Was the PJ's biggest mistake not testing the twins straight away?

[Angelo222]

If Madeleine said anything it points to TUE night not WED. WED night Rachel was next door to the children's room and heard nowt and Kate was in the same room. It all points to Madeleine crying on TUE as Pamela Fenn witnessed.

Mrs Fenn knew exactly what she meant.  She went out on the Wed evening to avoid a repetition of having to endure another evenings crying from the children resident beneath her apartment.

[Brietta]

Goncalo Amaral's book tells us that he suspected the parents from the word go ... but it really wasn't his job to act as judge and jury ... it was his job to look for evidence.

It was his job to follow that evidence to find out what had happened to a missing child and with any luck find her and return her to her family.

It was not his job to waken on the morning of the 4th firm in the unshakeable belief that her parents were responsible for her disappearance and from there on in concentrate on that while paying only lip service to all else.

The (laughable) secrecy laws were flouted by the police who day after day leaked fresh pejorative insinuations about Madeleine's distraught parents to a press eager for copy.

For the media feeding frenzy which resulted to have been blamed on those parents by sceptics is risible ... and John O'Connor's observation reveals exactly who is responsible and what the aim of it was.

The golden hours were squandered never to be recovered.

Most definitely the worst mistake made by the Amaral investigation was not to follow the evidence they had ... very often in abduction cases the only evidence is something left behind - a bike or a scooter - or an eye witness account.

But when the senior investigating officer "knows" who dunnit ... why bother checking out other avenues for investigation.



Quote
"I was there with GMTV at the time and the press were being briefed covertly by Portuguese journalists and police officers that they believed that the offenders were within the family or the family group ...

and they would't move from that and they were so wrong ...

and it got them off to a dreadful start and they missed golden opportunities in the early stages of the investigation ...

because they were just intent on trying to to prove some culpability within the family and they could't have been further from the actual truth of it and of course what SY been trying to do is to catch up with what should have been done at the time. 

There's a lot of things that weren't done. "  John O'Connor speaking in 2013 about the events of 2007

[ShiningInLuz]

An abductor could have taken Madeleine to a shed, garage or house,   I would have thought the police would have searched all sheds and garages around the area where she went missing.

The law in Portugal re entry to an area (house grounds) appears to be different to the UK, but like I said, don't quote me.

Here, if a property is not completely fenced off, people are allowed to enter it and partake of what they wish.  There is a villa in Olhão that we rented a number of times.  It was not fenced off.  We had one instance of people coming on to the property to pick from a carob tree near the pool.  Despite the tree being on 'our' land, I believe that action was legal in Portugal.

We had another instance, in the same villa, of being woken up early one Sunday morning to the sound of rifles going off.  We are back to the 'property unfenced' idea again.  It was legal for the hunting party to encroach on to 'our' property, in the absence of a fence.  It happened to be illegal to conduct the hunt, because the hunting season had not started.  It happened to be illegal to conduct the hunt close to our villa, because there is a law stating that hunts have to be a certain distance away from homes, and they were definitely closer.

The hunters concluded their foray through 'our' property by trampling underfoot a new flower garden the owners had recently put in.

The next evening, as we headed off in our car for dinner, the lead hunter was shepherding his sheep across a track we shared.  Being the kindly souls we are, we chose not to hunt his sheep, despite being on unfenced land.

Let me turn to the villa I am in at the moment, in Luz, and let me pretend it was empty in May 2007.  I don't know whether it was or not.  This is just a thought exercise.  I want to work out how much it would cost the PJ to search this single property without permission of the owner, and in my little neck of Luz, there are dozens and dozens of such properties.

First of all, the PJ would have to do a LOT of breaking and entering.  To get into the main house, that involves forcing at least one shutter and breaking through double glazing, as a minimum.  I simply can't see anyone getting through the front door with anything less than a cutting torch or explosives, as the door and lock are reinforced.

Now we have the rest of the property.  There's 3 separate outdoor locked storage areas.  I reckon a crowbar would do the trick on these.  Then we have the pool equipment room, which in our case is old and does not shut, let alone lock, despite the fact that the equipment inside is worth thousands of euros.

One single house.  Four lots of breaking and entering required.  Cost of damage incurred = ???

We do not have all the keys to this house.  The owners retain the key to one of the storage areas, and we have never seen inside it.  Should I get a crowbar and have a go, just in case Madeleine might be inside?

By the way, we have just received confirmation that the bank has accepted our offer to buy a house, so we should be heading out of Luz in the near future.  And you might wish to check out the link on here to the webcams, 'cos it is definitely ShiningInLuz.

[pathfinder73]

Goncalo Amaral's book tells us that he suspected the parents from the word go ... but it really wasn't his job to act as judge and jury ... it was his job to look for evidence.

It was his job to follow that evidence to find out what had happened to a missing child and with any luck find her and return her to her family.

It was not his job to waken on the morning of the 4th firm in the unshakeable belief that her parents were responsible for her disappearance and from there on in concentrate on that while paying only lip service to all else.

The (laughable) secrecy laws were flouted by the police who day after day leaked fresh pejorative insinuations about Madeleine's distraught parents to a press eager for copy.

For the media feeding frenzy which resulted to have been blamed on those parents by sceptics is risible ... and John O'Connor's observation reveals exactly who is responsible and what the aim of it was.

The golden hours were squandered never to be recovered.

Most definitely the worst mistake made by the Amaral investigation was not to follow the evidence they had ... very often in abduction cases the only evidence is something left behind - a bike or a scooter - or an eye witness account.

But when the senior investigating officer "knows" who dunnit ... why bother checking out other avenues for investigation.



Quote
"I was there with GMTV at the time and the press were being briefed covertly by Portuguese journalists and police officers that they believed that the offenders were within the family or the family group ...

and they would't move from that and they were so wrong ...

and it got them off to a dreadful start and they missed golden opportunities in the early stages of the investigation ...

because they were just intent on trying to to prove some culpability within the family and they could't have been further from the actual truth of it and of course what SY been trying to do is to catch up with what should have been done at the time. 

There's a lot of things that weren't done. "  John O'Connor speaking in 2013 about the events of 2007

The parents were given a free ride by Amaral/PJ. No clothes taken, no twins tested, Gerry allowed to sit in with Kate. No second statement by Kate. Gerry was allowed to go back and fetch clothes i.e. clothes missing from 2nd crime scene photos taken on the 4th. They were following the Sagres lead and Tannerman. If he was after parents from the start then they would have known about it. He didn't even bring in crime scene dogs until after the McCanns brought in body finder.

[Brietta]

The parents were given a free ride by Amaral/PJ. No clothes taken, no twins tested, Gerry allowed to sit in with Kate. No second statement by Kate. Gerry was allowed to go back and fetch clothes i.e. clothes missing from 2nd crime scene photos taken on the 4th. They were following the Sagres lead and Tannerman. If he was after parents from the start then they would have known about it. He didn't even bring in crime scene dogs until after the McCanns brought in body finder.

You evidence much the same mindset which proved so disastrous for the chances of the original investigation finding out where Madeleine was at the most optimum time.

Their concentration on the McCann family and friends proved redundant then ... and a distraction from finding the missing child they decided had died in 5A.

Your mirroring concentration on those patently redundant suppositions which so bemused and confused any hope of finding Madeleine in 2007 ... is rather bizarre when one considers the disrepute that now taints the original investigation.

However your mistaken conclusions mean not a thing.

The original mistaken conclusions ... although how one can conclude anything prior to any investigation occurring is a mystery ... of the PJ had a shattering and disastrous effect on the search for a missing child.

For your information the original investigation got it wrong and followed entirely the wrong path ... people like John O'Connor and Mark Williams-Thomas could see that at the time ... however if it comforts you to think otherwise that is fine, because it doesn't really mean a thing.

Nearly nine years worth of damage has been done by those mistakes made by the PJ in 2007.  Bet you are delighted that today's PJ and SY continue doing their best to retrieve something from that disaster by their continuing search for information on what may have happened to Madeleine McCann.

[Lace]

Mrs Fenn knew exactly what she meant.  She went out on the Wed evening to avoid a repetition of having to endure another evenings crying from the children resident beneath her apartment.

Did she?   I missed that in the files.

[Lace]

The law in Portugal re entry to an area (house grounds) appears to be different to the UK, but like I said, don't quote me.

Here, if a property is not completely fenced off, people are allowed to enter it and partake of what they wish.  There is a villa in Olhão that we rented a number of times.  It was not fenced off.  We had one instance of people coming on to the property to pick from a carob tree near the pool.  Despite the tree being on 'our' land, I believe that action was legal in Portugal.

We had another instance, in the same villa, of being woken up early one Sunday morning to the sound of rifles going off.  We are back to the 'property unfenced' idea again.  It was legal for the hunting party to encroach on to 'our' property, in the absence of a fence.  It happened to be illegal to conduct the hunt, because the hunting season had not started.  It happened to be illegal to conduct the hunt close to our villa, because there is a law stating that hunts have to be a certain distance away from homes, and they were definitely closer.

The hunters concluded their foray through 'our' property by trampling underfoot a new flower garden the owners had recently put in.

The next evening, as we headed off in our car for dinner, the lead hunter was shepherding his sheep across a track we shared.  Being the kindly souls we are, we chose not to hunt his sheep, despite being on unfenced land.

Let me turn to the villa I am in at the moment, in Luz, and let me pretend it was empty in May 2007.  I don't know whether it was or not.  This is just a thought exercise.  I want to work out how much it would cost the PJ to search this single property without permission of the owner, and in my little neck of Luz, there are dozens and dozens of such properties.

First of all, the PJ would have to do a LOT of breaking and entering.  To get into the main house, that involves forcing at least one shutter and breaking through double glazing, as a minimum.  I simply can't see anyone getting through the front door with anything less than a cutting torch or explosives, as the door and lock are reinforced.

Now we have the rest of the property.  There's 3 separate outdoor locked storage areas.  I reckon a crowbar would do the trick on these.  Then we have the pool equipment room, which in our case is old and does not shut, let alone lock, despite the fact that the equipment inside is worth thousands of euros.

One single house.  Four lots of breaking and entering required.  Cost of damage incurred = ???

We do not have all the keys to this house.  The owners retain the key to one of the storage areas, and we have never seen inside it.  Should I get a crowbar and have a go, just in case Madeleine might be inside?

By the way, we have just received confirmation that the bank has accepted our offer to buy a house, so we should be heading out of Luz in the near future.  And you might wish to check out the link on here to the webcams, 'cos it is definitely ShiningInLuz.

Yes,  I see what you mean.

I would expect the owners to open up empty properties for the police without them having a search warrant,  to see if anyone had been in there.

I suppose if the property doesn't belong to the person who took Madeleine that person would have had to break in a property to start with wouldn't he.

Glad to hear you can now buy your house,   I wish you all the best in your new home.

[G-Unit]

Goncalo Amaral's book tells us that he suspected the parents from the word go ... but it really wasn't his job to act as judge and jury ... it was his job to look for evidence.

It was his job to follow that evidence to find out what had happened to a missing child and with any luck find her and return her to her family.

It was not his job to waken on the morning of the 4th firm in the unshakeable belief that her parents were responsible for her disappearance and from there on in concentrate on that while paying only lip service to all else.

The (laughable) secrecy laws were flouted by the police who day after day leaked fresh pejorative insinuations about Madeleine's distraught parents to a press eager for copy.

For the media feeding frenzy which resulted to have been blamed on those parents by sceptics is risible ... and John O'Connor's observation reveals exactly who is responsible and what the aim of it was.

The golden hours were squandered never to be recovered.

Most definitely the worst mistake made by the Amaral investigation was not to follow the evidence they had ... very often in abduction cases the only evidence is something left behind - a bike or a scooter - or an eye witness account.

But when the senior investigating officer "knows" who dunnit ... why bother checking out other avenues for investigation.



Quote
"I was there with GMTV at the time and the press were being briefed covertly by Portuguese journalists and police officers that they believed that the offenders were within the family or the family group ...

and they would't move from that and they were so wrong ...

and it got them off to a dreadful start and they missed golden opportunities in the early stages of the investigation ...

because they were just intent on trying to to prove some culpability within the family and they could't have been further from the actual truth of it and of course what SY been trying to do is to catch up with what should have been done at the time. 

There's a lot of things that weren't done. "  John O'Connor speaking in 2013 about the events of 2007

Quoting Amaral's book? As we are told it's all scurrilous lies there's no point in quoting from it imo. PdL was full of self proclaimed experts who knew more than the police force on the ground. None of them had ever investigated the disappearance of a child as far as I know, so their opinions are just opinions. I can't remember any other police force being so vilified by all and sundry from day one of an investigation. Shameful!!!

The rumours were begun by the parents with the help of relatives and friends immediately. Abduction, breaking into a locked apartment, leaving the door open and the shutters broken. In light of the untruths being printed in the UK press I'm not surprised the Portuguese began to hit back.

The couple checked on their children every half an hour and ensured that the doors were locked, it was said......Between their checks at 9.30pm and 10pm, the apartment was broken into through a window and Madeleine was taken, according to her aunt. Trish Cameron, Mr McCann's sister, from Dum-barton, near Glasgow, said it appeared that someone had been spying on Madeleine and had targeted her for abduction.

?The front door was open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open and Madeleine was missing,? she said. ?Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her.?
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/1may7/05-05-07-Times-Transcript.htm

[Alice Purjorick]

Quoting Amaral's book? As we are told it's all scurrilous lies there's no point in quoting from it imo. PdL was full of self proclaimed experts who knew more than the police force on the ground. None of them had ever investigated the disappearance of a child as far as I know, so their opinions are just opinions. I can't remember any other police force being so vilified by all and sundry from day one of an investigation. Shameful!!!

The rumours were begun by the parents with the help of relatives and friends immediately. Abduction, breaking into a locked apartment, leaving the door open and the shutters broken. In light of the untruths being printed in the UK press I'm not surprised the Portuguese began to hit back.

The couple checked on their children every half an hour and ensured that the doors were locked, it was said......Between their checks at 9.30pm and 10pm, the apartment was broken into through a window and Madeleine was taken, according to her aunt. Trish Cameron, Mr McCann's sister, from Dum-barton, near Glasgow, said it appeared that someone had been spying on Madeleine and had targeted her for abduction.

?The front door was open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open and Madeleine was missing,? she said. ?Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her.?
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/1may7/05-05-07-Times-Transcript.htm

I wonder what particular feature made the abductor single out Madeleine?
There were plenty of other children about the resort so why pick out Madeleine?

[Mr Gray]

I wonder what particular feature made the abductor single out Madeleine?
There were plenty of other children about the resort so why pick out Madeleine?

you would need to ask the abductor

[jassi]

I wonder what particular feature made the abductor single out Madeleine?
There were plenty of other children about the resort so why pick out Madeleine?

Possibly all the other alternative children were being more adequately supervised.

[Alfred R Jones]

I wonder what particular feature made the abductor single out Madeleine?
There were plenty of other children about the resort so why pick out Madeleine?

Is that not a question one could ask about any child abducted by a stranger?

[Alice Purjorick]

you would need to ask the abductor

If I felt such person existed, knew both their identity and whereabouts I would probably do just that. As I don't I thought posters may have an opinion on it. It is unusual for folk to be backward in coming forward with an opinion about such things.

[Mr Gray]

If I felt such person existed, knew both their identity and whereabouts I would probably do just that. As I don't I thought posters may have an opinion on it. It is unusual for folk to be backward in coming forward with an opinion about such things.

I think its more of case of the backward coming forward on here

[Brietta]

I wonder what particular feature made the abductor single out Madeleine?
There were plenty of other children about the resort so why pick out Madeleine?

Why Ylenia?
Why April?
Why Holly?
Why Jessica?
Why James?
Why Sandy?
Why Ben?
Why do children go missing and vanish without trace?
Why did you post such an inappropriate - question? particularly as it has nothing really to do with PJ mistakes.