2 of article 278, or in another case, under number 2 of article 279 of the Penal Process Code, or by requesting the opening of the instruction under article 287, number 1, item b, of the Penal Process Code.
 
Finally, it should be noted that an archiving decision may be a fair decision, although of the possible justice, and, especially, to underline heavily that the archiving of the present files does not equal a definite and irreversible closing of the process. This process, as long as the prescription deadline for the possibly committed crimes does reach its term, and if new evidence that justifies it, appears, can always be reopened, officiously or through the request of an assistant, again ordinate to a final decision of accusation or non accusation.
 
Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:
 
a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;
 
b) The archiving of the Process concerning arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
 
Article 277 number 3 of the Penal Process Code is to be fulfilled.
 
Under article 214 number 1 item a) of the Penal Process Code, the coercion measures that have been imposed on the arguidos are declared extinct.
 
Portimão, 21.07.08
 
The Republic's Prosecutor
 
(José de Magalhães e Menezes)
 
The Joint General Prosecutor
 
(João Melchior Gomes)