Did Gonçalo Amaral misinterpret the evidence?

[Robittybob1]

 Did Gonçalo Amaral misinterpret the evidence?  You would think so but was he given a fair go?

[Brietta]

Did Gonçalo Amaral misinterpret the evidence?  You would think so but was he given a fair go?

I don't know what you mean by asking if Goncalo Amaral was given a fair go.

He coordinated two missing child cases in close proximity to each other in time and place and set about investigating the second in exactly the same manner as he did the first.  Despite the fact that his investigation of the first case failed to find any evidential trace of the missing child ... although it did achieve a result in the form of a conviction.

Exactly how much of a 'fair go' did he give Madeleine McCann if according to his memoir, he had decided on the fourth of May that her abduction had been staged and her parents the guilty party?

Don't you think that unwavering certainty might have influenced his interpretation of the evidence causing him to make errors of judgement that another might not?

[Robittybob1]

I don't know what you mean by asking if Goncalo Amaral was given a fair go.

He coordinated two missing child cases in close proximity to each other in time and place and set about investigating the second in exactly the same manner as he did the first.  Despite the fact that his investigation of the first case failed to find any evidential trace of the missing child ... although it did achieve a result in the form of a conviction.

Exactly how much of a 'fair go' did he give Madeleine McCann if according to his memoir, he had decided on the fourth of May that her abduction had been staged and her parents the guilty party?

Don't you think that unwavering certainty might have influenced his interpretation of the evidence causing him to make errors of judgement that another might not?

That is exactly what I mean.  Had he been given a bit more truth from the start we would not have this issue.

[Brietta]

That is exactly what I mean.  Had he been given a bit more truth from the start we would not have this issue.

I think we may be talking at cross purposes here.  I don't think you have understood my post at all.  The problem lay not so much in what he was 'given' but in how he chose to interpret that information.

[Benice]

I think Amaral had a better grasp on the basic facts than those who came after him. Understabdable as he was there from day 1.

Snipped

On 'Day One' he was elsewhere being made an Arguido.     I find it hard to believe that such a major disaster in his own life had no effect whatsoever on his concentration on that day - or even his ensuing attitude towards the case (especially towards the mother) as time went by.    We have no idea how he was affected by being made an arguido, particularly during the 'golden hour' - because he studiously avoids mentioning it - at all times.   

As it was probably the worst thing to happen to him in his career to date  - I believe that momentous event and the possible dire consequences would be uppermost in his mind for a very long time.     It would be abnormal for it not to be IMO. 


AIMHO

[Brietta]

On 'Day One' he was elsewhere being made an Arguido.     I find it hard to believe that such a major disaster in his own life had no effect whatsoever on his concentration on that day - or even his ensuing attitude towards the case (especially towards the mother) as time went by.    We have no idea how he was affected by being made an arguido, particularly during the 'golden hour' - because he studiously avoids mentioning it - at all times.   

As it was probably the worst thing to happen to him in his career to date  - I believe that momentous event and the possible dire consequences would be uppermost in his mind for a very long time.     It would be abnormal for it not to be IMO. 


AIMHO

I cannot imagine what his thought processes might have been when he and his team from the previous missing child case he coordinated were accused by the prosecutors of the heinous crime of torture and falsifying evidence.

Under those circumstances perhaps he thought that wrapping up another missing child case expeditiously and securing a conviction might have alleviated his personal and professional difficulties.

Whatever, it could not have failed to have had a dire effect when dealing with a similar case and may very well have clouded his judgement as far as the parents particularly, the mother were concerned.

In my opinion the Portuguese authorities should perhaps have done what they did when considering reopening Madeleine's case and that was to deploy a team from Porto.

I found the following publication informative regarding the background to the role of the press in forming public opinion in both cases.


Popular press and forensic genetics in Portugal: Expectations and disappointments regarding two cases of missing children https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51528347_Popular_press_and_forensic_genetics_in_Portugal_Expectations_and_disappointments_regarding_two_cases_of_missing_children

[Robittybob1]

I think we may be talking at cross purposes here.  I don't think you have understood my post at all.  The problem lay not so much in what he was 'given' but in how he chose to interpret that information.

Well let's say it is a combination of the both:
1.  Was he told the whole truth - Yes or No?
2.  Did he interpret what information he had in an honest and reasonable way, Yes or No?

But the process starts from:
1.  Was he told the whole truth - Yes or No?  Without that he can't be expected to be correct in the next step but we can still ask ourselves did he work with what he had adequately?

He felt he didn't receive the whole truth. I remember phrases he used like "faked abduction" etc which suggest to me he at least thought  "Was he told the whole truth - Yes or No?"  was a NO.
But can that stance be backed up here for we are not allowed to say anyone is lying but that is what he is implying.  Who would have been lying so that GA becomes correct?

[Robittybob1]

She mentions the sailing incident though:She did alert them to the fact that "the supervision and planning were the responsibility of the club" but Goncalo didn't follow that up by checking the accident register nor taking statements from all involved. Nor asking specific questions regarding the period afterward.
When Kate says  She is talking about major strange behaviours not things at the level of Madeleine's tiredness.
I can't see where they took a decent statement from her at all.

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.nz/2016/08/chapter-8-egregious-examples.html
In Peter Mac's book (which is highly supportive of Amaral's opinions he quotes Kate's book Madeleine.

She looked so pale and worn out, I went straight up to her and asked if she was all right. Had she been OK at the club when Ella left to go to the beach? Yes, she said, but now she was really tired and wanted me to pick her up, which I did. Ten minutes later, the five of us went back to our apartment. I was carrying Madeleine. Because she was so exhausted we skipped playtime that evening.

I'm still surprised this didn't get in her early statement, for it has the hallmarks of internal haemorrhage.
http://www.emedicinehealth.com/internal_bleeding/page4_em.htm

Most healthy people can lose 10% to 15% of their blood supply and show minimal signs of shock. This blood loss is the equivalent of donating a pint of blood. Symptoms become more severe as more blood is lost.
Children, the elderly, and those taking certain medications may not exhibit classic signs and symptoms and medical care providers may need to maintain a higher level of suspicion when looking for internal bleeding.

I.e. the symptoms are hard to pick.

[Lace]

Amaral didn't even understand that no incriminating inference could be drawn from the reactions of the dogs.

He didn't need to listen to anyone who came after him to grasp that basic fact.

He just needed to listen to Harrison (and even Grime).

How could Amaral conclude that Madeleine was driven anywhere dead in the Renault when the provenance of the dog-reaction was Gerry's blood?

Did Amaral ever find this fridge?

I often wonder if a search for a fridge was made,  that could have stored Madeleine's body.   Didn't he also say or  somewhere cool,  where could that be I wonder.

You would have thought as it was an important part of Amaral's theory that the McCann's kept Madeleine's body for weeks,  until they are supposed to have transported her somewhere in the hire car,  that we would hear more about the  investigating that went into the search for a fridge or a cool place. 

[Robittybob1]

I think you would need more than a domestic fridge to keep a body "fresh" for more than a month.

[ferryman]

I often wonder if a search for a fridge was made,  that could have stored Madeleine's body.   Didn't he also say or  somewhere cool,  where could that be I wonder.

You would have thought as it was an important part of Amaral's theory that the McCann's kept Madeleine's body for weeks,  until they are supposed to have transported her somewhere in the hire car,  that we would hear more about the  investigating that went into the search for a fridge or a cool place.

Wasn't Amaral, apparently, just on the brink of finding the fridge at the point he was removed from the investigation? 

[sadie]

Wasn't Amaral, apparently, just on the brink of finding the fridge at the point he was removed from the investigation?

Sorry, but that made me laugh out loud

How could Amaral KNOW he was on the point of finding something if he hadn't found it?

[slartibartfast]

Sorry, but that made me laugh out loud

How could Amaral KNOW he was on the point of finding something if he hadn't found it?

You would have to ask ferryman, he brought it up.

[Robittybob1]

Wasn't Amaral, apparently, just on the brink of finding the fridge at the point he was removed from the investigation?

Maybe he could detect the cadaver odour without the dogs.

[G-Unit]

On 'Day One' he was elsewhere being made an Arguido.     I find it hard to believe that such a major disaster in his own life had no effect whatsoever on his concentration on that day - or even his ensuing attitude towards the case (especially towards the mother) as time went by.    We have no idea how he was affected by being made an arguido, particularly during the 'golden hour' - because he studiously avoids mentioning it - at all times.   

As it was probably the worst thing to happen to him in his career to date  - I believe that momentous event and the possible dire consequences would be uppermost in his mind for a very long time.     It would be abnormal for it not to be IMO.

AIMHO

I was pointing out that his grasp of the basic facts was better than those who came after, as demonstrated by my cites.

I expect many professionals have to learn to leave their troubles 'at the door' when they go to work. I know I did. If you are committed to and interested in your work the task in hand fills your mind leaving no room for other thoughts.

I have no idea what you mean by 'golden hour'. Is that the hour after the child disappeared, the hour after her disappearance was reported to the GNR, the hour after her disappearance was reported to the PJ or what?