Author Topic: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007  (Read 3099 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2022, 08:29:28 AM »
Yes. Guilhermino Encarnação, the man in charge of deciding the direction which the investigation took, for which Amaral has been consistently blamed by those who don't understand the command structure of the PJ.
You constantly criticise others.... Perhaps it's you who doesn't understand.  The problem was caused because the PJ believed the hype about the dogs.

How could Eddie who had never been wrong in 200 cases ..never given a false alert... suddenly be wrong.  That's where the problem lies.

I think Grime should have clarified the situation
« Last Edit: January 05, 2022, 08:32:22 AM by Davel »

Offline jassi

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2022, 08:38:28 AM »
Yes. Guilhermino Encarnação, the man in charge of deciding the direction which the investigation took, for which Amaral has been consistently blamed by those who don't understand the command structure of the PJ.

Doesn't trip off the tongue in quite  the same way, does it?
I don't even know how to pronounce it
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2022, 08:42:16 AM »
Yes. Guilhermino Encarnação, the man in charge of deciding the direction which the investigation took, for which Amaral has been consistently blamed by those who don't understand the command structure of the PJ.
Are you suggesting Amaral had no say in which direction the investigation took?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline G-Unit

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2022, 08:43:34 AM »
You constantly criticise others.... Perhaps it's you who doesn't understand.  The problem was caused because the PJ believed the hype about the dogs.

How could Eddie who had never been wrong in 200 cases ..never given a false alert... suddenly be wrong.  That's where the problem lies.

I think Grime should have clarified the situation

Off at a tangent again. How about an answer to my actual post, instead of one which seems to have no relationship to it at all? Guilhermino Encarnação (and Luis Neves) were in charge of the investigation, not Goncalo Amaral.

Mark Harrison was quite clear;

"The reconnaissance undertaken and this report has been completed at the direct request and benefit of Guillhemino Encamacao the Algarve Regional Director of the Portuguese Judicial Police"
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
"
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2022, 08:53:36 AM »
Off at a tangent again. How about an answer to my actual post, instead of one which seems to have no relationship to it at all? Guilhermino Encarnação (and Luis Neves) were in charge of the investigation, not Goncalo Amaral.

Mark Harrison was quite clear;

"The reconnaissance undertaken and this report has been completed at the direct request and benefit of Guillhemino Encamacao the Algarve Regional Director of the Portuguese Judicial Police"
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
"

If you read your post it talks about who is to blame for the direction the investigation took. I'm explaining imo it was down to the hype Re the dogs.
We all know who was in charge of the investigation.  The while of the PJ believed the false hype Re the dogs.  I think it's clear that was the real problem

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2022, 08:56:25 AM »
Off at a tangent again. How about an answer to my actual post, instead of one which seems to have no relationship to it at all? Guilhermino Encarnação (and Luis Neves) were in charge of the investigation, not Goncalo Amaral.

Mark Harrison was quite clear;

"The reconnaissance undertaken and this report has been completed at the direct request and benefit of Guillhemino Encamacao the Algarve Regional Director of the Portuguese Judicial Police"
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
"
That’s rich coming from you!
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline G-Unit

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2022, 09:00:56 AM »
Are you suggesting Amaral had no say in which direction the investigation took?

I expect his opinions were taken into account.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #22 on: January 05, 2022, 09:19:28 AM »
I expect his opinions were taken into account.
Yes and he had a very strong opinion on the subject from Day One didn’t he?  That’s if we believe what he says in his book.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline The General

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #23 on: January 05, 2022, 09:34:56 AM »
If you read your post it talks about who is to blame for the direction the investigation took. I'm explaining imo it was down to the hype Re the dogs.
We all know who was in charge of the investigation.  The while of the PJ believed the false hype Re the dogs.  I think it's clear that was the real problem
How long after she went missing did the dogs turn up? Why did the dogs turn up? Who suggested it?
The 2nd Youngest Member of the Forum

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #24 on: January 05, 2022, 09:55:09 AM »
How long after she went missing did the dogs turn up? Why did the dogs turn up? Who suggested it?

I've explained this.. It was part of the Big Experiment.... That after became... The Big Cock Up

Offline The General

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #25 on: January 05, 2022, 10:09:45 AM »
I've explained this.. It was part of the Big Experiment.... That after became... The Big Cock Up
The point being, the PJ were driven down the 'dog' route as an option proffered by Mark Harrison - no stone unturned and all that. Any police force who subsequently takes up the offer and obtain 'corroborative' or 'incongruent' results derived from the efforts of experts in their field, would react in a similar way - i.e. follow up and divert resources in that direction. It would be remiss not to.
And who recommended Martin Grime?
« Last Edit: January 05, 2022, 10:20:17 AM by The General »
The 2nd Youngest Member of the Forum

Offline G-Unit

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #26 on: January 05, 2022, 10:38:58 AM »
How long after she went missing did the dogs turn up? Why did the dogs turn up? Who suggested it?

I doubt that the PJ knew that Mark Harrison existed, so his involvement must have been suggested by UK police.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #27 on: January 05, 2022, 10:48:08 AM »
The point being, the PJ were driven down the 'dog' route as an option proffered by Mark Harrison - no stone unturned and all that. Any police force who subsequently takes up the offer and obtain 'corroborative' or 'incongruent' results derived from the efforts of experts in their field, would react in a similar way - i.e. follow up and divert resources in that direction. It would be remiss not to.
And who recommended Martin Grime?
I totally agree.  The problem was Harrison was not recommending a tried and tested strategy... It was his new idea from his out of the box thinking and it backfired.
Harrison did then to to play it down but the damage to the investigation was done.  I put a lot of blame on both of them

Offline The General

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #28 on: January 05, 2022, 10:49:21 AM »
I doubt that the PJ knew that Mark Harrison existed, so his involvement must have been suggested by UK police.
That's what I was driving at. It's easy to state that the PJ went off on a tangent and it turned in to some circus thereafter, but the steer in the dog direction was external. What are they suppose to do with the 'results', dismiss them out of hand?
The 2nd Youngest Member of the Forum

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The filming of the dogs in Luz August 2007
« Reply #29 on: January 05, 2022, 10:50:27 AM »
The point being, the PJ were driven down the 'dog' route as an option proffered by Mark Harrison - no stone unturned and all that. Any police force who subsequently takes up the offer and obtain 'corroborative' or 'incongruent' results derived from the efforts of experts in their field, would react in a similar way - i.e. follow up and divert resources in that direction. It would be remiss not to.
And who recommended Martin Grime?