Journalist Sonia Poulton promises "The untold story of Madeleine McCann".

[pathfinder73]

What has that got to do with tactics (which involve lying to suspects) employed by the police when questioning people who they have decided are guilty of a crime.

Some will never admit to their crime until their last dying day in jail. One case I saw the other night the police released on the news that they knew where the body would be and were starting digging tomorrow and the suspect came out to spy on them. After he left the police went to his point of view and narrowed down where the body could be - in a vast area of fields. They went to that probable body area the next day and the suspect saw them and acted and went out that night to try and move the body. He showed them where it was. That was entrapment because they really had no idea where the body was. They lied and took a risk that the suspect would get scared about the news and act and it paid off.

[Benice]

Some will never admit to their crime until their last dying day in jail. One case I saw the other night the police released on the news that they knew where the body would be and were starting digging tomorrow and the suspect came out to spy on them. After he left the police went to his point of view and narrowed down where the body could be - in a vast area of fields. They went to that probable body area the next day and the suspect saw them and acted and went out that night to try and move the body. He showed them where it was. That was entrapment because they really had no idea where the body was. They lied and took a risk that the suspect would get scared about the news and act and it paid off.

So what do you think the reason was for the PJ to take the decision  to lie to the McCanns about the 100%DNA match?  What were they hoping to achieve by employing that tactic?

All it did achieve IMO was to alarm the parents into thinking the PJ may have evidence that Madeleine was dead and caused them great distress.  IIRC they begged the PJ to tell them if that was the case -  as up until that point they were hoping she would be found alive.  (from memory so am not sure whether this applied to both parents or just to Gerry)

However, hardly the reaction one would expect from guilty people to the news that 100% DNA evidence had been found and who would then realise that their goose was well on the way to being cooked IMO.

[ferryman]

So what do you think the reason was for the PJ to take the decision  to lie to the McCanns about the 100%DNA match?  What were they hoping to achieve by employing that tactic?

All it did achieve IMO was to alarm the parents into thinking the PJ may have evidence that Madeleine was dead and caused them great distress.  IIRC they begged the PJ to tell them if that was the case -  as up until that point they were hoping she would be found alive.  (from memory so am not sure whether this applied to both parents or just to Gerry)

However, hardly the reaction one would expect from guilty people to the news that 100% DNA evidence had been found and who would then realise that their goose was well on the way to being cooked IMO.

It did that, certainly.  But it did something else.

It alerted Kate and Gerry to the fact that the PJ were sizing them up as the 'guilty party' ...

[stephen25000]

It did that, certainly.  But it did something else.

It alerted Kate and Gerry to the fact that the PJ were sizing them up as the 'guilty party' ...

You appear to be in the libelling frame of mind ferryman.

Be careful on that.

[slartibartfast]

So if someone accused you of boiling babies alive in midnight Satanic rituals and it wasn't true, you would think it an imposition of society that you should be allowed to sue the person who made the false claim?

Is that right?

It's a frequent occurrence, you just tend to laugh it off.

[slartibartfast]

IMO a guilty person who knew that it was not impossible that DNA evidence could be found at the site where they had placed a dead body would realise the game was over once confronted with the fact that 100% DNA evidence had indeed been found at that site.   The McCanns were not stupid and totally understood that.  If they were guilty they would know they had been caught bang to rights and there was no point in prolonging things.  I'm sure you will agree Stephen that the whole idea behind the PJ's tactic of lying to the McCanns about the DNA was to bring about that very situation

However, the fact that when confronted with 100% DNA match the McCanns did not give up and confess or even come close to a confession in the face of such indisputable evidence  -  should have told the PJ they were barking up the wrong tree.

All that lie succeeded in doing was to make the McCanns think that the PJ had evidence that their beloved daughter was dead and to react as any innocent parent of a missing child would on hearing such terrible news.

I think most people would refuse to answer any more questions and let the police try and prove it.

[ferryman]

IMO a guilty person who knew that it was not impossible that DNA evidence could be found at the site where they had placed a dead body would realise the game was over once confronted with the fact that 100% DNA evidence had indeed been found at that site.   The McCanns were not stupid and totally understood that.  If they were guilty they would know they had been caught bang to rights and there was no point in prolonging things.  I'm sure you will agree Stephen that the whole idea behind the PJ's tactic of lying to the McCanns about the DNA was to bring about that very situation

However, the fact that when confronted with 100% DNA match the McCanns did not give up and confess or even come close to a confession in the face of such indisputable evidence  -  should have told the PJ they were barking up the wrong tree.

All that lie succeeded in doing was to make the McCanns think that the PJ had evidence that their beloved daughter was dead and to react as any innocent parent of a missing child would on hearing such terrible news.

Not quite all it did.

Arguably most significant, it was an unnecessary diversion and lost valuable time in efforts to track down the true perpetrator(s) of crime(s) against Madeleine ....

[stephen25000]

Not quite all it did.

Arguably most significant, it was an unnecessary diversion and lost valuable time in efforts to track down the true perpetrator(s) of crime(s) against Madeleine ....

In your opinion.

Hardly surprising.

Do try and remember the crime has yet to be determined, let alone be dealt with in court.

[ferryman]

In your opinion.

Hardly surprising.

Do try and remember the crime has yet to be determined, let alone be dealt with in court.

My opinion?

It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:

"1 - Whoever places another person's life in danger,
a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or
b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;"

This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim's life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim's behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.

The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.

Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.

Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.

The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.

To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.

Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child's death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the 'Ocean Club' resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.

Whose opinion is that?

Oh yes, incompetent senile doddery old fools of Portuguese prosecutors.

What would they know?

[pathfinder73]

It did that, certainly.  But it did something else.

It alerted Kate and Gerry to the fact that the PJ were sizing them up as the 'guilty party' ...

That happened in August.

8 Aug - João Carlos returned our car at lunchtime (albeit with a piece missing from the boot). He said that Neves and Encarnação were ready to see us later that afternoon. Thank goodness! Finally someone was going to explain to us exactly what was happening. We were taken to an upstairs room at the police station where we were greeted by Luís Neves and Guilhermino Encarnação. Our interpreter this time was a police officer, not Proconsul Angela Morado, as was usually the case. The whole demeanour of Neves and Encarnação was different. They looked serious and cold.