Met Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley gives update on the search for Madeleine McCann.

[Brietta]

Does he give a jot?

I would say he cares very much about a slur on his character with which it appears he will be branded for the rest of his life.

[Alfie]

I would say he cares very much about a slur on his character with which it appears he will be branded for the rest of his life.

I would agree wholeheartedly with your point above, as would anyone with an ounce of empathy and understanding.

[Mr Gray]

Does he give a jot?

he does not care a jot...he cares £600,000....

[Mr Gray]

I would agree wholeheartedly with your point above, as would anyone with an ounce of empathy and understanding.

and of course sense...I'm beginning to sense a certain poster doesnt have any

[ShiningInLuz]

I would say he cares very much about a slur on his character with which it appears he will be branded for the rest of his life.

We have evidence that the McCanns care about a 'slur' on their characters with which it appears they will be branded with for the rest of their lives.

They lost.

Reality bites.

[Brietta]

We have evidence that the McCanns care about a 'slur' on their characters with which it appears they will be branded with for the rest of their lives.

They lost.

Reality bites.

Robert Murat was suspected of being involved in Madeleine McCann's disappearance.  There was no evidence to support that suspicion and Murat was not charged with any offence against Madeleine.

Kate and Gerry McCann were suspected of involvement in Madeleine McCann's disappearance.  There was no evidence to support that suspicion and neither were charged with any offence against Madeleine.

It is morally wrong that three people who were in effect questioned under caution and released without charge are expected to be sanguine about having their names continually dragged through the mud ... in one instance by a convicted axe murderer.

[G-Unit]

Public Ministry of Portimao
Case Section
Case 201/07 GALGS

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm
Dear Sir
Public prosecutor


Kate Marie Healy arguida in the case referred to above, having been notified (page 3947) expresses her availability to participate in the reconstruction of the events on the second of the dates suggested, in other words on the 15 and 16th of next May. Her husband, Gerry McCann has also already expressed his availability.

Rogerio Alves
Lawyer



The McCanns did not lose the possibility of proving their innocence. It was taken away from them by the PJ's insistence that all the required witnesses took part in the reconstitution plus the non-compliance of said witnesses due to certain assurances not being given by the PJ. Quite what sort of prima facie evidence a reconstitution would have provided is anyone's guess & the PJ held no other evidence to allow a successful prosecution.

If the McCanns had wanted their friends to attend they would have, in my opinion.

[Robittybob1]

Public Ministry of Portimao
Case Section
Case 201/07 GALGS

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm
Dear Sir
Public prosecutor


Kate Marie Healy arguida in the case referred to above, having been notified (page 3947) expresses her availability to participate in the reconstruction of the events on the second of the dates suggested, in other words on the 15 and 16th of next May. Her husband, Gerry McCann has also already expressed his availability.

Rogerio Alves
Lawyer



The McCanns did not lose the possibility of proving their innocence. It was taken away from them by the PJ's insistence that all the required witnesses took part in the reconstitution plus the non-compliance of said witnesses due to certain assurances not being given by the PJ. Quite what sort of prima facie evidence a reconstitution would have provided is anyone's guess & the PJ held no other evidence to allow a successful prosecution.

Thank you Misty.  That was exactly as I thought too.  Why should they be punished for the non-compliance of the other Tapas members and Jez Wilkins.

[stephen25000]

Thank you Misty.  That was exactly as I thought too.  Why should they be punished for the non-compliance of the other Tapas members and Jez Wilkins.

More pertinently, why didn't they take part in a re-construction ?

There were no excuses.

[Eleanor]

More pertinently, why didn't they take part in a re-construction ?

There were no excuses.

They were told not to bring their children and refused any assurances.  I suspect that they feared for their freedom as witnesses and the possibility of being made Arguidos themselves.

I don't know about Jez Wilkins, but it would have been pointless without him.

[stephen25000]

They were told not to bring their children and refused any assurances.  I suspect that they feared for their freedom as witnesses and the possibility of being made Arguidos themselves.

I don't know about Jez Wilkins, but it would have been pointless without him.

Why would they have been made arguida ?

[G-Unit]

They were told not to bring their children and refused any assurances.  I suspect that they feared for their freedom as witnesses and the possibility of being made Arguidos themselves.

I don't know about Jez Wilkins, but it would have been pointless without him.

Jes Wilkins said he would go if the others did.

What assurances were refused? All their questions were answered here;

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm

[Eleanor]

Why would they have been made arguida ?

Why were The McCanns made Arguidos?

[stephen25000]

Why were The McCanns made Arguidos?

Suspicion of involvement in their daughter's disappearance.

Inconsistent and changing accounts of events.

No evidence of abduction.......................

[Robittybob1]

More pertinently, why didn't they take part in a re-construction ?

There were no excuses.

The McCanns made themselves available but the others didn't.  Who do you blame for that?