CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[Mr Gray]

You do not know what happened in the apartment.


You are also impugning another persons intelligence, and also indicating possible other motives for his actions, which you have no basis for.

Not one of the three main theories has been proved or disproved.

So what is the reason that Amaral gets so much wrong
The children were not put to sleep every night with an antihistamine called calpol
The dogs did not prove a cadaver had been in the apartment

So what is the explanation
Was he just not very bright and should not have been leading the investigation

[Eleanor]

In my opinion good detectives appear to develop a sense of when people are being less than honest. Amaral may not have worked out exactly what the truth is, but he's convinced something was hidden. John Stalker reached the same conclusion. Many ordinary people agree with them. That's why blogs and fora exist which promote this viewpoint.

John Stalker believes that The McCanns are innocent.  You forgot to mention that.

As for a gut instinct sense of being less than honest.  Try that one one in a Court of Law.  Although it does appear to have worked for Amaral in the past.

[Eleanor]

So what is the reason that Amaral gets so much wrong
The children were not put to sleep every night with an antihistamine called calpol
The dogs did not prove a cadaver had been in the apartment

So what is the explanation
Was he just not very bright and should not have been leading the investigation

There was no Calpol containing antihistamine in May 2007.  This is a Fact.

[ferryman]

I'm afraid I have never regarded any non-verbatim statements as totally reliable.    In fact I think going over them with a microscope analysing every word as if they ARE totally accurate  is a waste of time and energy.      Similarly - although  I believe witnesses told the truth - that doesn't mean that all their recollections are accurate.

YES!



However what I don't do is throw common sense, logic and reasoned thought out of the window  - no matter what is being discussed/debated.   

[Mr Gray]

You do not know what happened in the apartment.


You are also impugning another persons intelligence, and also indicating possible other motives for his actions, which you have no basis for.

Not one of the three main theories has been proved or disproved.

my opinions are facts...calpol is not an antihistimine

the alerts do not prove the presence of a cadaver..

[stephen25000]

What happened to Madeleine remains undetermined.

Amaral was coordinator for the investigation for a few months.

[Mr Gray]

What happened to Madeleine remains undetermined.

Amaral was coordinator for the investigation for a few months.

I am discussing the video that has been posted...this is a discussion forum...thats what happens

[Miss Taken Identity]

I did point out on the first page of this thread that Calpol does not have antihistamine, which is clamed by Sr Amaral in the video. He has obviously got confused as to what the medicine does, does not do.

He is implying that this may have been used to drug the children to make them sleep. It is highly unlikely that this would be used for such a  scenario. It may well help children to sleep if they are in pain from teething/earache etc. However it is known that Calpol contains paracetamol and people can accidentally overdose. The children would have had to have been given a huge amount to knock them out! As a theory I would dismiss this instantly. The fact that Kate wanted the children's hair to be checked- it is well known in the medical profession that the hair follicles of drug users can highlight certain drugs for up to a year!

If a deliberate drugging theory is to be considered by who ever is suspected of administering the drug. Calpol would not be the chosen drug to do this.

Another theory in the equation is accidental drugging- child wakes up- see prescription tablets and thinking they are sweets eats some.

Please note  I am not stating anything typed  in this post to have happened, these are just theories I have come across over the years and worthy of a mention even just to be dismissed, or debated.

[Mr Gray]

I did point out on the first page of this thread that Calpol does not have antihistamine, which is clamed by Sr Amaral in the video. He has obviously got confused as to what the medicine does, does not do.

He is implying that this may have been used to drug the children to make them sleep. It is highly unlikely that this would be used for such a  scenario. It may well help children to sleep if they are in pain from teething/earache etc. However it is known that Calpol contains paracetamol and people can accidentally overdose. The children would have had to have been given a huge amount to knock them out! As a theory I would dismiss this instantly. The fact that Kate wanted the children's hair to be checked- it is well known in the medical profession that the hair follicles of drug users can highlight certain drugs for up to a year!

If a deliberate drugging theory is to be considered by who ever is suspected of administering the drug. Calpol would not be the chosen drug to do this.

Another theory in the equation is accidental drugging- child wakes up- see prescription tablets and thinking they are sweets eats some.

Please note  I am not stating anything typed  in this post to have happened, these are just theories I have come across over the years and worthy of a mention even just to be dismissed, or debated.

so if you and others understand this why doesnt amaral

[ferryman]

What happened to Madeleine remains undetermined.

Amaral was coordinator for the investigation for a few months.

So how could Amaral have been so clueless about the role of Mark Harrison?

[G-Unit]

I'm afraid I have never regarded any non-verbatim statements as totally reliable.    In fact I think going over them with a microscope analysing every word as if they ARE totally accurate  is a waste of time and energy.      Similarly - although  I believe witnesses told the truth - that doesn't mean that all their recollections are accurate.

However what I don't do is throw common sense, logic and reasoned thought out of the window  - no matter what is being discussed/debated.   

So they told what they thought was the truth, is that what you're saying? Telling the truth is really simple but in this case it seems very complicated. The only thing they all (roughly) agree on is the timeline and they wrote that together.

I also believe I possess common sense, logic and reasoned thought. Unlike you, though, I think it's perfectly possible for Gerry McCann to have entered the apartment through the locked door using his key. There's no reason to believe that it's illogical or unreasonable in my opinion. So appealing to abstract concepts doesn't work because they're subjective, not universal.

[John]

cite for falling over balcony.....never herad amaral say that

He implied that could have happened as the dog alerted in the garden below the balcony.  If I recall he suggested that Madeleine could have pursued her father after hearing him speaking outside.

[ferryman]

So they told what they thought was the truth, is that what you're saying? Telling the truth is really simple but in this case it seems very complicated. The only thing they all (roughly) agree on is the timeline and they wrote that together.

I also believe I possess common sense, logic and reasoned thought. Unlike you, though, I think it's perfectly possible for Gerry McCann to have entered the apartment through the locked door using his key. There's no reason to believe that it's illogical or unreasonable in my opinion. So appealing to abstract concepts doesn't work because they're subjective, not universal.

Re-telling personal recollection of fast-moving, and particularly stressful, events is never simple.

[Miss Taken Identity]

I'm afraid I have never regarded any non-verbatim statements as totally reliable.    In fact I think going over them with a microscope analysing every word as if they ARE totally accurate  is a waste of time and energy.      Similarly - although  I believe witnesses told the truth - that doesn't mean that all their recollections are accurate.

However what I don't do is throw common sense, logic and reasoned thought out of the window  - no matter what is being discussed/debated.   

Well that's a new one on me I have to say... If the recollections are inaccurate then how can they be telling the truth?

 I cannot accept that these doctors can barely string a sentence together in interviews of such importance but can  chop, over the weeks/months, and changed things due to 'recollection'. The recollections of Jane Tanner and Kate McCann vastly improved to make an abductor story more pliable.

[John]

So what is the reason that Amaral gets so much wrong
The children were not put to sleep every night with an antihistamine called calpol
The dogs did not prove a cadaver had been in the apartment

so clearly amaral does not have a clue

I suspect you know very well that Amaral espoused several theories, he did not state categorically that this happened or that happened.  As to what he got wrong, no proof has been provided one way or another.  It is unknown what happened to the child, Amaral's qualified opinion is as valid as anyone elses at this juncture in time.