Was Gonçalo Amaral fair game given the content of his book?

[Redblossom]

It was not until 21 July 2008 that the Portuguese authorities shelved their investigation and lifted the arguido status of the McCanns. Responding to the contents of the cable, a spokesman for the McCanns told the Guardian: "This is an entirely historic note that is more than three years old. [from the date of the article, December 2010] Subsequently, Kate and Gerry had their arguido status lifted, with the Portuguese authorities making it perfectly clear that there was absolutely no evidence to implicate them in Madeleine's disappearance whatsoever.

Quite, rumour based on unsubstantiated leaks before the files were released.  And those unfounded leaks were repeated and reinforced in Amaral's book.

You really a a master at shifting goalposts and cherry picking to suit


You asked where the "canard" came from that the British "developed" the evidence against the Mccanns


I answered you

A) It wasn't a "canard"

B) It was from official documents "hacked and leaked" by Wikileaks in 2010

C) It had nothng to do with Amaral or his book or leaks from the PJ before or after vis a vis the British Ambassadors comments

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id353.htm

There you go

Hard  work sometimes here !!

[Lyall]

id353.html Red

[Redblossom]

id353.html Red

that's odd the direct link doesn't work, but if you google Wikileaks Release - McCann Files, top entry links to the page

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=wikileaks+release+-+mccannfiles&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari

[Montclair]

It is interesting that  this episode of the show, in which great emphasis is placed on Mr Amaral's exposition of the idea that we must stick to facts, facts and only facts, begins with a slot on the Canadian psychics.

Presenter Julia mentions the 'findings' of the psychics again  half way though, just before introducing footage of Mr Amaral outside the apartment with the other journalist talking about the different entrances.

It's not Gonçalo Amaral's television show and it was not his decision to have a segment involving the psychics.

[pegasus]

IMO Mr Amarals team made some serious errors in the investigation.
(One example is the GNR thumbprint accidently being used (IMO) to misdeduce that KM lied about the window).
However IMO Mr Amaral is a man of integrity and I believe he will be shown to be so when the case is solved.

[Redblossom]

IMO Mr Amarals team made some serious errors in the investigation.
(One example is the GNR thumbprint accidently being used (IMO) to misdeduce that KM lied about the window).
However IMO Mr Amaral is a man of integrity and I believe he will be shown to be so when the case is solved.

??

[pathfinder73]

IMO Mr Amarals team made some serious errors in the investigation.
(One example is the GNR thumbprint accidently being used (IMO) to misdeduce that KM lied about the window).
However IMO Mr Amaral is a man of integrity and I believe he will be shown to be so when the case is solved.

How's a GNR print got anything to do with opening the window? Someone opened it before they arrived on the scene and Kate's fingerprints were found. Kate said she was conscious of not touching things but as soon as Dianne Webster arrives she asks her to check the shutters for her  8-)(--) Get someone else to tamper with the crime scene 

[Carana]

"In order to prove that the child is dead it is not necessary to have a body" GA

In very exceptional circumstances, I'd agree that it may be possible to at least safely assume that someone died in the absence of a body.

However, in neither of the two missing children cases that he coordinated has his team proven that the child died, nor even been in a position to safely assume that this was the case. 

[Eleanor]

Why did Amaral assume that two Portuguese peasants were so clever that they were able to hide a body or any signs of one, for ever?
Or did he think they were both too thick to defend themselves when they had the shite beaten out of them?

PS.  The term "Peasant" in France is not derogatory necessarily.  But The Ciprianos were hardly worldly wise. 

Pity about The McCanns fighting back.

PPS.  I have just realised that nothing I say will ever make a difference to those with closed minds.  Why has it taken me so long?

[Lyall]

Why did Amaral assume that two Portuguese peasants were so clever that they were able to hide a body or any signs of one, for ever?
Or did he think they were both too thick to defend themselves when they had the shite beaten out of them?

PS.  The term "Peasant" in France is not derogatory necessarily.  But The Ciprianos were hardly worldly wise. 

Pity about The McCanns fighting back.

PPS.  I have just realised that nothing I say will ever make a difference to those with closed minds.  Why has it taken me so long?

Why did Amaral assume..?

Because he was a policeman, and that was his job. But police do not take the decision to prosecute, and they do not convict people.

Your continual determination to single out just one man is why you will not ever convince anyone: your agenda has precisely zero subtlety.

[Lyall]

Why did Amaral assume that two Portuguese peasants were so clever that they were able to hide a body or any signs of one, for ever?
Or did he think they were both too thick to defend themselves when they had the shite beaten out of them?

PS.  The term "Peasant" in France is not derogatory necessarily.  But The Ciprianos were hardly worldly wise. 

Pity about The McCanns fighting back.

PPS.  I have just realised that nothing I say will ever make a difference to those with closed minds.  Why has it taken me so long?

It's the same when people keep asking why did the police think Barry George shot Jill Dando? The police get the blame, but they didn't make the decision to prosecute. The current DPP was involved in George's prosecution and conviction, but few people blame her.

You and they keep blaming the police (just one policeman in your case) when it's the lawyers and judiciary who should be sharing the criticism (but that's clearly not so convenient for your agenda).

[Eleanor]

It's the same when people keep asking why did the police think Barry George shot Jill Dando? The police get the blame, but they didn't make the decision to prosecute. The current DPP was involved in George's prosecution and conviction, but few people blame her.

You and they keep blaming the police (just one policeman in your case) when it's the lawyers and judiciary who should be sharing the criticism (but that's clearly not so convenient for your agenda).

Oh, so you think there should be critisism.

As it is I don't actually care what any of you think.  It isn't going to result in a conviction, is it.  But I am not just going to sit here and listen to the lies.
Or would you rather I bogged off and left you to get on with whatever you think you are doing?

[Lyall]

Oh, so you think there should be critisism.

As it is I don't actually care what any of you think.  It isn't going to result in a conviction, is it.  But I am not just going to sit here and listen to the lies.
Or would you rather I bogged off and left you to get on with whatever you think you are doing?

Nope, not me.

It's just discussion. 99.9% of the country doesn't get involved in it. It's not 'victimisation' or whatever word or words you might care to use to describe it. It's discussion and considering the papers still put the case on their front pages - seven years later - discussion is understandable and very valid.

[Lyall]

I mean discussion here. I don't agree with what people do elsewhere (much of which disgusts me as much as it does you).

[Eleanor]

I mean discussion here. I don't agree with what people do elsewhere (much of which disgusts me as much as it does you).

Thank you.  But even speculation goes too far sometimes.