Author Topic: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.  (Read 40998 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #195 on: June 10, 2016, 11:22:32 AM »
This is not linked to any of my other posts.  ?{)(**

Section 114 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 defines hearsay evidence as a statement not made in oral evidence in criminal proceedings and admissible as evidence of any matter stated but only if certain conditions are met, specifically where:

    It is in the interests of justice to admit it (see section 114(1)(d))
    The witness cannot attend (see section 116)
    The evidence is in a document (see section 117)
    The evidence is multiple hearsay (see section 121)

The meaning of “statements” and “matter stated” is explained in section 115 of the 2003 Act. “Oral evidence” is defined in section 134(1) of that Act.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline G-Unit

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #196 on: June 10, 2016, 11:48:23 AM »
This is not a credible argument IMO.     Everything Amaral says about the case is based on 2nd hand information as he never had any personal interaction with the McCanns himself.     Therefore theoretically -  if everything the McCanns say is dismissed as  'hearsay' then surely that must also apply to Amaral.

I think you're mixing up two different things. Amaral and his team assessed the case using intelligence and evidence. There's no requirement that I can think of for a detective to speak to those supplying evidence in order to verify it. Their signatures on their statements do that.

Not everything that the McCanns say 'is dismissed as  'hearsay'', but in the case of this 'deal' their account is not supported by others who were present, even their own lawyer;

That explains the outrage 10 days ago, on the evening that Gerry and Kate McCann were declared formal suspects, or arguidos, in the disappearance of their daughter. Police were still questioning Gerry McCann when, already, his sister Philomena was telling Sky they had offered Kate McCann a reduced two-year sentence if she admitted to killing her daughter accidentally, hiding the body and then secretly disposing of it weeks later.

On this occasion the police officers were right to be angry. Like many things said about the McCann affair over the past days and months, the story was wrong. There was no offer of a plea bargain. It had all been "a misunderstanding", the McCann lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, explained the following day.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/sep/17/mondaymediasection13

Had the PJ broken the law by offering a plea bargain the McCann's lawyer would surely have reported them for misconduct.
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 Mr Gray

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #197 on: June 10, 2016, 01:06:44 PM »
I think you're mixing up two different things. Amaral and his team assessed the case using intelligence and evidence. There's no requirement that I can think of for a detective to speak to those supplying evidence in order to verify it. Their signatures on their statements do that.

Not everything that the McCanns say 'is dismissed as  'hearsay'', but in the case of this 'deal' their account is not supported by others who were present, even their own lawyer;

That explains the outrage 10 days ago, on the evening that Gerry and Kate McCann were declared formal suspects, or arguidos, in the disappearance of their daughter. Police were still questioning Gerry McCann when, already, his sister Philomena was telling Sky they had offered Kate McCann a reduced two-year sentence if she admitted to killing her daughter accidentally, hiding the body and then secretly disposing of it weeks later.

On this occasion the police officers were right to be angry. Like many things said about the McCann affair over the past days and months, the story was wrong. There was no offer of a plea bargain. It had all been "a misunderstanding", the McCann lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, explained the following day.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/sep/17/mondaymediasection13

Had the PJ broken the law by offering a plea bargain the McCann's lawyer would surely have reported them for misconduct.

Looks like Carlos is trying to cover up for dropping the pj in it.....the mccanns could not report the offer it was made to their lawyer and it seems he quickly backtracked

Offline Mr Gray

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #198 on: June 10, 2016, 01:10:51 PM »
This is not linked to any of my other posts.  ?{)(**

Section 114 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 defines hearsay evidence as a statement not made in oral evidence in criminal proceedings and admissible as evidence of any matter stated but only if certain conditions are met, specifically where:

    It is in the interests of justice to admit it (see section 114(1)(d))
    The witness cannot attend (see section 116)
    The evidence is in a document (see section 117)
    The evidence is multiple hearsay (see section 121)

The meaning of “statements” and “matter stated” is explained in section 115 of the 2003 Act. “Oral evidence” is defined in section 134(1) of that Act.


so hearsay evidence is evidence...as I have already pointed out to stephen...thanks for the confirmation

Offline Mr Gray

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #199 on: June 10, 2016, 01:18:45 PM »
can anyone confirm if this is an extract from kates book

In any event, it seemed we’d underestimated the magnitude of the fight we had
on our hands. Then came the best bit. My lawyer Carlos Pinto de Abreu
announced what police had proposed.

If we, or rather I, admitted that Madeleine had died in an accident in the
apartment, and confessed to having hidden and disposed of her body, the
sentence I’d receive would be much more lenient: only two years, he said, as
opposed to what I’d be looking at if I ended up being charged with homicide.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #200 on: June 10, 2016, 01:36:34 PM »
so hearsay evidence is evidence...as I have already pointed out to stephen...thanks for the confirmation

'Multiple hearsay'.

Offline John

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #201 on: June 10, 2016, 02:16:05 PM »
It is noticeable that Gonçalo Amaral makes no reference to any deal or offer in his book. The following extract relates to the witness interview conducted with Kate on 6 September 2007 and the arguido interviews conducted with both parents on 7 September 2007.


Chapter 19
 
TOWARDS PLACING THE McCANN COUPLE UNDER INVESTIGATION
     
In Portugal, the criminal process is comprised of three phases: the investigation, the  instruction and the trial. Under the direction and control of the Public Minister, the  investigation is led by the criminal police, who enjoy total practical and tactical  independence. The police officers may make a declaration of arguido status as they  think fit. This status confers on a suspect a set of rights and responsibilities. One of the  fundamental principles of our code of criminal procedure is that of non-selfincrimination: it is illegal for information given by a witness to later be used against him  and to implicate him in a crime. The right of silence, therefore, allows him to avoid  giving incriminating details. But the status heaps opprobrium on those who become  arguido, in spite of the principle of presumption of innocence.   
With due regard to procedural regulations and faced with evidence of the concealment  of a corpse and simulation of an abduction - partially confirmed by laboratory analyses - , we decide to question the McCanns before their imminent return to England. This  decision is taken with full knowledge of the facts by the investigators, the Public  Minister and the Director of the Judiciary Police. (PJ)   
On September 3rd, the police officer Ricardo Paiva, responsible for relations with the  couple, goes to their residence to inform them of the date and time of the interview.  Kate reacts quite badly: she is worried about what her parents are going to think and  about the reaction of the press. She even states that the Portuguese police, "is submitting  to pressure on the part of its government to resolve the case as soon as possible."  English and Portuguese investigators actively prepare the interviews and draw up a list  of questions focusing particularly on the course of events on the night of the  disappearance. The suspects must clarify for us the various contradictions raised in the  course of their previous statements.
 
THE INTERROGATIONS   
The decision to declare Kate and Gerald McCann arguidos was taken. Notification had  already reached them. On September 6th, a little before 3pm, Kate arrives at the DIC in  Portimão, accompanied by her press officer. Her lawyer has already arrived and the  interview room is ready. The crowd has been building up outside for a while. Going  through the door, Kate laughs as she says that this media scrum is good for tourism.   
Her lawyer requests that she be heard as a witness and not interrogated as an arguida.  We don't agree with what, to us, constitutes a backward step. Some officers involved in  the investigation seem to be hoping for the miracle of a confession. We remain  skeptical.   
We finally decide to question her as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events  after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children.  From that time on, everything she said could be held against her. According to the principle of non-incrimination, she would then have to be declared arguida since we  have sufficient evidence to be able to do that.   
On the subject of the press officer who was accompanying her everywhere, including to  the police station, the opinion was unanimous: she had nothing to do with anything here.   
- I have never heard of the role of the press officer in the penal code!...Perhaps it's the  subject of the next amendment, or else it's a new method.   
- Drop it. She is only going to sit near the police officers on duty and wait.   
Her presence in the offices of the police during the interrogations seems unacceptable to  me, useless and prejudicial to the investigation. However, she was to stay there from  start to finish.
   
At 8 o'clock, we have a break to have something to eat, then the interrogation continues  until 11pm. At the end of that day, we have learned nothing new with the exception of  two details: Kate now remembers - five months after the event - that on the evening of  May 3rd, Gerald was wearing jeans and trainers. Another detail came back to her: the  time that David Payne had spent at her apartment. Gerald had spoken of 30 minutes,  Kate now insists that he was only there for 30 seconds. We have never understood why  it was so important to minimise this period of time. When Kate leaves the premises, we  make sure that all necessary precautions have been taken to ensure her safety.
 
ARGUIDOS   
On September 7th at 11am, Kate Healy is declared an arguida on the basis of strong  presumptions of the crime of concealing a body and simulating an abduction. She states  her name and gives her address as her home in Great Britain. Taking advantage of the  right accorded to her by her status, she remains silent and does not answer questions  concerning the circumstances of her daughter's death, on May 3rd 2007, in the Ocean  Club apartment.
 
At 4pm, it's Gerald's turn to be officially declared an arguido, for the same reasons. In  contrast to his wife, he seems disposed to answer questions. He begins by vehemently  denying any responsibility whatsoever in his daughter's disappearance. As far as the  time that David Payne spent with Kate and her children is concerned, he now says that  the 30 minutes represents the total time that it took David Payne, after having left Gerry  on the court at 6.30pm, to drop in and see Kate, go to his apartment to get changed and  get back dressed to play tennis. But the court was reserved from 6 to 7pm. Why did  David go back at 7pm, ready to play, when he knew there wasn't time?

Extract from The Truth Of The Lie - Gonçalo Amaral pages 84-85
« Last Edit: June 10, 2016, 02:24:09 PM by John »
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 Mr Gray

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #202 on: June 10, 2016, 02:26:01 PM »
It is noticeable that Gonçalo Amaral makes no reference to any deal or offer in his book. The following extract relates to the witness interview conducted with Kate on 6 September 2007 and the arguido interviews conducted with both parents on 7 September 2007.


Chapter 19
 
TOWARDS PLACING THE McCANN COUPLE UNDER INVESTIGATION
     
In Portugal, the criminal process is comprised of three phases: the investigation, the  instruction and the trial. Under the direction and control of the Public Minister, the  investigation is led by the criminal police, who enjoy total practical and tactical  independence. The police officers may make a declaration of arguido status as they  think fit. This status confers on a suspect a set of rights and responsibilities. One of the  fundamental principles of our code of criminal procedure is that of non-selfincrimination: it is illegal for information given by a witness to later be used against him  and to implicate him in a crime. The right of silence, therefore, allows him to avoid  giving incriminating details. But the status heaps opprobrium on those who become  arguido, in spite of the principle of presumption of innocence.   
With due regard to procedural regulations and faced with evidence of the concealment  of a corpse and simulation of an abduction - partially confirmed by laboratory analyses - , we decide to question the McCanns before their imminent return to England. This  decision is taken with full knowledge of the facts by the investigators, the Public  Minister and the Director of the Judiciary Police. (PJ)   
On September 3rd, the police officer Ricardo Paiva, responsible for relations with the  couple, goes to their residence to inform them of the date and time of the interview.  Kate reacts quite badly: she is worried about what her parents are going to think and  about the reaction of the press. She even states that the Portuguese police, "is submitting  to pressure on the part of its government to resolve the case as soon as possible."  English and Portuguese investigators actively prepare the interviews and draw up a list  of questions focusing particularly on the course of events on the night of the  disappearance. The suspects must clarify for us the various contradictions raised in the  course of their previous statements.
 
THE INTERROGATIONS   
The decision to declare Kate and Gerald McCann arguidos was taken. Notification had  already reached them. On September 6th, a little before 3pm, Kate arrives at the DIC in  Portimão, accompanied by her press officer. Her lawyer has already arrived and the  interview room is ready. The crowd has been building up outside for a while. Going  through the door, Kate laughs as she says that this media scrum is good for tourism.   
Her lawyer requests that she be heard as a witness and not interrogated as an arguida.  We don't agree with what, to us, constitutes a backward step. Some officers involved in  the investigation seem to be hoping for the miracle of a confession. We remain  skeptical.   
We finally decide to question her as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events  after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children.  From that time on, everything she said could be held against her. According to the principle of non-incrimination, she would then have to be declared arguida since we  have sufficient evidence to be able to do that.   
On the subject of the press officer who was accompanying her everywhere, including to  the police station, the opinion was unanimous: she had nothing to do with anything here.   
- I have never heard of the role of the press officer in the penal code!...Perhaps it's the  subject of the next amendment, or else it's a new method.   
- Drop it. She is only going to sit near the police officers on duty and wait.   
Her presence in the offices of the police during the interrogations seems unacceptable to  me, useless and prejudicial to the investigation. However, she was to stay there from  start to finish.
   
At 8 o'clock, we have a break to have something to eat, then the interrogation continues  until 11pm. At the end of that day, we have learned nothing new with the exception of  two details: Kate now remembers - five months after the event - that on the evening of  May 3rd, Gerald was wearing jeans and trainers. Another detail came back to her: the  time that David Payne had spent at her apartment. Gerald had spoken of 30 minutes,  Kate now insists that he was only there for 30 seconds. We have never understood why  it was so important to minimise this period of time. When Kate leaves the premises, we  make sure that all necessary precautions have been taken to ensure her safety.
 
ARGUIDOS   
On September 7th at 11am, Kate Healy is declared an arguida on the basis of strong  presumptions of the crime of concealing a body and simulating an abduction. She states  her name and gives her address as her home in Great Britain. Taking advantage of the  right accorded to her by her status, she remains silent and does not answer questions  concerning the circumstances of her daughter's death, on May 3rd 2007, in the Ocean  Club apartment.
 
At 4pm, it's Gerald's turn to be officially declared an arguido, for the same reasons. In  contrast to his wife, he seems disposed to answer questions. He begins by vehemently  denying any responsibility whatsoever in his daughter's disappearance. As far as the  time that David Payne spent with Kate and her children is concerned, he now says that  the 30 minutes represents the total time that it took David Payne, after having left Gerry  on the court at 6.30pm, to drop in and see Kate, go to his apartment to get changed and  get back dressed to play tennis. But the court was reserved from 6 to 7pm. Why did  David go back at 7pm, ready to play, when he knew there wasn't time?

Extract from The Truth Of The Lie - Gonçalo Amaral pages 84-85

as its illegal...he is hardly going to mention it

my take is taht it was made off the record to Carlos and he and the pj were embarassed by it....if something isn't true you say it isn't true.......Carlos referred to it as a misunderstanding to save face all round.
I cant see that Kate made this up...
« Last Edit: June 10, 2016, 02:30:27 PM by davel »

Offline John

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #203 on: June 10, 2016, 02:31:06 PM »
Looks like Carlos is trying to cover up for dropping the pj in it.....the mccanns could not report the offer it was made to their lawyer and it seems he quickly backtracked

Except that it was Gerry who dropped them in it by going public.
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.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #204 on: June 10, 2016, 02:32:52 PM »
as its illegal...he is hardly going to mention it

my take is taht it was made off the record to Carlos and he and the pj were embarassed by it....if something isn't true you say it isn't true.......Carlos referred to it as a misunderstanding to save face all round.
I cant see that Kate made this up...

I can see why someone could, make such a claim.


Offline John

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #205 on: June 10, 2016, 02:44:28 PM »
The answer to your earlier question is yes, it was a direct quote from Madeleine.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2016, 03:17:45 PM by John »
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

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #206 on: June 10, 2016, 02:51:19 PM »
so hearsay evidence is evidence...as I have already pointed out to stephen...thanks for the confirmation

Before you get too carried away giving yourself a round of applause and a ruck of high fives:
you said: there is ample evidence to prove an offer was made by teh pj
I said : well provide it then.
I am still waiting.
Either it exists ergo you will be able to provide it or you are over egging the pud. Which is it ?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #207 on: June 10, 2016, 03:30:28 PM »
so hearsay evidence is evidence...as I have already pointed out to stephen...thanks for the confirmation

There may be different rules in Portugal.
In fact I believe the Ciprianos sunk themselves over the hearsay rules in Portugal.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Mr Gray

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #208 on: June 10, 2016, 03:43:30 PM »
There may be different rules in Portugal.
In fact I believe the Ciprianos sunk themselves over the hearsay rules in Portugal.

Don't mention the ciprianos
I mentioned them once etc

Offline John

Re: According to Kate McCann the choice was accidental killng or homicide.
« Reply #209 on: June 10, 2016, 03:52:06 PM »
That explains the outrage 10 days ago, on the evening that Gerry and Kate McCann were declared formal suspects, or arguidos, in the disappearance of their daughter. Police were still questioning Gerry McCann when, already, his sister Philomena was telling Sky they had offered Kate McCann a reduced two-year sentence if she admitted to killing her daughter accidentally, hiding the body and then secretly disposing of it weeks later.

On this occasion the police officers were right to be angry. Like many things said about the McCann affair over the past days and months, the story was wrong. There was no offer of a plea bargain.
It had all been "a misunderstanding", the McCann lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, explained the following day.


http://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/sep/17/mondaymediasection13


This must be one of the most understated comments of all time in this case. 
One cannot help from laughing at the absurdity of it all  @)(++(*
« Last Edit: June 10, 2016, 03:56:00 PM by John »
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.