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

[Alfred R Jones]

 Kate McCann: "With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula"

Where is the admission of lawbreaking in that sentence, someone kindly point it out please.

"With alcohol consumption technically illegal in Saudi Arabia, the closest we could get to having a beer was the Intercontinental hotel in Bahrain" - is this an admission of me breaking Saudi Arabian law? 

[stephen25000]

Kate McCann: "With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula"

Where is the admission of lawbreaking in that sentence, someone kindly point it out please.

"With alcohol consumption technically illegal in Saudi Arabia, the closest we could get to having a beer was the Intercontinental hotel in Bahrain" - is this an admission of me breaking Saudi Arabian law?

..but the firm operated in Portugal. , by their own admission.

[DCI]

..but the firm operated in Portugal. , by their own admission.

Which the PJ knew about in November 2007! Why weren't they arrested?

3445 to 3454 External diligence carried out re: Metodo 3, 2007.11.21

TRANSLATION BY ALBYM

13-Processo 13 Pages 3445 to 3454

Page 3445-3449: The external diligence report dated 21 November on the follow up work done

Page 3450-3453: supporting photos taken during the follow up, and

Page 3454: phone mast evidence exonerating M Walczuch, R Murat, S Malinka and L Antonio from any involvement in the alleged sighting by the truck driver.

In point form:
- The PJ traced the driver, Manuel A P Gautier, and spoke to him.
- He acknowledged speaking to M3 on 3 November.
- He and PJ met by agreement at a given location on IC1.
- The driver related his story of having seen a grey Audi and a green car (possibly Opel Astra) on 4 May between 15h00 and 17h00 in the IC1 freeway
- He saw a woman (standing next to the Audi) pass something wrapped in cloth to a man (next to the green car) over the metal fence.
- From what he could make out it was not very heavy and there was nothing to suggest it might have been a child.
- They went to the location where photos were taken.
- The resident of a nearby house was questioned by the PJ. He neither saw nor heard vehicles in his 'driveway' on 4 May, and noticed nothing untoward with the closed gate across its entrance.
- The driver stated that from pictures in the printed media he recognised some resemblance between MW and the woman he saw on 4 May, mainly some facial features, her build and hair colour, but he could not positively assert that it was her.
- The driver could not recall the man.

The PJ checked the phone antenna records for 4 May and found phone calls to and from MW, RM, SM and LA during that day, and during the time of the alleged observation, all calls showing they were all some 65 km away from the location of the alleged sighting.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/METODO_3.htm

[DCI]

Good point, Stephen's response to my query however did not highlight where in Kate McCann's book she admits to breaking Portuguese law (why am I not surprised?!)

Maybe because she doesn't  as Davel points out.

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."

[stephen25000]

Some need to watch this again, and the admissions made.


The McCanns and the Conman - Channel 5

[faithlilly]

Which the PJ knew about in November 2007! Why weren't they arrested?

3445 to 3454 External diligence carried out re: Metodo 3, 2007.11.21

TRANSLATION BY ALBYM

13-Processo 13 Pages 3445 to 3454

Page 3445-3449: The external diligence report dated 21 November on the follow up work done

Page 3450-3453: supporting photos taken during the follow up, and

Page 3454: phone mast evidence exonerating M Walczuch, R Murat, S Malinka and L Antonio from any involvement in the alleged sighting by the truck driver.

In point form:
- The PJ traced the driver, Manuel A P Gautier, and spoke to him.
- He acknowledged speaking to M3 on 3 November.
- He and PJ met by agreement at a given location on IC1.
- The driver related his story of having seen a grey Audi and a green car (possibly Opel Astra) on 4 May between 15h00 and 17h00 in the IC1 freeway
- He saw a woman (standing next to the Audi) pass something wrapped in cloth to a man (next to the green car) over the metal fence.
- From what he could make out it was not very heavy and there was nothing to suggest it might have been a child.
- They went to the location where photos were taken.
- The resident of a nearby house was questioned by the PJ. He neither saw nor heard vehicles in his 'driveway' on 4 May, and noticed nothing untoward with the closed gate across its entrance.
- The driver stated that from pictures in the printed media he recognised some resemblance between MW and the woman he saw on 4 May, mainly some facial features, her build and hair colour, but he could not positively assert that it was her.
- The driver could not recall the man.

The PJ checked the phone antenna records for 4 May and found phone calls to and from MW, RM, SM and LA during that day, and during the time of the alleged observation, all calls showing they were all some 65 km away from the location of the alleged sighting.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/METODO_3.htm

Seems this was yet more unsubstantiated witness testimony from Metodo3. The PJ must have wasted hours of valuable time following up this sort of rubbish passed to them from the McCann's detectives.

One does wonder whether it was calculated misdirection or merely incompetence.

[DCI]

Seems this was yet more unsubstantiated witness testimony from Metodo3. The PJ must have wasted hours of valuable time following up this sort of rubbish passed to them from the McCann's detectives.

One does wonder whether it was calculated misdirection or merely incompetence.

Yeah, probably went in Paiva's "IRRELEVANT BIN"

[Jean-Pierre]

I can't really see what all the fuss is about.   If my child was missing, and there was a chance of finding her, but was against the law of the country, would I take that chance?

Too right I would.  In a heartbeat.   

As would any parent. 

[slartibartfast]

I can't really see what all the fuss is about.   If my child was missing, and there was a chance of finding her, but was against the law of the country, would I take that chance?

Too right I would.  In a heartbeat.   

As would any parent.

....and answer questions and perform reconstructions.

[faithlilly]

....and answer questions and perform reconstructions.

Yes they do rather pick and choose what they are willing to do 'for their child'.

[ferryman]

It is a warped mindset indeed that supposes that answering those questions or performing a "reconstitution" would have done anything whatever for Madeleine ...

[Alfred R Jones]

It is a warped mindset indeed that supposes that answering those questions or performing a "reconstitution" would have done anything whatever for Madeleine ...

It certainly is, and around the houses we go with the sceptics claiming that they would do absolutely anything to find their chid (including fully cooperate with a police investigation with one aim only and that is to get you put in the dock and ultimately in prison), but heaven forfend they should break sacred Portuguese law by hiring detectives to find that child! 

[Angelo222]

Of course, but then that's because you're thinking like a normal parent, not a McCann sceptic. In any case, this thread alleges that Kate McCann admits to breaking the law, when in fact she does no such thing.  So, not only is this thread title inaccurate, it is also libellous, but still it is allowed to remain - why I wonder?

Absolute rubbish.  Kate McCann knew damn well that any investigation of a crime committed in Portugal in direct opposition to the official police investigation was liable to be considered illegal, technically or otherwise.  Their Fund engaged these crooked investigators knowing full well what they were doing was contrary to Portuguese law.  There is no excuse for what they did, they went into it with their eyes open.  So you libel claim is a load of cobblers!!

[Jean-Pierre]

Absolute rubbish.  Kate McCann knew damn well that any investigation of a crime committed in Portugal in direct opposition to the official police investigation was liable to be considered illegal, technically or otherwise.  Their Fund engaged these crooked investigators knowing full well what they were doing was contrary to Portuguese law.  There is no excuse for what they did, they went into it with their eyes open.  So you libel claim is a load of cobblers!!

Angelo.  Where the law is an ass, do you feel duty bound to follow it slavishly?

 

[Mr Moderator]

Absolute rubbish.  Kate McCann knew damn well that any investigation of a crime committed in Portugal in direct opposition to the official police investigation was liable to be considered illegal, technically or otherwise.  Their Fund engaged these crooked investigators knowing full well what they were doing was contrary to Portuguese law.  There is no excuse for what they did, they went into it with their eyes open.  So you libel claim is a load of cobblers!!

You have encapsulated the facts rather well Angelo.  The important point which must not be forgotten in this topic is that the McCanns had been advised that interference in the criminal inquiry was illegal thus why Kate McCann states in her book the reason for using a Spanish firm of private investigators.  Did Kate McCann really think that Metodo 3 were going to be doing all their investigating in every country except the one in which the alleged crime took place?