Kate McCann admits in her book that private criminal investigations in Portugal were illegal.

[Mr Gray]

I do believe, sir, you are blinded to reality by your worship of the McCanns. If the McCanns said the moon was made of green cheese you would probably believe they were correct and statements to the contrary would in your view be a criticism of the McCanns.

you believe this because you do not understand the evidence in this case...like a lot of posters on these forums. if you did understand the evidence you would no doubt agree with me.
This thread is a good example...no where does Kate admit to breaking the law ...and no one has been able to produce the law she has allegedly broke

[Brietta]

I do believe, sir, you are blinded to reality by your worship of the McCanns. If the McCanns said the moon was made of green cheese you would probably believe they were correct and statements to the contrary would in your view be a criticism of the McCanns.

If there was evidence to back up the entirely hypothetical statement that the moon was made of green cheese, I would certainly give the proposition some consideration, but the sources would have to be impeccable.   

That no-one is able to provide a source to prove assertions of illegality … puts that on a very unsound footing indeed.

Do you have one?

[faithlilly]

If there was evidence to back up the entirely hypothetical statement that the moon was made of green cheese, I would certainly give the proposition some consideration, but the sources would have to be impeccable.   

That no-one is able to provide a source to prove assertions of illegality … puts that on a very unsound footing indeed.

Do you have one?

Well Kate McCann certainly thinks it's illegal and she should know. Isn't that good enough for you ?

How strangely perverse that supporters are now asking for a cite for Kate's claim. Seem they have added saving Kate and Gerry from self incrimination to the agenda.

[Angelo222]

Well Kate McCann certainly thinks it's illegal and she should know. Isn't that good enough for you ?

How strangely perverse that supporters are now asking for a cite for Kate's claim. Seem they have added saving Kate and Gerry from self incrimination to the agenda.

      technically illegal!!     and this from the woman who called the police liaison officer a f.....g tosser numerous times in her book.  The McCann diatribe for anything or anyone who opposes them.

[Alice Purjorick]

you believe this because you do not understand the evidence in this case...like a lot of posters on these forums. if you did understand the evidence you would no doubt agree with me.
This thread is a good example...no where does Kate admit to breaking the law ...and no one has been able to produce the law she has allegedly broke

According to whom?
It may have escaped your attention that outside of this forum is a rather large world with access to much information about the case that extends a little beyond the partisanship displayed by your good self.

[Carana]

You beat me to it Matt.  Davel is well practised in the art of obfuscation    

If some of the most senior officials in Portugal considered it illegal then it is good enough for me. The only part which surprises me is that more wasn't made of it or done about it but then who knows what's down the road ???

Who are they and where are they cited?

Has anyone found a blanket law against any kind of private investigation - barring illegal means - yet?

[Alice Purjorick]

If there was evidence to back up the entirely hypothetical statement that the moon was made of green cheese, I would certainly give the proposition some consideration, but the sources would have to be impeccable.   

That no-one is able to provide a source to prove assertions of illegality … puts that on a very unsound footing indeed.

Do you have one?

Try reading Kate McCanns book it is in there that "technically" they broke the law.
Or is it now time for all to be selective in what in the book is right and what is wrong?

[Carana]

According to whom?
It may have escaped your attention that outside of this forum is a rather large world with access to much information about the case that extends a little beyond the partisanship displayed by your good self.

Perhaps you could share some of your information with credible sources as a reference?

[Angelo222]

In her book called Madeleine, Kate McCann admits that the employing of private investigators to undertake investigations in Portugal was 'technically illegal'.   Given that this renders the McCanns technically criminal by their own admission are they really so different from Amaral?


From Madeleine.

"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."

Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.

As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.

[Carana]

Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.

As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.

"With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal"

I still have no idea where that idea came from. Unless anyone can point out a blanket law, it may well be a widespread misconception, possibly promoted on PT TV by various supposedly expert pundits.

[Mr Gray]

Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.

As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.

Kate does not admit to breaking the law in the opening post...you are putting your own intepretation on it

[Brietta]

Try reading Kate McCanns book it is in there that "technically" they broke the law.
Or is it now time for all to be selective in what in the book is right and what is wrong?

In other words ... you do not have an authoritative Portuguese source for your claim of illegality. 

[faithlilly]

Kate does not admit to breaking the law in the opening post...you are putting your own intepretation on it

So what is your interpretation of what she wrote ?

[faithlilly]

Irrelevant. 
Still no cite has been provided ... and that is extremely relevant.

Not irrelevant at all.

And if you would like a cite could I respectfully suggest you contact Kate.

[Carana]

Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.

As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.

There is no doubt a law about perverting the course of justice. I have no issue with that. But what evidence is there as to who may have infringed such a law?

Judicial secrecy was most definitely infringed... but largely by PT authority employees leaking to the tabloids....