The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.

[Brietta]

The case was shelved because no progress in tracking down Madeleine's abductor had been made.

Also, I think, Portuguese law (commendably in one respect) would not allow the unjust aspersion of 'arguido' to be hung around the necks of those accused (including Robert Murat) indefinitely.

The McCanns status of 'arguido' was rushed in just before a change in Portuguese law that would have forced the authorities to justify their reasons for imposing the status.

In my opinion as borne out by subsequent conclusions, the stated reasons for the status would not have stood up to scrutiny had the PJ waited for the new penal code to come into effect.
Unfortunately I believe it can be said that perhaps the investigation may have become beguiled by the alleged theory of parental involvement which the senior investigation officer has outlined in his book, documentary and as a television pundit in the case.
Perhaps it behoved the investigation to be more proactive in eliminating the abduction theory by person or persons unknown rather than wasting precious time in what I believe to have been an unworkable theory unsupported by not one single shred of evidence.

[stephen25000]

What is abundantly clear, is that the Portuguese prosecutors did not have enough evidence to pursue anyone.

that remains the case

[Brietta]

I can't be bothered (yet again!) to quote what the Portuguese prosecutors made very clear did NOT happen.

That Gerry was proved to be at the Tapas Restaurant at the moment of the Smith sighting (and also the moment of Kate's alert) scuppers all notion of parental involvement in anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance.

Which in my opinion is the fact of the matter.

[Alfie]

This thread is about not writing unproven statements as fact.  To this end I would like to know why a moderator has been allowed to do so on this very thread - ie: Angelo has stated that Team McCann planted false sightings of Madeleine to discredit the PJ investigation.  WTF??

[stephen25000]

I can't be bothered (yet again!) to quote what the Portuguese prosecutors made very clear did NOT happen.

That Gerry was proved to be at the Tapas Restaurant at the moment of the Smith sighting (and also the moment of Kate's alert) scuppers all notion of parental involvement in anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance.

You can type what you will.

The facts are very straight forward.

The cause of Madeleine's disappearance remains undetermined.

You can type 'abduction until the end of time. It does not make it true.

The case was originally shelved due to lack of evidence.

The Supreme Court judgement remains as well.

[Angelo222]

All my posts are on-topic.  The term 'abductor' does not need any qualification, and I have explained, precisely, in my (removed) posts why.

As far as I'm concerned, the only thing 'off-topic' is what this thread invites us to discuss.

The whole of the thread should be removed.

Don't you like the truth?

[Angelo222]

This thread is about not writing unproven statements as fact.  To this end I would like to know why a moderator has been allowed to do so on this very thread - ie: Angelo has stated that Team McCann planted false sightings of Madeleine to discredit the PJ investigation.  WTF??

Burying you head in the sand doesn't cut much mustard Alfie.  The conspiracy by McCann private detectives to bury Amaral using Portuguese lawyer Correia has long been established.

The fake sightings created by those same private investigators is established after one of their own spoke out.

Kate McCanns refusal to answer simple questions during her arguida interview is established.

These are damaging facts despite your attempts to play them down

For Alfie's benefit.  Metodo 3 created false sightings, invented false investigators and false invoices all to create financial benefit for themselves and when Everest magnate Brian Kennedy was informed directly about this he refused to meet with the whistleblower. Raises the question as to what really was the relationship between these individuals and why was the involvement of M3 withheld for several months before being made public?  I feel another thread coming on.


ps  who is team McCann??

[Mr Gray]

For Alfie's benefit.

ps  who is team McCann??

for your benefit
you claimed fake sightings had been manufactured but have been unable tp provide a cite.

[ferryman]

Clearly inaccurate then.   You conveniently omit the bit in the AG report where he states that the parents lost the opportunity to demonstrate what they claimed by the refusal of their friends to partake in a reconstruction when requested to do so.

(Partial) credit for citing the correct term (used by the prosecutors) demonstrate rather than prove.

It's a pity the prosecutors didn't add that there was no need for the McCanns to demonstrate their innocence. 

Also a pity that they didn't record (even if they did think it) that the disgraceful modus operandi of the PJ's questioning of the McCanns during their arguido interviews (including either incompetent or fraudulent misrepresentation of evidence) left the McCanns ample and justified reason to suspect the motive behind this so-called 'reconstitution' which, in any event, could never have shed light on anything, since you can never recreate in retrospect a sequence of events that have already come to pass in real-time.

Human memory (including honest human memory) is too fallible and unreliable for that.

[Angelo222]

for your benefit
you claimed fake sightings had been manufactured but have been unable tp provide a cite...looks like you are posting rubbish#

It is a well known fact that M3 were creating fictional sightings to keep their employers happy and keep the Euros rolling in.  What a total waste of time and money.

[Mr Gray]

It is a well known fact that M3 were creating fictional sightings to keep their employers happy and keep the Euros rolling in.

then provide a cite...it is NOT a well known fact

[ShiningInLuz]

The case was shelved because no progress in tracking down Madeleine's abductor had been made.

Also, I think, Portuguese law (commendably in one respect) would not allow the unjust aspersion of 'arguido' to be hung around the necks of those accused (including Robert Murat) indefinitely.

The McCanns status of 'arguido' was rushed in just before a change in Portuguese law that would have forced the authorities to justify their reasons for imposing the status.

The McCanns announced their departure date.

The Portuguese chose to interview them before their departure date.

Because of what was to be covered, they were interviewed as arguidos, as per the legal requirements.

If you are implying that the McCanns chose a departure that they knew pre-dated a change in legal requirements, I'm going to ROFL.

If you think the McCanns would not have been made arguidos under the new requirement, we have plenty of evidence now that this is nonsense.

[ferryman]

For Alfie's benefit.  Metodo 3 created false sightings, invented false investigators and false invoices all to create financial benefit for themselves and when Everest magnate Brian Kennedy was informed directly about this he refused to meet with the whistleblower. Raises the question as to what really was the relationship between these individuals and why was the involvement of M3 withheld for several months before being made public?  I feel another thread coming on.


ps  who is team McCann??

Do you mean Metodo3 'created false sightings'?

Or do you mean that sightings, reported by Metedo3, turned out not to be Madeleine?

[Brietta]

The McCanns announced their departure date.

The Portuguese chose to interview them before their departure date.

Because of what was to be covered, they were interviewed as arguidos, as per the legal requirements.

If you are implying that the McCanns chose a departure that they knew pre-dated a change in legal requirements, I'm going to ROFL.

If you think the McCanns would not have been made arguidos under the new requirement, we have plenty of evidence now that this is nonsense.

Such as?

[Mr Gray]

The McCanns announced their departure date.

The Portuguese chose to interview them before their departure date.

Because of what was to be covered, they were interviewed as arguidos, as per the legal requirements.

If you are implying that the McCanns chose a departure that they knew pre-dated a change in legal requirements, I'm going to ROFL.

If you think the McCanns would not have been made arguidos under the new requirement, we have plenty of evidence now that this is nonsense.

posting opinion as fact again.....what evidence do you have to support the claim in red