Assume for instance that SY only had the same summarised non-verbatim statements that we have where Gerry apparently says he went into 5A by the front door using a key and then changed his statement in his next interview to say that he entered via the patio doors.
(a) Do you think SY are going to sit around puzzling and debating amongst themselves over why Gerry would make such an inexplicable claim and trying to fathom out what his reason for doing that would be?
or
(b) Do you think they would ask Gerry himself for an explanation as to why he changed his statement and then ask the Oporto Team to check his explanation with the PJ officers/translator who were present at that second interview?
Common sense dictates that it would NOT be (a)
IMO.
You have no idea what OG might decide to do in the above situation. Your 'common sense' may not be shared by them. My 'common sense' tells me that sometimes detectives notice things but don't always act because;
1. They dismiss them as unimportant.
2. They add them to a list of similar queries which may need clarifying at some point.
3, They add them to a list of similar queries which will need clarifying at some point.
