My opinion is the PJ had taken, listened to, recorded [in the wider sense of the word] statements of the main protagonists and found them to be wanting in enough respects to raise suspicion, a point raised within the archiving process.I suspect the PJ used software, we were lead to believe they did not have, to create "timeway diagrams" of the stated movements of the protagonists which reinforced their suspicion. Given there is a requirement to hold such reconstitution is there a time limit placed on it ? I "don't subscribe to the theory "well they would've (of?) fitted 'em up had they gone wouldn't they" That is too Gene Hunt for words.
In the event an opportunity for the PJ to progress the case was denied.
IMO once the police have formed their suspicions, then they are looking for further confirmation of their suspicions, not for any evidence to let their suspects off the hook. That is why, if you are innocent (which I believe the Tapas group to be) you won’t be eager to play into the police’s hands, because something which may have simply been a genuine recall error (and many witnesses make them in their statements) could end up being used to further reinforce the case the police are building against you. At no point would a reconstitution have “proved their innocence”. it simply would not have been possible to do that, nor would it have helped to find Madeleine. So, from the point of view of parents and friends innocent of hiding the child’s body, a reconstitution would have been at best a complete waste of time, at worst a threat to their future liberty. IMO. Now ridicule away, as is your wont.
