Is absence of evidence.... evidence of innocence

[Alice Purjorick]

Amarals told us
He can prove Maddie died in the apartment
Sedated with calpol
Of course he cant

The trouble is old stick Sr Amaral has been yesterday's man for ten years and beyond a certain point his opinions ain't worth diddly squatt.
Now back to the 48 questions [there were 51 in all their actuality]. Do you have evidence that there was a procedural infringement of this part of the process ?

[Robittybob1]

The trouble is old stick Sr Amaral has been yesterday's man for ten years and beyond a certain point his opinions ain't worth diddly squatt.
Now back to the 48 questions [there were 51 in all their actuality]. Do you have evidence that there was a procedural infringement of this part of the process ?

That is a very interesting question.  Have you got a list of the things that might constitute a procedural infringement?  Then we will have a look.

[Mr Gray]

The trouble is old stick Sr Amaral has been yesterday's man for ten years and beyond a certain point his opinions ain't worth diddly squatt.
Now back to the 48 questions [there were 51 in all their actuality]. Do you have evidence that there was a procedural infringement of this part of the process ?

Who has mentioned a procedural infringement
The only infringement I can see is posters drawing a negative  inference for Kate acting quite properly

[stephen25000]

Who has mentioned a procedural infringement
The only infringement I can see is posters drawing a negative  inference for Kate acting quite properly

Well, she basically was refusing to cooperate in as part of an investigation trying to ascertain what happened to her daughter.

[Mr Gray]

Well, she basically was refusing to cooperate in as part of an investigation trying to ascertain what happened to her daughter.

She took the advice of her solicitor which she had every right to do
As John has explained in this situation police can twist and manipulate innocent answers which may then give them evidence to arrest and charge

[stephen25000]

She took the advice of her solicitor which she had every right to do
As John has explained in this situation police can twist and manipulate innocent answers which may then give them evidence to arrest and charge

I have already discussed this with John.

So you are basically saying davel, that any potential suspect should not answer police questions.

Now what do you think police forces around the world would think of a refusal to answer questions by a potential suspect ?

[Mr Gray]

I have already discussed this with John.

So you are basically saying davel, that any potential suspect should not answer police questions.

Now what do you think police forces around the world would think of a refusal to answer questions by a potential suspect ?

That seems to be the general advice from solicitors
John explained it very well in a post yesterday
Obviously it depends on the situation but where it is suspected that the police are intent on making a case against you and you are innocent....the advice seems to be silence

[stephen25000]

That seems to be the general advice from solicitors
John explained it very well in a post yesterday
Obviously it depends on the situation but where it is suspected that the police are intent on making a case against you and you are innocent....the advice seems to be silence

Then police will make the inevitable conclusions.

[Mr Gray]

Then police will make the inevitable conclusions.

They can make what conclusions they like but without evidence they cannot arrest

[stephen25000]

They can make what conclusions they like but without evidence they cannot arrest

Are you sure about that davel ?

[Mr Gray]

Are you sure about that davel ?

I'm sure they cannot arrest without evidence
Yes

[stephen25000]

I'm sure they cannot arrest without evidence
Yes

I think you will find police can arrest people who are behaving in a suspicious way.

It does not mean they have committed a crime.

Then there is, 'stop and search'.

[Alice Purjorick]

Who has mentioned a procedural infringement
The only infringement I can see is posters drawing a negative  inference for Kate acting quite properly

The infringement to which you refer is a non infringement.
There have been suggestions in the past on this very forum that those nasty PJ Johnnies were trying to stitch up the McCanns which is why KM did not answer the questions.
I have my doubts about that proposition.