Would an amnesty in the Madeleine case bring forth a conclusion?

[John]

I know we have looked at the provision of a reward in the Madeleine McCann case but what if an amnesty were to be offered to those who are involved.  I purposely have not used the word abducted for several reasons.

If she is deceased and this scenario is more likely than the other, wouldn't it be better that her family and especially parents and siblings know about it rather than go to their graves not knowing?

If there was an abductor or abductors, offer an immunity against prosecution for revealing where Madeleine is.

Please discuss.

115

[peter claridge]

Would this amnesty apply to the T9 as well?

[VIXTE]

I've got a feeling there would be no need for this..

It is hard to explain this feeling but for example to form a reason for prosecution SY and PJ would need to full fill providing evidence A, B and C.

What we have in published files is lots of As.. possibly a part of a B somewhere, if looked from an different angle but no Cs..

I believe they reached the point B at the moment.. and they are pushing towards the C..

[Carana]

Interesting question, John.

There was a case recently, although I can't remember offhand in which country, in which there had been a suspicious death/murder, with probable drug users who wouldn't have spontaneously come forward, but who may have had information to help solve the bigger case. From memory, amnesty was granted and people did indeed come forward.

[Estuarine]

I can just about bring myself to accept amnesties in a political context. e.g EOKA and Mau Mau.
In a criminal context I think amnesty defeats the principles of law. Letting someone off a minor crime to nail someone else for a major crime or gain useful intelligence is a bit iffy in my book. OK it probably happens but should be discouraged as it legitimises some law breaking. The problem then is that an individual or organisation is making decisions that rightfully in our society should be made by the Judiciary.

[Carana]

I can just about bring myself to accept amnesties in a political context. e.g EOKA and Mau Mau.
In a criminal context I think amnesty defeats the principles of law. Letting someone off a minor crime to nail someone else for a major crime or gain useful intelligence is a bit iffy in my book. OK it probably happens but should be discouraged as it legitimises some law breaking. The problem then is that an individual or organisation is making decisions that rightfully in our society should be made by the Judiciary.

Dunno. A hypothetical situation. Someone has been knifed to death in a nightclub. After weeks or months, no useful witnesses come forward. What do you do? Shelve it? Or offer amnesty to people who may have crucial information but who wouldn't have come forward out of fear of being prosecuted for either taking whatever suspected drug may have been taken, or even sold, that night?

[AnneGuedes]

I can just about bring myself to accept amnesties in a political context. e.g EOKA and Mau Mau.
In a criminal context I think amnesty defeats the principles of law. Letting someone off a minor crime to nail someone else for a major crime or gain useful intelligence is a bit iffy in my book. OK it probably happens but should be discouraged as it legitimises some law breaking. The problem then is that an individual or organisation is making decisions that rightfully in our society should be made by the Judiciary.

I agree with that. Amnesty is only justified to establish a situation where people have a chance to live together again.
We know that the police work with illegally obtained, sometimes precious, informations. But it must remain unofficial and opaque, to be effective.

[Estuarine]

Dunno. A hypothetical situation. Someone has been knifed to death in a nightclub. After weeks or months, no useful witnesses come forward. What do you do? Shelve it? Or offer amnesty to people who may have crucial information but who wouldn't have come forward out of fear of being prosecuted for either taking whatever suspected drug may have been taken, or even sold, that night?

Same answer! you either believe in the rule of law or you don't. If you believe law and justice are tradable commodities then who will be the arbiter of where lines are drawn?

[Carana]

I agree with that. Amnesty is only justified to establish a situation where people have a chance to live together again.
We know that the police work with illegally obtained, sometimes precious, informations. But it must remain unofficial and opaque, to be effective.

Why only when "people have a chance to live together again"? What about the poor police with a serious investigation into a murder or missing person in which no witnesses are willing to come forward? What about the poor families who need to know what happened?

[Carana]

Same answer! you either believe in the rule of law or you don't. If you believe law and justice are tradable commodities then who will be the arbiter of where lines are drawn?

ETA: Apologies, I intended to reply to Anne Guedes, whose comment was just above.

I agree with your philosophical question. However, to quote your previous remark, you seem to find it justified in certain circumstances:

"I agree with that. Amnesty is only justified to establish a situation where people have a chance to live together again.
We know that the police work with illegally obtained, sometimes precious, informations. But it must remain unofficial and opaque, to be effective. "

[AnneGuedes]

Same answer! you either believe in the rule of law or you don't. If you believe law and justice are tradable commodities then who will be the arbiter of where lines are drawn?

Absolutely. This doesn't mean everything has to be transparent.

[AnneGuedes]

Why only when "people have a chance to live together again"? What about the poor police with a serious investigation into a murder or missing person in which no witnesses are willing to come forward? What about the poor families who need to know what happened?

The "poor" police and the "poor" families need a law system solid like a rock and separation of powers like John Locke advocated.

[Carana]

Absolutely. This doesn't mean everything has to be transparent.

But then you also stated that one either believes in the rule of law or not...

[Estuarine]

I agree with your philosophical question. However, to quote your previous remark, you seem to find it justified in certain circumstances:

"I agree with that. Amnesty is only justified to establish a situation where people have a chance to live together again.
We know that the police work with illegally obtained, sometimes precious, informations. But it must remain unofficial and opaque, to be effective. "

I think you have "muxed ip" my reply and that of Anne. I believe amnesty per se is more or less acceptable in a political context but not in a criminal one. A police officer trading an offence of what in my younger days was called "going prepared" for some key info on a planned blag could not be construed as an amnesty. It is a one off trade. In the context of what we are discussing on this thread granting an amnesty would potentially lead to finding out what had happened to Madeleine McCann at the expense of being able to do anything about it if a crime had been committed.

[Carana]

I think you have "muxed ip" my reply and that of Anne. I believe amnesty per se is more or less acceptable in a political context but not in a criminal one. A police officer trading an offence of what in my younger days was called "going prepared" for some key info on a planned blag could not be construed as an amnesty. It is a one off trade. In the context of what we are discussing on this thread granting an amnesty would potentially lead to finding out what had happened to Madeleine McCann at the expense of being able to do anything about it if a crime had been committed.

Yes, I did, I quoted you instead of Anne. Apologies, I've amended my post.

Yes, I don't actually know what the negotiations are in such situations, but a one-off trade for amnesty concerning potential prosecutions for side issues might be feasible in certain jurisdictions in exceptional cases, as in someone consuming or peddling pills at a rave party, but who may have been a key witness of a murder, or even someone whose visa had run out, who had an undeclared job, or may have had a conviction at some point for petty theft or whatever else. Or even a family member or partner who may not trust the police not to leak to the press.