The tapas group and the 'reconstitution' that was never to take place.

[Eleanor]

How do think that criminal investigations are carried out in other countries? Do you think asking for an alibi is fascist?

Not everyone has an Alibi.  What happens then?

[Montclair]

Not everyone has an Alibi.  What happens then?

The police investigate, what else!

[Mr Gray]

The police investigate, what else!

they investigated the mccanns and found nothing

[Jean-Pierre]

The police investigate, what else!

What else? 

Why, gather material for their book. 

[Jean-Pierre]

A properly organised reconstruction could resolve and clarify some of these discrepancies, or at least expose them - you could not not have done that at this time because you were doing something else.   

So - why was a reconstruction not at least attempted shortly after the incident?  Who was in charge of the investigation?     

[Carana]

A properly organised reconstruction could resolve and clarify some of these discrepancies, or at least expose them - you could not not have done that at this time because you were doing something else.   

So - why was a reconstruction not at least attempted shortly after the incident?  Who was in charge of the investigation?     

That is when it would have made the most sense, particularly as it could have included far more people (including locals, OC staff), etc.

Amaral said that they chose not to because of the potential media interest. He at least intimated that it was also because they didn't want the group to know that they were suspects.

All they had to say, however, was that it was to pinpoint when an abductor could have taken her without being noticed. That would have been perfectly plausible to most people... except that the press might have dragged up the Cipriano "reconstruction" and the fact that he was already an arguido in that affair.

[Jean-Pierre]

That is when it would have made the most sense, particularly as it could have included far more people (including locals, OC staff), etc.

Amaral said that they chose not to because of the potential media interest. He at least intimated that it was also because they didn't want the group to know that they were suspects.

All they had to say, however, was that it was to pinpoint when an abductor could have taken her without being noticed. That would have been perfectly plausible to most people... except that the press might have dragged up the Cipriano "reconstruction" and the fact that he was already an arguido in that affair.

That makes sense.  Which makes it all the more puzzling why it was not done. 

I would have thought that part of the point would be the media interest - pubicising the event may have triggered memories in peoples minds and could have led to further leads. 

[ferryman]

Jean-Pierre:

pubicising the event may have triggered memories in peoples minds and could have led to further leads.

But the Portuguese don't do that.

Their secrecy laws won't allow it.

That's why they call what they do allow reconstitutions rather than reconstructions.

The purpose is purely to determine guilt or innocence of the accused, mission impossible by that route, because you can never recreate things exactly the same as first time round ...

[Carana]

That makes sense.  Which makes it all the more puzzling why it was not done. 

I would have thought that part of the point would be the media interest - pubicising the event may have triggered memories in peoples minds and could have led to further leads.

Not in Portugal as the concept of a reconstruction / reconstitution is to assess potential guilt of those summoned to take part as opposed to a public appeal for potential witnesses.

One possibility is that they really weren't aware that reconstructions in other countries could be used as an appeal and that therefore a reconstruction would have intimated that the group were suspects. However, it could have been handled differently, as I suggested earlier. They could just have wheeled out the valiant de Sousa to state that it was to pinpoint when she could have been taken.

The other possibility is the fact the coordinator was an arguido himself in the Cipriano case (which involved a so-called "reconstitution" in dubious circumstances as virtually the only "evidence" on which they were convicted, not to mention the torture), and might have drawn unwanted press attention to that case. Particularly as it also involved a missing child not that far away, with an abysmal investigation, and no evidence as to what actually happened to her.

Amaral moans about political interference. However, IMO, it doesn't take too much to work out what the diplomatic exchanges were actually about...

[Matthew Wyse]

For me the reconstruction which the Portuguese were planning was the most crucial factor in establishing non culpability by any of the tapas group.  It speaks volumes that the reconstruction was prevented from taking place by elements within that group, a point which was not lost in the final report provided by the Portuguese police and the Attorney General who was left with no option but to archive the case.

 

[Benice]

For me the reconstruction which the Portuguese were planning was the most crucial factor in establishing non culpability by any of the tapas group.  It speaks volumes that the reconstruction was prevented from taking place by elements within that group, a point which was not lost in the final report provided by the Portuguese police and the Attorney General who was left with no option but to archive the case.

Perhaps you would like to tell us how a reconstruction could take place considering that only approximate times are remembered by 9 of the people involved.

You could start with Jez Wilkins. 

The PJ ask him to leave his apartment at the same time that he did on May 3rd and take the same route - to where he met Gerry.

Jez Wilkins explains that he doesn't know the exact time - and asks what will happen if he guesses the wrong departure time and because of that -  when he arrives at the place where he met Gerry - Gerry has already walked back into the complex and he's missed him.

Keeping in mind that they were only going to get one go at this recon. - what do you think the PJ's answer to Jez would be?

And that's just for starters.   

[stephen25000]

Perhaps you would like to tell us how a reconstruction could take place considering that only approximate times are remembered by 9 of the people involved.

You could start with Jez Wilkins. 

The PJ ask him to leave his apartment at the same time that he did on May 3rd and take the same route - to where he met Gerry.

Jez Wilkins explains that he doesn't know the exact time - and asks what will happen if he guesses the wrong departure time and because of that -  when he arrives at the place where he met Gerry - Gerry has already walked back into the complex and he's missed him.

Keeping in mind that they were only going to get one go at this recon. - what do you think the PJ's answer to Jez would be?

And that's just for starters.

Approximate times, my R'se.

and let's not forget the convention at the Rothley hotel on the return to the UK when they 'discussed' the case together.

Naughty, naughty.

However, of course they weren't colluding. %£&)**# &%&£(+ %£&)**# &%&£(+

[Benice]

Approximate times, my R'se.

and let's not forget the convention at the Rothley hotel on the return to the UK when they 'discussed' the case together.

Naughty, naughty.

However, of course they weren't colluding. %£&)**# &%&£(+ %£&)**# &%&£(+

Well why don't you tell us how an accurate recon could take place?     Apart from Jez - what about Jane Tanner who  gave the time she left the table after Gerry as between 5 and 10 mins.  If she guessed the time wrongly, Gerry could have been back at the table before she'd left it.   What would happen then?

The PJ knew the chances of the group agreeing to return for a recon was minimal - because of the appalling  way they had been treated and after seeing their friends made arguidos.     They would have NO trust at all in the PJ - and who could blame them. 

Pure speculation on my part but IMO the PJ were banking on them not returning  - and breathed a huge sigh of relief when they didn't.    That meant they could shelve the case and offload the blame.   It was a face-saving operation IMO.     And it worked.

[Wonderfulspam]

Well why don't you tell us how an accurate recon could take place?     Apart from Jez - what about Jane Tanner who  gave the time she left the table after Gerry as between 5 and 10 mins.  If she guessed the time wrongly, Gerry could have been back at the table before she'd left it.   What would happen then?

The PJ knew the chances of the group agreeing to return for a recon was minimal - because of the appalling  way they had been treated and after seeing their friends made arguidos.     They would have NO trust at all in the PJ - and who could blame them. 

Pure speculation on my part but IMO the PJ were banking on them not returning  - and breathed a huge sigh of relief when they didn't.    That meant they could shelve the case and offload the blame.   It was a face-saving operation IMO.     And it worked.

What appalling treatment?

Offload what blame?

[sadie]

Approximate times, my R'se.

and let's not forget the convention at the Rothley hotel on the return to the UK when they 'discussed' the case together.

Naughty, naughty.

However, of course they weren't colluding. %£&)**# &%&£(+ %£&)**# &%&£(+

Convention?  What an imagination you have.

Maybe you dont go nice places for dinner with your friends?

Of course they would discuss what happened



You are not for real Stephen

They cant have a glass of wine with their meal

They cant meet up with their friends for dinner and go over what happened without it being a Convention.  How silly you are sounding.



Do you have no social life ?