Author Topic: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?  (Read 40322 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Montclair

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #30 on: October 01, 2013, 05:28:14 PM »
I think it's clear from reading his book that Amaral simply didn't have the dynamic mind and mental flexibility to handle an investigation as complex as the one he found himself presented with. Nobody, not even Kate and Gerry, would try to argue that the police shouldn't explore theories. Amaral and his colleagues were right to question the statements made by the McCanns' holiday companions. They were right to scrutinise contradictions and of course, they were right to consider the possibility that the parents or friends were involved in their daughter's disappearance. However, within the first twenty-four hours, certainly within the first forty-eight, they should have eliminated the parents from their inquiries. They failed to do so.

Amaral's problem was that he became fixated, to the detriment of the investigation. He misunderstood the forensic evidence, hardly surprising given that the local officers were trying to gather it without even wearing gloves! More worryingly, he grew increasingly paranoid about the motivations of his superiors and his British counterparts, seeing plots and hidden agendas everywhere. In short, he was not fit to carry out the role entrusted to him by the good people of Portugal.

The above was clear to anyone who had so much as a passing interest in the case. For Kate and Gerry - at the centre of it - it would have been painfully clear that Amaral had all but abandoned any sense of objectivity, and was interested only in his own pet theories. Their decision not to indulge his idiocy any longer was perfectly understandable.

Reconstruction? The only thing that needed reconstructing was the investigative process!

I will say this once again, hoping that this information might just sink into some people's heads. Gonçalo Amaral did not lead the investigation. The Polícia Judiciária are part of the judicial system and work under the authority of the judges in the Ministério Público. All decisions are made by the judges not the inspectors. Many of you still insist on the idea that investigations in Portugal are run like they are in the UK.

The investigation in the beginning was influenced by pressure from the British authorities. Although the PJ and the Ministério Público had their suspicions about the parents, they were pressured into looking exclusively at the abduction theory for the first 3 months and obviously got nowhere, even with the presence of the British police to help them. So, please don't come up with the story that the Portuguese did not look at other alternatives. Also, I would like to remind you that the British were the first to come up with the possibility that Madeleine was dead. Perhaps you should acquaint yourself with Lee Rainbow and Mark Harrison.

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #31 on: October 01, 2013, 05:28:55 PM »
So, if thats the case, why were the McCann's not interrogated??

By the way, Ignorance is bliss  @)(++(*

Read the first two paragraphs here

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm

I have seen nowhere in the files any request by the PJ to requestion the Mccanns, let alone a list of 100 new questions!

Offline Luz

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #32 on: October 01, 2013, 05:37:44 PM »
Can yo detail what makes them objectively ridiculous? Or are you just disinclined to trust them?

Read them and afterwards we can discuss it's importance to clarify whatever was stated before.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #33 on: October 01, 2013, 05:38:16 PM »
I think it's clear from reading his book that Amaral simply didn't have the dynamic mind and mental flexibility to handle an investigation as complex as the one he found himself presented with. Nobody, not even Kate and Gerry, would try to argue that the police shouldn't explore theories. Amaral and his colleagues were right to question the statements made by the McCanns' holiday companions. They were right to scrutinise contradictions and of course, they were right to consider the possibility that the parents or friends were involved in their daughter's disappearance. However, within the first twenty-four hours, certainly within the first forty-eight, they should have eliminated the parents from their inquiries. They failed to do so.

Amaral's problem was that he became fixated, to the detriment of the investigation. He misunderstood the forensic evidence, hardly surprising given that the local officers were trying to gather it without even wearing gloves! More worryingly, he grew increasingly paranoid about the motivations of his superiors and his British counterparts, seeing plots and hidden agendas everywhere. In short, he was not fit to carry out the role entrusted to him by the good people of Portugal.

The above was clear to anyone who had so much as a passing interest in the case. For Kate and Gerry - at the centre of it - it would have been painfully clear that Amaral had all but abandoned any sense of objectivity, and was interested only in his own pet theories. Their decision not to indulge his idiocy any longer was perfectly understandable.

Reconstruction? The only thing that needed reconstructing was the investigative process!
How do you then explain the McCanns' fear that such a book could hamper the search?

Offline Luz

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #34 on: October 01, 2013, 05:45:27 PM »
How do you then explain the McCanns' fear that such a book could hamper the search?

One woman videoed taking fingerprints without gloves doesn't hamper the forensics results. What may have compromised the crime scene was the hysterical (or voluntary?!) damage caused by the McCann themselves, their friends and all the people they invited into the apartment, and the fact that they took almost an hour to call the authorities.

The fear the McCann had about the book was just an extension of the fear they had from the first minute. That's why they delayed contacting the authorities and instead chose to put up a Media campaign before the police had a chance to get there.

Offline Victoria

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #35 on: October 01, 2013, 05:46:30 PM »
How do you then explain the McCanns' fear that such a book could hamper the search?

I don't speak for the McCanns. If you refer to the opening post, you will see that this thread is about the reconstruction.

Offline Luz

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #36 on: October 01, 2013, 05:49:16 PM »
I read them a long time ago. I do not need to tread them again before you support your assertion that they are ridiculous.

If you are going to make a statement, you need to back it up. Why, in your humble opinion, are they ridiculous; if so, are they ridiculous to everyone, or is it just your opinion.

If you need me to appoint why they are ridiculous, either you didn't read them or you didn't understand what was the point for those interviews - I can guaranty you that it was not to have the witnesses read or being told what their (or their partners) previous testimonies were in order to attempt to make ends meet.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #37 on: October 01, 2013, 05:52:00 PM »
The Madeleine McCann investigation has hit an impasse as police are being blocked from asking the McCanns 100 new questions.
 
Detectives said a 'root and branch' review of the six-month inquiry had 'confirmed suspicions' but failed to uncover any new clues which could solve the disappearance.
 
They have drawn up a list of questions they want to put to Kate and Gerry McCann but they will not be allowed to do so unless they convince a public prosecutor that they have a case against them.
 
They also want to interrogate the other members of the so-called Tapas Nine, and to quiz relatives about the couple and their relationship with their children.
 
But the Portuguese public prosecutor has said he will not authorise any new interrogations without seeing stronger evidence in the case.
 
Police have privately admitted that it would take 'a miracle' for them to build a better case against the couple, although they still hope there could be a forensics breakthrough in the investigation.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-493208/Madeleine-investigation-grinds-halt-police-barred-asking-suspects-100-new-questions.html#ixzz2gUArVlNU
The Daily Mail !
The MP said that there was no reason for Mrs McCann to change her attitude (lawyer orientated) and answer the 48 since no new element of proof had be uncovered. If there had been, she should have come to Portugal, as an arguido. But of course she could spontaneously, or because the lawyer all of a sudden would have thought it was better, have asked to be interviewed in Portimão.

Offline Montclair

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #38 on: October 01, 2013, 05:53:24 PM »
Where is your evidence for the delay in calling the police. What time elapsed? How do we know?

I would point out that in such cases virtually no crime scene is unsulllied. It is also suggested that the local police showed no respect for it as a crime scene until the PJ showed.

Of course, it was not considered a crime scene because, at the time, it was a case of a missing child who could have wandered off and been found.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #39 on: October 01, 2013, 05:57:40 PM »
until the PJ showed.
The PJ showed when the GNR called them and the GNR showed when the receptionist called them, about 40 minutes after the alert and though all these people had cell phones and could call the 999 that would have redirected them to the European Emergency Number 112.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #40 on: October 01, 2013, 05:59:24 PM »
So that would also apply to the McCanns who at that time did not know (and probably still do not know) what happened.
The issue, the crucial one, is the McCann always knew what happened : an abduction from bed, nothing else.

Offline John

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #41 on: October 01, 2013, 05:59:51 PM »
Where is your evidence for the delay in calling the police. What time elapsed? How do we know?

I would point out that in such cases virtually no crime scene is unsulllied. It is also suggested that the local police showed no respect for it as a crime scene until the PJ showed.

Lets keep to the facts guys which we have already established by much scrutiny of the evidence.

The police were summoned a short time after Madeleine was found to have disappeared.  It wasn't the McCanns fault that the resort receptionist delayed in telephoning them or that the only patrol available was miles away at the time dealing with an alleged robbery.

Madeleine was found to be missing some minutes after 10pm, the Portuguese police (GNR) arrived at 11pm and it was after midnight when the first of the detectives or PJ arrived.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Montclair

Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #42 on: October 01, 2013, 06:04:25 PM »
What time did reception make the call? Who informed reception?

The GNR received the call at 22h50. Wouldn't these questions be cleared up with a reconstruction which you seem to think would be useless?

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #43 on: October 01, 2013, 06:05:24 PM »
I don't speak for the McCanns. If you refer to the opening post, you will see that this thread is about the reconstruction.
I wasn't suggesting this. I just answered to your "I think it's clear from reading his book that Amaral simply didn't have the dynamic mind and mental flexibility to handle an investigation as complex as the one he found himself presented with."
If it's clear for you, it's clear for anybody and this trial is absurd unless it gives money to the McCanns.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was the refusal to partake in a reconstruction to their detriment?
« Reply #44 on: October 01, 2013, 06:06:07 PM »
The GNR received the call at 22h50. Wouldn't these questions be cleared up with a reconstruction which you seem to think would be useless?
22:41 the first call.