The tapas-9 members who refused to take part in a reconstruction in PdL.

[John]

Portuguese investigators attempted to organise a reconstruction (reconstitution) of events which occurred on 3rd May 2007 but were thwarted in their efforts prior to abandoning the initiative.

The issue was referred to by the Appeal Court which deliberated the Amaral book ban.

This statement by the appellate court is worth repeating...

In possession of that new data, and crossing it with the data that had been collected before, the Portuguese authorities - the Public Ministry and the Judiciary Police - tried to perform a reconstitution of the facts, they did and tried everything, but due to the lack of availability of the McCann couple and their friends, who did not show up, said diligence could not be performed and those facts still remain to be clarified.

Concerning that matter, it is written in the final dispatch that "(…) despite the fact that the national authorities took all measures to render their travelling to Portugal possible, due to motives that are unknown, after the many doubts that they raised concerning the need and the opportunity of their travelling were clarified several times, they chose not to show up, which rendered the diligence impossible to perform.

We believe that the main damaged party were the McCann arguidos, who missed the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were made arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also hindered, because said facts remain unclear (…)".

[Eleanor]

This statement by the appellate court is worth repeating...

In possession of that new data, and crossing it with the data that had been collected before, the Portuguese authorities - the Public Ministry and the Judiciary Police - tried to perform a reconstitution of the facts, they did and tried everything, but due to the lack of availability of the McCann couple and their friends, who did not show up, said diligence could not be performed and those facts still remain to be clarified.

Concerning that matter, it is written in the final dispatch that "(…) despite the fact that the national authorities took all measures to render their travelling to Portugal possible, due to motives that are unknown, after the many doubts that they raised concerning the need and the opportunity of their travelling were clarified several times, they chose not to show up, which rendered the diligence impossible to perform.

We believe that the main damaged party were the McCann arguidos, who missed the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were made arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also hindered, because said facts remain unclear (…)".

The McCann Couple never refused to go to Portugal for a reconstitution.

Was it mentioned that Amaral refused to do a reconstitution at the beginning, for reasons that didn't appear to exist at the later date?

[Anna]

The McCann Couple never refused to go to Portugal for a reconstitution.

Was it mentioned that Amaral refused to do a reconstitution at the beginning, for reasons that didn't appear to exist at the later date?

Apensos IX Vol I
Page 139



Public Ministry of Portimao
Case Section
Case 201/07 GALGS


Dear Sir
Public prosecutor


Kate Marie Healy arguida in the case referred to above, having been notified (page 3947) expresses her availability to participate in the reconstruction of the events on the second of the dates suggested, in other words on the 15 and 16th of next May. Her husband, Gerry McCann has also already expressed his availability.


Rogério Alves

Lawyer


(Sent by email)
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic24-30.html

[sadie]

Apensos IX Vol I
Page 139



Public Ministry of Portimao
Case Section
Case 201/07 GALGS


Dear Sir
Public prosecutor


Kate Marie Healy arguida in the case referred to above, having been notified (page 3947) expresses her availability to participate in the reconstruction of the events on the second of the dates suggested, in other words on the 15 and 16th of next May. Her husband, Gerry McCann has also already expressed his availability.

Rogério Alves

Lawyer


(Sent by email)
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic24-30.html

Well done anna.  You always come up with the goods.

Some good points above 

[John]

...or more importantly, the witnesses who refused to take part.



Table of Contents : Processo Vol 16..(PDF page 223)...Page 4354—"Email from Rebelo to Prior re: Prosecutor Decision"

Vol 16 Page 4354 (Page 1 of 1)

Paulo Fernando Gaspar Rebelo

From : Paulo Fernando Gaspar Rebelo.
Date : 27th May 2008 10.25 a.m.
To : "Prior Stuart"
Subject : Re-enactment cancelation

(( Inserted here is an attachment labelled : Anulação da reconstitutiçã0.doc....))

Dear Stuart :

As agreed, here I send the Prosecutor's decision regarding the re-enactment cancelation. In a few words, it says that due the absence of the wittnesses Matthew Oldfield, Rachael Mampilly, Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner, there are no conditions to perform the diligence.
I kindly request you to urgently transmit this decision to each one of the witnesses (Matthew, Rachael, Russell, Jane, Dianne, David, Fiona and Jeremy).

Thank you, again, for your cooperation.
Best regards
Paulo Rebelo
CSIC

[Anna]

...or more importantly, the witnesses who refused to take part.



Table of Contents : Processo Vol 16..(PDF page 223)...Page 4354—"Email from Rebelo to Prior re: Prosecutor Decision"

Vol 16 Page 4354 (Page 1 of 1)

Paulo Fernando Gaspar Rebelo

From : Paulo Fernando Gaspar Rebelo.
Date : 27th May 2008 10.25 a.m.
To : "Prior Stuart"
Subject : Re-enactment cancelation

(( Inserted here is an attachment labelled : Anulação da reconstitutiçã0.doc....))

Dear Stuart :

As agreed, here I send the Prosecutor's decision regarding the re-enactment cancelation. In a few words, it says that due the absence of the wittnesses Matthew Oldfield, Rachael Mampilly, Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner, there are no conditions to perform the diligence.
I kindly request you to urgently transmit this decision to each one of the witnesses (Matthew, Rachael, Russell, Jane, Dianne, David, Fiona and Jeremy).

Thank you, again, for your cooperation.
Best regards
Paulo Rebelo
CSIC

And why for at least them

Thanks to MCXLIII for typing up the following posts:

[Processo/16 - VOLUME XVIa.pdf P106 ]
Vol XVI p. 4237

xx xxxxxx xxxx
Exeter
Devon
xxx xxx


23rd April 2008

Re: Re-enactment of Events of 3/5/2008

Dear Stuart, Many thanks for your email, and for forwarding the reply from Senhor Rebelo. Also, thanks to you and your colleagues for arranging the re-interviews.

It is somewhat reassuring to see in writing from the PJ that there are "no suspicions over [us] regarding the commission of any criminal acts." However, we heard something similar in the weeks before Kate and Gerry were made arguidos! Additionally, the thrust of the PJ's closed questions during the re-interviews seemed only to focus on Kate and Gerry's culpability, suspicion about our written timeline or who involved the media.

After a year of lies, accusations and intrusion, I am sure that the Mr Rebelo can appreciate our complete revulsion at what Kate and Gerry have been forced to endure. Furthermore, we cannot help but feel that the re-interviews and re-enactment are all too little and far too late.

However, the last thing we would ever want is a standoff between us and the PJ, something that would only delight and benefit the press. Kate and Gerry desperately need the cloud of suspicion over them to be emphatically lifted, and the PJ need to complete their investigation. We also appreciate the legal obstacles to removing Kate and Gerry's arguido status, but would request that prior to us agreeing to the re-enactment the PJ:

• publicly dispels the damaging and disturbing lies churned out by the Portuguese press regarding alleged changes to statements, re-interviews or alleged lack of co-operation.

• publicly states there are "no suspicions over [us] regarding the commission of any criminal acts." This in no way compromises judicial secrecy.

This in no way compromises judicial secrecy. But without some official intervention on their part, a return for the re-enactment seems little more than a perfect opportunity for the press to speculate and libel us all once again.

We are very keen to help an investigation aiming to establish what's happened to Madeleine, but have no desire to assist one that seeks only to d**n our innocent friends. By actively restoring the focus on Madeleine and robustly dispelling the countless speculation, the PJ can expect our continued co- operation.

Yours sincerely,

Russell O'Brien & Jane Tanner

PS: We certainly do not request any specific reimbursement for travel or accommodation.

[John]

Interesting...witnesses dictating the terms whereby investigators may conduct a criminal investigation.  Would a witness in the UK get away with such arrogance?

The Portuguese should have demanded they be brought back, in shackles if necessary. 

Remind me...who obstructed the search for Madeleine?

[ferryman]

Interesting...witnesses dictating the terms whereby investigators may conduct a criminal investigation.  Would a witness in the UK get away with such arrogance?

The Portuguese should have demanded they be brought back, in shackles if necessary. 

Remind me...who obstructed the search for Madeleine?

A witness in the UK would never be invited to take part in a reconstruction intended to determine the guilt or innocence of an accused.

That is why the Portuguese term (more accurately describing its intended purpose) is reconstitution rather than reconstruction.

That is, an attempt to replicate, as accurately as possible, a sequence of events that actually happened earlier.

Certainly, to a standard that ought to be required for determining guilt or innocence, that is mission impossible, even with the best will in the world.

[Anna]

Interesting...witnesses dictating the terms whereby investigators may conduct a criminal investigation.  Would a witness in the UK get away with such arrogance?

The Portuguese should have demanded they be brought back, in shackles if necessary. 

Remind me...who obstructed the search for Madeleine?

If it happened in UK ,Yes you are correct John, they would probably have been forced to take part, but the Portuguese authorities have no Authority in the UK.
 However if this was a Portuguese citizen, it would all have been a very different ball game and the McCanns would be in prison by now despite the evidence being non existent .

I would like to add that the term “McCann supporters” on here, is offensive, since I do not  particularly like the McCanns, but Maddie was a child and she deserves Justice.
I am simply checking out the facts associated with Maddie’s disappearance and trying (as most rational human beings would) to determine all the possibilities of what could have happened.
  The way I see it , this is a forum meant for people to debate and investigate any possibilities that could be associated with the crime (in a civilised, adult manner) and not as some seem to assume, for achieving popularity with any particular persons.

[Estuarine]

One judges people by their deeds not their words. Whatever anyone may or may not have said T9 were a "no show" for the reconstitution that Sr. Rebelo wanted.
It's a bit like Mitchell "Kate and Gerry are prepared to take a polygraph test at anytime; but it is inadmissible in court so they will not bother" paraphrased of course.

[Eleanor]

Interesting...witnesses dictating the terms whereby investigators may conduct a criminal investigation.  Would a witness in the UK get away with such arrogance?

The Portuguese should have demanded they be brought back, in shackles if necessary. 

Remind me...who obstructed the search for Madeleine?

Not legally possible to force them to return.  None of them were Arguidos.  And The PJ would have been laughed out of court if they had attempted to make them so at that late stage.

[pegasus]

Not legally possible to force them to return.  None of them were Arguidos.  And The PJ would have been laughed out of court if they had attempted to make them so at that late stage.

Mr Redwood now has legal authority to interview any persons in the UK he wishes.

[Eleanor]

Mr Redwood now has legal authority to interview any persons in the UK he wishes.

Of course he does.  I expect he already has.  Has he arrested anyone yet?

[jassi]

Of course he does.  I expect he already has. Has he arrested anyone yet?

I suspect that is not on the cards for anyone.

[Eleanor]

I suspect that is not on the cards for anyone.

He certainly isn't going backwards and forwards to PdL to question or arrest the tapas friends.  There is likely someone in Portugal that he is interested in.  Could be Portuguese.  Could be British.  Could be anything actually.