A Simple Question.

[barrier]

How could they? There's no such thing in the UK.

Some of the people the PJ interviewed on behalf of SY were named as having arguido status in the media; others weren't.

Assuming that that is correct, it may have been the witnesses themselves who requested the status in order to benefit from certain rights. My reasoning for that is that when I last checked, at the time, I couldn't find any legal provision for temporary arguido status in the Portuguese CPP, but neither did I find any provision as to a temporary status in the event of a foreign police force requesting such interviews.

AIFAIK, they are no longer arguidos, which makes me think that it was an ad hoc provision to allow temporary status for the purpose of UK inquiries.

Sauces say it was to protect the Arguidos.

The BBC source said: “The 'arguido' [suspect] status was given to the suspects to protect them.
“It gives them legal rights including the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer present during interviews.
“They were declared arguido due to being identified as suspects in a letter of international request sent by the British to the Portuguese authorities.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10942089/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-questioning-leads-to-no-new-developments.html

[Alice Purjorick]

A very, very simple question that only requires only a yes or no answer.

If OG and the PJ were investigating the McCann’s and their friend’s role in Madeleine’s disappearance do you think they would tell the general public ?

It always pays to announce your intentions, you then have the element of surprise on your side.

[Robittybob1]

A very, very simple question that only requires only a yes or no answer.

If OG and the PJ were investigating the McCann’s and their friend’s role in Madeleine’s disappearance do you think they would tell the general public ?

Yes  - For if they were investigating the McCanns when they say they are not no one is going to trust SY ever again.

[barrier]

Yes  - For if they were investigating the McCanns when they say they are not no one is going to trust SY ever again.

Mark Rowley:We will not comment on other parts of our investigation - it does not help the teams investigating to give a commentary on those aspects.

[Robittybob1]

Mark Rowley:We will not comment on other parts of our investigation - it does not help the teams investigating to give a commentary on those aspects.

But didn't they say they are not looking at the parents etc?

[barrier]

But didn't they say they are not looking at the parents etc?

Yes,because they looked at the original interview's carried out under the stewardship of Amaral,which would suggest they are satisfied with it all,only concentrating on that which the PJ didn't consider important aka,the supposed burglars, now who was right one wonders.

[Vertigo Swirl]

A very, very simple question that only requires only a yes or no answer.

If OG and the PJ were investigating the McCann’s and their friend’s role in Madeleine’s disappearance do you think they would tell the general public ?

Well, they did tell us about the people in Portugal they were questioning as arguidos, so quite possibly - if not directly then perhaps via leaks to the media.
Here's a simple yes/no question by return: do you believe the McCanns are currently the investigation's main suspects?

[faithlilly]

Well, they did tell us about the people in Portugal they were questioning as arguidos, so quite possibly - if not directly then perhaps via leaks to the media.
Here's a simple yes/no question by return: do you believe the McCanns are currently the investigation's main suspects?

Hard to know without more information.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Hard to know without more information.

Why wasn't that an option when you were asking the questions?!

[slartibartfast]

Why wasn't that an option when you were asking the questions?!

Because they were two very different questions, the first being a question of logic that could be answered based on the information in the question, the second being a matter of opinion based on an individual’s understanding of the case.

[Mr Gray]

Because they were two very different questions, the first being a question of logic that could be answered based on the information in the question, the second being a matter of opinion based on an individual’s understanding of the case.

The first one is a matter of opinion too and why should a poster try to restrict the answer to a, question rather than let posters, answer as they want...

[Wonderfulspam]

The first one is a matter of opinion too and why should a poster try to restrict the answer to a, question rather than let posters, answer as they want...

What other answer to the question could there be, other than yes or no?

Maybe? Maybe not?

[jassi]

The OP asked for a simple yes/no answer. Those unhappy with that needn't answer.

[Mr Gray]

A very, very simple question that only requires only a yes or no answer.

If OG and the PJ were investigating the McCann’s and their friend’s role in Madeleine’s disappearance do you think they would tell the general public ?

I don't think they would answer the question

[Mr Gray]

The OP asked for a simple yes/no answer. Those unhappy with that needn't answer.

Or we can answer withe answer of ourchoice