What did Amaral & co get right?

[ferryman]

So his description of the process was correct.

As an aside ... did he mention his own arguido status anywhere in the book?

I don't think so.

I'm trying to stay on-topic.

And finding it as difficult as you ....

[Brietta]

The authors of the archiving report had no quibble with it.
>>>>snip:Therefore, under the light of interpretation of the elements that constituted the process at that date, there is no doubt whatsoever concerning the legitimacy and legality of their constitution as arguidos, as it is also certain that any investigation has its own dynamics and the continuous flow of elements into the files may alter the situation, as it has, and no judgment or presumption of guilt can be extracted from such a process act. snip<<<<
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Ferryman was describing his synopsis of the process as being informative not what he actually did with it which imo was at that stage calculated spite.

[Brietta]

I don't think so.

I'm trying to stay on-topic.

And finding it as difficult as you ....

The topic is a really difficult one.  So far I'm finding little but when I do it is qualified with an ..."ah but ... ".

Given the information available to them at the time, I think it was the correct thing to do to make Robert Murat an arguido.

[Alice Purjorick]

Ferryman was describing his synopsis of the process as being informative not what he actually did with it which imo was at that stage calculated spite.

You are entitled to your opinion which possibly may not be in the same county as reality let alone the same field.
It is possible that Drs McCann could have been made arguido(a) on the basis of being the missing persons parents and the last known persons to see her alive.

[Brietta]

You are entitled to your opinion which possibly may not be in the same county as reality let alone the same field.
It is possible that Drs McCann could have been made arguido(a) on the basis of being the missing persons parents and the last known persons to see her alive.

How about deflecting back to the topic of the thread which isn't really about my opinion as far as I can see, but about what Mr Amaral may have got right in the process of his sojourn into missing child territory.

Maybe you can come up with something along those lines as everyone else appears to be struggling a bit.

[Alice Purjorick]

How about deflecting back to the topic of the thread which isn't really about my opinion as far as I can see, but about what Mr Amaral may have got right in the process of his sojourn into missing child territory.

Maybe you can come up with something along those lines as everyone else appears to be struggling a bit.

Then why quote your opinion?
As for the rest of it? there are apparently 55 volumes of evidence attached to this case. I doubt anyone on here has read them all so I guess the posts to this thread will be mostly opinion biased one way or another.

[ShiningInLuz]

The topic is a really difficult one.  So far I'm finding little but when I do it is qualified with an ..."ah but ... ".

Given the information available to them at the time, I think it was the correct thing to do to make Robert Murat an arguido.

May I ask why?

AFAIK, this was based on someone thinking his behaviour was odd.  And is it correct to subject someone to opprobrium etc. on this basis?

Lots of folks thought the McCann behaviour was odd, but that hardly makes them guilty of anything other than odd behaviour.

[ferryman]

May I ask why?

AFAIK, this was based on someone thinking his behaviour was odd.  And is it correct to subject someone to opprobrium etc. on this basis?

Lots of folks thought the McCann behaviour was odd, but that hardly makes them guilty of anything other than odd behaviour.

Veering wildly off-topic, here, but more than odd.

Sinister.

Claiming to correct and contradict Prior on interpretation of the forensic results (in a way deeply pejorative to the McCanns), for example ...

[ShiningInLuz]

Veering wildly off-topic, here, but more than odd.

Sinister.

Claiming to correct and contradict Prior on interpretation of the forensic results (in a way deeply pejorative to the McCanns), for example ...

You've lost me.

Were there ANY forensic results back when Murat was made an arguido?  And as far as I am aware, none of the forensic results implicates Murat in any way, shape or form.

I wondered why making Murat an arguido without evidence was seen as OK, whilst making the McCanns arguidos without evidence was seen as unacceptable.

[ferryman]

You've lost me.

Were there ANY forensic results back when Murat was made an arguido?  And as far as I am aware, none of the forensic results implicates Murat in ant way, shape or form.

I wondered why making Murat an arguido without evidence was seen as OK, whilst making the McCanns arguidos without evidence was seen as unacceptable.

My apologies.

I hadn't read Brietta's post you were responding to and thought you were talking about Amaral.

[Mr Gray]

You've lost me.

Were there ANY forensic results back when Murat was made an arguido?  And as far as I am aware, none of the forensic results implicates Murat in ant way, shape or form.

I wondered why making Murat an arguido without evidence was seen as OK, whilst making the McCanns arguidos without evidence was seen as unacceptable.

I don't think making either of them arguido was unacceptable....but keeping them as arguido for such a long time was when there was no evidence against them . I wonder why no one on here has highlighted the inconsistencies in Murat's statements but rabbit on incessantly re the alleged inconsistencies in those of the mccanns

[Brietta]

May I ask why?

AFAIK, this was based on someone thinking his behaviour was odd.  And is it correct to subject someone to opprobrium etc. on this basis?

Lots of folks thought the McCann behaviour was odd, but that hardly makes them guilty of anything other than odd behaviour.

I don't think it was very much at all to do with Lori Campbell who mainly gets the "credit" for whistle blowing or anyone else.

The PJ very much had their suspicions about him the least of it being what might be called eccentric behaviour and based on the information in the files they would have been seriously remiss in their duty had they not checked out the information they had on him.

In this instance the arguido status was instituted in appropriate and proper circumstances which protected his rights.

Given what has come out since regarding official thinking it was probably the time to do the same for the Drs McCann when it might have afforded them some protection and rights ... rather than being used as a salvo in a personal war.

Read the files and it will become apparent why the PJ acted correctly, that was their job, the fact that they found no further evidence to back up initial suspicions ... which were not as a result of 'odd' behaviour ... is part of the process.

[ferryman]

I don't think it was very much at all to do with Lori Campbell who mainly gets the "credit" for whistle blowing or anyone else.

The PJ very much had their suspicions about him the least of it being what might be called eccentric behaviour and based on the information in the files they would have been seriously remiss in their duty had they not checked out the information they had on him.

In this instance the arguido status was instituted in appropriate and proper circumstances which protected his rights.

Given what has come out since regarding official thinking it was probably the time to do the same for the Drs McCann when it might have afforded them some protection and rights ... rather than being used as a salvo in a personal war.

Read the files and it will become apparent why the PJ acted correctly, that was their job, the fact that they found no further evidence to back up initial suspicions ... which were not as a result of 'odd' behaviour ... is part of the process.

There is a (genuinely excellent) profile of Robert Murat in The Times that casts Murat's mode of behaviour in an entirely light.

It seems that, from way before events of PdL 2007, he was the sort of neighbour that would be a God-send to have, always eager to help, always on-hand, nothing, ever, too much trouble, to an extent that occasionally you might think he was too enthusiastic and eager.

I think, when you read that profile, it casts his way of conducting himself in the wake of Madeleine's disappearance in a very different light ...

[Brietta]

There is a (genuinely excellent) profile of Robert Murat in The Times that casts Murat's mode of behaviour in an entirely light.

It seems that, from way before events of PdL 2007, he was the sort of neighbour that would be a God-send to have, always eager to help, always on-hand, nothing, ever, too much trouble, to an extent that occasionally you might think he was too enthusiastic and eager.

I think, when you read that profile, it casts his way of conducting himself in the wake of Madeleine's disappearance in a very different light ...

It is an interesting topic ... but we are going to get whooshed ... since apart from my thinking the PJ were correct to investigate him therefore having to constitute him arguido ... we are wandering OT.