Author Topic: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?  (Read 120823 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #330 on: June 18, 2014, 03:16:25 PM »
So there is nothing to be gauged from any participating British police officer remaining silent with regard to the case.

Thank you Eleanor.

Not relevant.

But Amaral seemed to think it was all part of the big conspiracy.

They just have plain old secrecy laws in Portugal, which The PJ break with impunity

Offline Benice

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #331 on: June 18, 2014, 03:19:57 PM »
So there is nothing to be gauged from any participating British police officer remaining silent with regard to the case.

Thank you Eleanor.

The UK FLOs who are trained to observe and who spent many hours with the McCanns reported that they saw nothing suspicious in their behaviour at any time.

Very pertinent IMO.


The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline faithlilly

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #332 on: June 18, 2014, 03:24:44 PM »
I'm not at all sure that Scotland Yard ever took much credence of Dr Amaral's implausible 'theory'. 

I have no doubt they went back to the very beginning and took every scenario on board. 

Once they had read and analysed the information contained in the files I believe they are following evidence which was summarily discarded in 2007. 
They are eliminating lines of inquiry as they progress the case. 

That was probably what was behind the recent digging.  I do not believe they are looking for Madeleine in Praia Da Luz, I think they are looking for the evidence which will lead them to where she was taken and by whom. 
I think that information lies with those they wish to interview in Praia Da Luz. 

I am of the opinion that is where the PJ and the Met investigations diversify. 

The PJ are looking to find answers in PDL. 

The Met are looking further afield. 
I think that if ever we do get a solution to what happened to Madeleine McCann it is going to rock certain individuals to the core; and it is my firm belief the Met will bring this investigation to fruition in the coming months; they have indeed warned this will be a long haul.

Incidentally, I wonder how deep their contempt runs for the latest theory and its author?

That's a lot of 'I believes' Brietta.

Have you any solid evidence at all for your 'beliefs' ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #333 on: June 18, 2014, 03:26:27 PM »
That's a lot of 'I believes' Brietta.

Have you any solid evidence at all for your 'beliefs' ?

do you have solid evidence for your beliefs...it seems amaral certainly didnt

Offline faithlilly

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #334 on: June 18, 2014, 03:28:38 PM »
do you have solid evidence for your beliefs...it seems amaral certainly didnt

There is certainly indicative evidence for my beliefs.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #335 on: June 18, 2014, 03:30:16 PM »
There is certainly indicative evidence for my beliefs.

So you mean no....indicative evidence..not evidence...

Offline faithlilly

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #336 on: June 18, 2014, 03:52:12 PM »
So you mean no....indicative evidence..not evidence...

Of course it is, it simply carries less weight.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2014, 03:50:57 AM by John »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #337 on: June 19, 2014, 11:02:36 PM »
I think Mr Amaral's  theory has more credence that the abduction- I am not saying I agree with it.

The thing lost in this is; the fact that Mr Amarla's Thesis does not say he believed the parents murdered their child.
He believed the child had an accident of some sort- and that should have been investigated-with out interference.

« Last Edit: June 20, 2014, 12:37:22 AM by John »
'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline Brietta

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #338 on: June 20, 2014, 01:22:09 AM »
That's a lot of 'I believes' Brietta.

Have you any solid evidence at all for your 'beliefs' ?

If I had solid evidence Faithlilly ~ who would have the need of either the PJ or the Met? 

What I do have is opinion as everyone who posts here is entitled to have.  However I base my opinion on observation of the progression of events and am content to watch the case into Madeleine's disappearance as it progresses.

What I can state categorically is that both the PJ and the Met have discarded Dr Amaral's theory - or should that be theories as they seem to be going through a process of revision from fridges to coffins to who knows what next.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline colombosstogey

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #339 on: June 20, 2014, 05:31:53 AM »
I think Mr Amaral's  theory has more credence that the abduction- I am not saying I agree with it.

The thing lost in this is; the fact that Mr Amarla's Thesis does not say he believed the parents murdered their child.
He believed the child had an accident of some sort- and that should have been investigated-with out interference.

EXACTLY.

The thing is these things do happen all the time, and parents cry ABDUCTION all the time and hide bodies.

ITS FACT it HAPPENS, its not FICTION.

Why was it so abhorrent to even think the McCanns could have covered up a death?

Especially in light of the fact that they had lackadaisical care in place, which would put a child at risk of accident.

Children have fatal accidents even with the parent within yards of them in a another room for example, and a child gets into trouble and dies.

The Accident and Emergency departments are full of them and many sadly fatal.

Children strangled by blind cords comes to mind, falling out of windows, swallowing bleach and tablets eek when i had my kids I was paranoid about it.

We were taught NEVER leave your children for a minute without supervision.

Even then something would happen, child in bath, the phone or door bell goes, your mind switches off to danger and you go answer it and when you come back in minutes a child is found dead in the bath.

Or falling down stairs is another one.

Or running out of a door and into the path of a car is another one (my best friends sister died like that right in front of her mother one lapse one moment and she was gone).

Those most at risk from a home accident are the 0-4 years age group. Falls account for the majority of non-fatal accidents while the highest number of deaths are due to fire. Most of these accidents are preventable through increased awareness, improvements in the home environment and greater product safety

IF the McCanns did a risk assessment they would have seen that their children were exposed to many danger elements.

Windows/falling
Door/steep steps
Steep steps/road
Floors/hard no soft coverings (carpet)
Cooker/heat burning
Full glass window/falling
Settee/falling
Bed near window/falling
Wander out/road/swimming pool/traffic

So the odds really of leaving children alone under 4 was pretty high for an accident to occur even with the parents in situ.

The largest number of accidents happen in the living/dining room.

However, the most serious accidents happen in the kitchen and on the stairs.

Every year more than 67,000 children experience an accident in the kitchen - 43,000 of these are aged between 0-4 years; 58,000 children have accidents on the stairs.

So the chances of one of them falling down the stairs was pretty high. The stair gate at the top even worse, as children are known to simply climb over them which makes the fall even more likely it could become fatal.

So with all that in mind is it so far fetched this theory that the child died in an accident and the family panicked and hid the body. NO.

It happens, it does happen, and it will happen again.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #340 on: June 20, 2014, 07:03:11 AM »
So you mean no....indicative evidence..not evidence...

No dave, it is evidence as you have been told by others.

However, as the forensics were inconclusive it does not prove absolutely the 'indications' were Madeleine's 'remains'.

Why by the way was there no mention of the dogs on  first Crimewatch program I wonder ?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #341 on: June 20, 2014, 07:41:23 AM »
Grime doesnt agree..and he is the expert..you and others are severely deluded

Perhaps you should read my comment again.

Also point out exactly where Grime says the dogs reactions could not be indicative of Madeleine's remains.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #342 on: June 20, 2014, 07:45:12 AM »
I think Mr Amaral's  theory has more credence that the abduction- I am not saying I agree with it.

The thing lost in this is; the fact that Mr Amarla's Thesis does not say he believed the parents murdered their child.
He believed the child had an accident of some sort- and that should have been investigated-with out interference.


Why, then, was Harrison handed a brief by the PJ to consider that Madeleine had been "murdered"?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #343 on: June 20, 2014, 07:47:37 AM »
Why, then, was Harrison handed a brief by the PJ to consider that Madeleine had been "murdered"?

The case remains 'type of crime unknown' ferryman.


Can you give the link you mention ?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
« Reply #344 on: June 20, 2014, 07:50:27 AM »
Perhaps you should read my comment again.

Also point out exactly where Grime says the dogs reactions could not be indicative of Madeleine's remains.

Grime says the dogs alerts have no evidential value...which part of that statetment do you and others not understand..its quite simple

Correction - The Martin Grime Report states, "No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence."
www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

Mr Moderator

« Last Edit: June 22, 2014, 12:00:15 PM by Mr Moderator »