Kate's refusal on legal advice to answer those 48 questions.

[ferryman]

What a stupid statement. In a criminal investigation, everyone involved is considered a suspect until they have been cleared one way or another. That is how it works, simple. Even the LP stated in the court in London that there was no evidence which eliminated the parents from any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.

The element of fascism is in the assumption that anyone should have to prove their innocence

It is a wholesale assault on the presumption of innocence

[Alfred R Jones]

What a stupid statement. In a criminal investigation, everyone involved is considered a suspect until they have been cleared one way or another. That is how it works, simple. Even the LP stated in the court in London that there was no evidence which eliminated the parents from any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.

In this country is the onus on the suspect to prove their innocence or the prosecution to prove guilt?  What sort of evidence would eliminate parents from any involvement above and beyond that which already exists?

[Martina]

In this country is the onus on the suspect to prove their innocence or the prosecution to prove guilt?  What sort of evidence would eliminate parents from any involvement above and beyond that which already exists?

The McCanns were not the suspects, right? And the prosecutors didn't even step in yet, when they were made arguidos. So what are you talking about, actually? We are not talking here about the McCanns having to prove their innocence in the court, what indeed would be totally against the presumption of innocence rule. We are talking here about an active investigation and the parents that were supposed to prove their innocence as in eliminate themselves from the pool of suspects. And it's weird when the parents of the missing child deny to do that, not allowing the investigators to concentrate fully on the other leads.

[Montclair]

In this country is the onus on the suspect to prove their innocence or the prosecution to prove guilt?  What sort of evidence would eliminate parents from any involvement above and beyond that which already exists?

AFAIK, the parents weren't being prosecuted and weren't in a court of law. As for your question about the evidence which would eliminate the parents, I suggest you ask the LP.

[Wonderfulspam]

AFAIK, the parents weren't being prosecuted and weren't in a court of law. As for your question about the evidence which would eliminate the parents, I suggest you ask the LP.

Yep.

"While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

[John]

Sorry to swing off on a tangent but based on the topic title, does anybody posess a cite for Kate not answering the questions due to legal advice?

From Madeleine - Friday 7th September 2007

I wasn’t taken to the interrogation room until 11.50am, so my late arrival made no difference, as I’d been pretty sure it wouldn’t: I was getting used to the PJ’s concept of time. The same people were present as the day before. Today Carlos had advised me not to answer any of the questions put to me. He explained that this was my right as an arguida and it was the safest option: any responses I gave might unintentionaly implicate me in some way. He knew the system better than I ever would, so it struck me as prudent to accept his guidance.

[ferryman]

Yep.

"While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

A statement made while the McCanns were arguidos and before the files had been released.

There is now abundant evidence that eliminates the McCanns from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.

[Eleanor]

Interesting.  A Thread on which I have opted to be Notified hasn't notified me for four hours, and nearly three pages.  Is this a glitch in the works, or some attempt to keep me out of this discussion?

[Wonderfulspam]

A statement made while the McCanns were arguidos and before the files had been released.

There is now abundant evidence that eliminates the McCanns from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.

No there aint.

[John]

Interesting.  A Thread on which I have opted to be Notified hasn't notified me for four hours, and nearly three pages.  Is this a glitch in the works, or some attempt to keep me out of this discussion?

I don't think you have missed much Eleanor. 

[John]

Yep.

"While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

Wasn't it LP and the PJ who jointly prepared the questions for the arguidos?  At least that is what Gonçalo relates.

[ferryman]

At least that is what Gonçalo relates.

Goncalo also relates that Harrison switched the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead.

Harrison did no such thing ...

[Eleanor]

I don't think you have missed much Eleanor. 

Apparently not, but does one ever?

Mitch Lang.

[Alfred R Jones]

The McCanns were not the suspects, right? And the prosecutors didn't even step in yet, when they were made arguidos. So what are you talking about, actually? We are not talking here about the McCanns having to prove their innocence in the court, what indeed would be totally against the presumption of innocence rule. We are talking here about an active investigation and the parents that were supposed to prove their innocence as in eliminate themselves from the pool of suspects. And it's weird when the parents of the missing child deny to do that, not allowing the investigators to concentrate fully on the other leads.

What do you mean "The McCanns were not the suspects, right?"  What were they then?  Since when has the onus been on those being questioned by police to "prove their innocence"?  It is entirely up to the police to build a case against their suspects, and one way they can do this is by asking leading questions designed to incriminate those they are questioning.   

[Mr Gray]

What a stupid statement. In a criminal investigation, everyone involved is considered a suspect until they have been cleared one way or another. That is how it works, simple. Even the LP stated in the court in London that there was no evidence which eliminated the parents from any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.

rubbish...can you name one case anywhere in the world where suspects have been asked to prove their innocence...it is fascism in the extreme