Author Topic: "We must reconstruct Maddie’s fateful night" says former Portuguese police chief.  (Read 190857 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Brietta

amaral may have been an experienced investigator but most poeple realise he got several important things wrong in this case

He was actually very inexperienced in relation to investigating missing children cases.  There must have been personnel able to head up such an investigation particularly as it seems illogical to appoint a co-ordinator due to be made an arguido in the conduct of the only other such case he had worked.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline pegasus

IMO a reconstruction ending at the 10pm alarm would be a waste of time.

Offline mercury

He was actually very inexperienced in relation to investigating missing children cases.  There must have been personnel able to head up such an investigation particularly as it seems illogical to appoint a co-ordinator due to be made an arguido in the conduct of the only other such case he had worked.

Who is very experienced in missing child cases? Do all the SIOs in the UK in such cases have a bumper CV in this speciality?


Offline Brietta

Who is very experienced in missing child cases? Do all the SIOs in the UK in such cases have a bumper CV in this speciality?

His experience and skill set was in organised crime and illegal drugs ... there was no-one in his team with experience or specialisation of dealing with missing children cases.

I believe it is good practice to immediately mobilise a multi disciplinary team in a case like Madeleine's.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline mercury

His experience and skill set was in organised crime and illegal drugs ... there was no-one in his team with experience or specialisation of dealing with missing children cases.

I believe it is good practice to immediately mobilise a multi disciplinary team in a case like Madeleine's.

Experience in organized crime sounds great considering some of the supporters theories.

I don't profess to know a thing about  how police organise their investigation teams here or in other countries, but I would hazard a guess that there is no such thing as an experienced in missing children police officer, specially in a country where child abductions are extremely rare in comparison with others

Before criticizing you may have been better off if you knew in fact the experience and expertise of all of Amarals team

John might be able to add a nugget or two here (vis a vis who is employed in x y z cases)

Offline misty

Here's an article about the concern over criminal investigation in Faro from 2006. The comments from Moita Flores make interesting reading.

http://portugalresident.com/security-debated-in-faro

Offline mercury

Here's an article about the concern over criminal investigation in Faro from 2006. The comments from Moita Flores make interesting reading.

http://portugalresident.com/security-debated-in-faro

acting outside the law to do the job?

What police force can hnestly deny ths never takes place! None.

Offline G-Unit

The Tapas 9 themselves saw the timeline as crucial, making two attempts to document it. I think that was more to do with their fear of being charged with neglect than a desire to help the police. As far as they were concerned it was a fact that Madeleine was abducted and that the abductor was seen by Jane Tanner at around 9.15pm. Given that, why did they think it mattered what time others checked? 

A group of people who couldn't remember anything with certainty worked very hard to convince the police that they remembered the timeline. Gerry couldn't remember which door he used, but he remembered what time he used it. It took Dianne Webster a year to remember seeing Matt, but she was absolutely sure what time Kate went to check. Matthew seemed to be describing a different apartment but he remembered what time he went there. Kate thought Russell went to check at the same time as Gerry, but she was sure what time Gerry went...and so on.

Looking at statements relating to the times before the meal began and after the alarm was raised we are in forgetful land again. What time did the men return from tennis? Between 7.10pm and 8pm. Fiona's run was never pinned down to an exact time. Gerry had no idea when or to whom he gave Madeleine's photograph and the family's passports. The other men are very vague about the times they searched or the times they came back to the apartments. Neither Kate nor Fiona are clear regarding the time the McCanns left the apartment in the morning of 4th. 

The timeline should have been examined at the time, but Amaral's superior (Encarnacao?) apparently blocked it. In my opinion the timeline is the result of agreement by a group of people with a vested interest in producing proof that their children were adequately cared for. It has not been independently verified by anyone outside the interested parties and therefore can't be relied on.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline John

A simple reminder that posts should be amiable and to the point.  Please remember that posts which contain goading or abusive remarks will be removed.  TY
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Alice Purjorick

The Tapas 9 themselves saw the timeline as crucial, making two attempts to document it. I think that was more to do with their fear of being charged with neglect than a desire to help the police. As far as they were concerned it was a fact that Madeleine was abducted and that the abductor was seen by Jane Tanner at around 9.15pm. Given that, why did they think it mattered what time others checked? 

A group of people who couldn't remember anything with certainty worked very hard to convince the police that they remembered the timeline. Gerry couldn't remember which door he used, but he remembered what time he used it. It took Dianne Webster a year to remember seeing Matt, but she was absolutely sure what time Kate went to check. Matthew seemed to be describing a different apartment but he remembered what time he went there. Kate thought Russell went to check at the same time as Gerry, but she was sure what time Gerry went...and so on.

Looking at statements relating to the times before the meal began and after the alarm was raised we are in forgetful land again. What time did the men return from tennis? Between 7.10pm and 8pm. Fiona's run was never pinned down to an exact time. Gerry had no idea when or to whom he gave Madeleine's photograph and the family's passports. The other men are very vague about the times they searched or the times they came back to the apartments. Neither Kate nor Fiona are clear regarding the time the McCanns left the apartment in the morning of 4th. 

The timeline should have been examined at the time, but Amaral's superior (Encarnacao?) apparently blocked it. In my opinion the timeline is the result of agreement by a group of people with a vested interest in producing proof that their children were adequately cared for. It has not been independently verified by anyone outside the interested parties and therefore can't be relied on.

Fair comment. Maybe that has a bearing on why The Met were so keen to interview those local "ne'er do wells" who were out and about at the appropriate time. "Tell us what you saw while you were hanging about on the street corner having a drag"............. &%+((£
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline pegasus

IMO it would be more useful to accurately reconstruct the searches inside the apartment that night.
This could be done just by accurately interviewing the few people who did so.

Offline ShiningInLuz

The Tapas 9 themselves saw the timeline as crucial, making two attempts to document it. I think that was more to do with their fear of being charged with neglect than a desire to help the police. As far as they were concerned it was a fact that Madeleine was abducted and that the abductor was seen by Jane Tanner at around 9.15pm. Given that, why did they think it mattered what time others checked? 

A group of people who couldn't remember anything with certainty worked very hard to convince the police that they remembered the timeline. Gerry couldn't remember which door he used, but he remembered what time he used it. It took Dianne Webster a year to remember seeing Matt, but she was absolutely sure what time Kate went to check. Matthew seemed to be describing a different apartment but he remembered what time he went there. Kate thought Russell went to check at the same time as Gerry, but she was sure what time Gerry went...and so on.

Looking at statements relating to the times before the meal began and after the alarm was raised we are in forgetful land again. What time did the men return from tennis? Between 7.10pm and 8pm. Fiona's run was never pinned down to an exact time. Gerry had no idea when or to whom he gave Madeleine's photograph and the family's passports. The other men are very vague about the times they searched or the times they came back to the apartments. Neither Kate nor Fiona are clear regarding the time the McCanns left the apartment in the morning of 4th. 

The timeline should have been examined at the time, but Amaral's superior (Encarnacao?) apparently blocked it. In my opinion the timeline is the result of agreement by a group of people with a vested interest in producing proof that their children were adequately cared for. It has not been independently verified by anyone outside the interested parties and therefore can't be relied on.
Giving this a quick thinkover, who could provide such independent verification?

Until Madeleine disappeared, it was a non-memorable evening.

The waiters clearly hadn't a clue who was getting up and when, and they had no particular reason to.

I don't know how many other diners were in the Tapas that night, but why should any of them remember?

And I can't think of anyone outside who would take notice of this.

If some or all of the T9 have tweaked the time line, they have done Madeleine a grave disservice.  We have no actual evidence of tweaking, merely that agreeing a time line seemed to be high priority.

And of course they actually produced 3, 2 on the child's book and a 3rd by computer.

That I find very strange.  I would know when I went.  I would know when my partner went.  If a 3rd party checked my children, I would know when that happened.  But even if the people sitting next to me went to check other than my children, I wouldn't remember, unless the checks were not time-driven but event driven e.g. person X got up between starters and main and that would be about ... while person Y got up after finishing the main course, and that would be about ...

The desire to bash out an agreed time line is very odd, IMO.
What's up, old man?

Offline Mr Gray

Giving this a quick thinkover, who could provide such independent verification?

Until Madeleine disappeared, it was a non-memorable evening.

The waiters clearly hadn't a clue who was getting up and when, and they had no particular reason to.

I don't know how many other diners were in the Tapas that night, but why should any of them remember?

And I can't think of anyone outside who would take notice of this.

If some or all of the T9 have tweaked the time line, they have done Madeleine a grave disservice.  We have no actual evidence of tweaking, merely that agreeing a time line seemed to be high priority.

And of course they actually produced 3, 2 on the child's book and a 3rd by computer.

That I find very strange.  I would know when I went.  I would know when my partner went.  If a 3rd party checked my children, I would know when that happened.  But even if the people sitting next to me went to check other than my children, I wouldn't remember, unless the checks were not time-driven but event driven e.g. person X got up between starters and main and that would be about ... while person Y got up after finishing the main course, and that would be about ...

The desire to bash out an agreed time line is very odd, IMO.

Not odd in the slightest...just you not understanding how the McCanns mind work
They felt it was important to get the most accurate timeline to help with the investigation. The best way to do this was to pool knowledge a sap whilst it was still fresh in their minds
The reason some suspect the McCanns is because they misunderstand perfectly normal actions

Offline Lace

The first reconstruction should have gone ahead,  Amaral cancelled it.    He has no authority at all now to ask for one.

Offline slartibartfast

The first reconstruction should have gone ahead,  Amaral cancelled it.    He has no authority at all now to ask for one.

I am pretty sure we have had the cite in the last couple of days that it was his boss.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.