Please list all the translation errors in the PJ files

[Brietta]

Benice gives another example of the difficulties encountered by the translators ...

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6414.msg254442#msg254442

[Benice]

Obviously you aren't going to accept the discrepancy, so I rest my case. The statements are clear.

So can you think of a reason why Gerry would decide to lie about which door he used.  What did he have to gain by doing that?

If he had decided to lie about it - then what  explanation was he planning to give to the PJ  - for his weird decision not to enter 5a by the patio door - a mere few seconds walk away from him  - but instead to take the much longer route round -  to go in by the front door?    He would need to give the PJ a reason for doing such a strange thing  - so what could that reason possibly be?   I can't think of one.




 

[G-Unit]

So can you think of a reason why Gerry would decide to lie about which door he used.  What did he have to gain by doing that?

If he had decided to lie about it - then what  explanation was he planning to give to the PJ  - for his weird decision not to enter 5a by the patio door - a mere few seconds walk away from him  - but instead to take the much longer route round -  to go in by the front door?    He would need to give the PJ a reason for doing such a strange thing  - so what could that reason possibly be?   I can't think of one.

I can think of a reason, but as I can't prove it I prefer not to share it. This thread concerns translation errors and my point is that in this case there were none.

[Mr Gray]

I can think of a reason, but as I can't prove it I prefer not to share it. This thread concerns translation errors and my point is that in this case there were none.

You claim there were no errors...it's just your opinion and as we all know...that is worthless. You are just showing how foolish you are when you claim there were no errors

[Benice]

I can think of a reason, but as I can't prove it I prefer not to share it. This thread concerns translation errors and my point is that in this case there were none.

Fair enough G-Unit, but unless someone can give credible reasons, then IMO it's clear that a misunderstanding occurred over which door Gerry was talking about -  which was not realised at the time and which continued throughout the interview.

Also IMO -  if there was any major significance in why Gerry changed his statement - then the reasons he gave for doing that would surely be part of his 2nd witness statement?    No reasons are given.

It would be helpful to know when Gerry first had sight of his statement after it had been re-translated and typed back in English.  (quite a time-consuming task IMO).   

[mercury]

Oh dear! This is my fault.

I did not make it clear in my opening post, which was related to an ongoing discussion about translations the other day. My question should have been, where is the evidence that the translations into Portuguese by the translators and subsequent mistranslations into English, causing the Tapas group to read, ratify and sign were erroneous, as that is something some have argued. IE, yes they did sign a translation written and read or read back to them orally in English but there is no guarantee that the two matched.

Thanks for the replies though. Some minor translation errors from the translators of the PJ files into English, but nothng earth shattering or changing anything that important. The expected typos are just that too, the vast majority are obviously that and can be checked against related files.

[Mr Gray]

I can think of a reason, but as I can't prove it I prefer not to share it. This thread concerns translation errors and my point is that in this case there were none.

It is obvious that there would be mistakes in translation...your refusal to accept shows your unbalanced mindset. You accuse Gerry of lying yet say you are not  attacking him. Accusing Gerry of lying in his police interviews is a serious allegation.

[G-Unit]

Oh dear! This is my fault.

I did not make it clear in my opening post, which was related to an ongoing discussion about translations the other day. My question should have been, where is the evidence that the translations into Portuguese by the translators and subsequent mistranslations into English, causing the Tapas group to read, ratify and sign were erroneous, as that is something some have argued. IE, yes they did sign a translation written and read or read back to them orally in English but there is no guarantee that the two matched.

Thanks for the replies though. Some minor translation errors from the translators of the PJ files into English, but nothng earth shattering or changing anything that important. The expected typos are just that too, the vast majority are obviously that and can be checked against related files.

I have noticed that any errors quoted are minor also. None of them have changed any facts so far. Some people need to try harder if they are to convince us that the files are seriously flawed.

[Mr Gray]

I have noticed that any errors quoted are minor also. None of them have changed any facts so far. Some people need to try harder if they are to convince us that the files are seriously flawed.

The files are flawed when non verbatim statements are taken with no opportunity to refer to the original. I wouldn't bother trying to convince anyone on here....mindsets are too entrenched. It would be like trying to convince a Jehova's Witness that God does not exist. You think your views are based on evidence....in reality they are based on your interpretation of the evidence.

[G-Unit]

It is obvious that there would be mistakes in translation...your refusal to accept shows your unbalanced mindset. You accuse Gerry of lying yet say you are not  attacking him. Accusing Gerry of lying in his police interviews is a serious allegation.

Unbalanced? Ha ha ha! Glass houses and stones.

There are no mistakes in the statements given by Gerald McCann about which door he used. I have no need to 'accuse' him of anything, he himself acknowledges that he changed his story;

Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

[Mr Gray]

Unbalanced? Ha ha ha! Glass houses and stones.

There are no mistakes in the statements given by Gerald McCann about which door he used. I have no need to 'accuse' him of anything, he himself acknowledges that he changed his story;

Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

You have no idea what Gerry said...you are relying on a twice translated summary from someone whose first language was not English...

what matters is that SY do NOT consider the McCanns suspects

[G-Unit]

The files are flawed when non verbatim statements are taken with no opportunity to refer to the original. I wouldn't bother trying to convince anyone on here....mindsets are too entrenched. It would be like trying to convince a Jehova's Witness that God does not exist. You think your views are based on evidence....in reality they are based on your interpretation of the evidence.
[/quote

You can't convince people if you don't try. Some have, and the results are inconsequential. Your views are based on no evidence at all. 'A child is missing therefore she was abducted', is a pretty flimsy proposition. when challenged for evidence your only reply is 'that's what SY are investigating'. As if anyone knows what they're doing, they haven't said a meaningful word since 2013.

[Alfred R Jones]

if there was any significance to Gerry's "changing story" then why wasn't he cross-questioned about it when he was an arguido?

[Mr Gray]

The files are flawed when non verbatim statements are taken with no opportunity to refer to the original. I wouldn't bother trying to convince anyone on here....mindsets are too entrenched. It would be like trying to convince a Jehova's Witness that God does not exist. You think your views are based on evidence....in reality they are based on your interpretation of the evidence.
[/quote

You can't convince people if you don't try. Some have, and the results are inconsequential. Your views are based on no evidence at all. 'A child is missing therefore she was abducted', is a pretty flimsy proposition. when challenged for evidence your only reply is 'that's what SY are investigating'. As if anyone knows what they're doing, they haven't said a meaningful word since 2013.

My opinions are based on exactly the same evidence that you have used to reach your decision. You want to pretend that my beliefs have no basis..you could not be more wrong

[stephen25000]

My opinions are based on exactly the same evidence that you have used to reach your decision. You want to pretend that my beliefs have no basis..you could not be more wrong

Your opinions as you call them, are based on total  defense of the mccanns, even when it has been made clear they changed their story.

As to why you do this, well that is blatantly obvious.