More recent events related to Madeleine McCann's case

[G-Unit]

YOu're right - there was no public proclamation that Amaral was an authority on the case - but it's self evident is it not?  He certainly sets himself up as one in his book, and in his media interviews.  He became the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman in the world off the back of the case (name another one as well known by the general public), so I don't think it is far fetched (or even simply my opinion) to say that Amaral who had been in a position of authority as far as the case was concerned, only got a publishing deal on the strength of that authority - I mean, if you'd written a book about the investigation I doubt any publisher would have been interested.  I think you are deflecting by claiming it is only my opinion that Amaral was a well-known authority on the case, I mean COME ON!!!!
And look at it any which way you like - Amaral has made a career out of claiming that Madeleine was not abducted, that she died in an accident in the apartment and that her death was covered up.  DOubtless you don't see that as accusing the parents, but that's because it suits you to twist things to fit your argument.  You're a wriggler and no mistake!

Here's a couple of questions for you - what factors influence whether or not someone receives a fair trial?  What factors specifically might influence a trial unfairly in the case of CB if he is ever put before a judge?

You can argue all you like, your opinion of Amaral's status remains your opinion, as does your reference to his 'career'.

I don't know if Amaral's book amounted to an accusation but if it did then so did the actions of the investigation up to 10th September 2007 which he describes.

[Venturi Swirl]

You can argue all you like, your opinion of Amaral's status remains your opinion, as does your reference to his 'career'.

I don't know if Amaral's book amounted to an accusation but if it did then so did the actions of the investigation up to 10th September 2007 which he describes.

Are you saying you disagree with the notion that Amaral was an authority on the investigation?  Are you disagreeing when I suggest that he was widely known internationally  as the man leading the initial investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance?  Are you disagreeing with the notion that he has publicly put the blame on the McCanns for hiding their child’s body?  Do you disagree that his career since his resignation has been largely if not wholly focused on the McCann case and on exploiting it for maximum financial gain?  Or are you just refusing to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case because it doesn’t suit your argument on this occasion?
How about you have a go at answering the questions at the end of my last post if it’s not too much trouble? 

[G-Unit]

Are you saying you disagree with the notion that Amaral was an authority on the investigation?  Are you disagreeing when I suggest that he was widely known internationally  as the man leading the initial investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance?  Are you disagreeing with the notion that he has publicly put the blame on the McCanns for hiding their child’s body?  Do you disagree that his career since his resignation has been largely if not wholly focused on the McCann case and on exploiting it for maximum financial gain?  Or are you just refusing to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case because it doesn’t suit your argument on this occasion?
How about you have a go at answering the questions at the end of my last post if it’s not too much trouble?

I have no need to "refuse to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case" when the "sentient being" to whom everything is "staggeringly obvious" is you. You can hold whatever opinions you like, but if you want them to be treated as facts a little more evidence is required imo.

You want me to answer these questions?

"Here's a couple of questions for you - what factors influence whether or not someone receives a fair trial?  What factors specifically might influence a trial unfairly in the case of CB if he is ever put before a judge?"

There are many factors which can interfere with a person's right to a fair trial. In Brueckner's case an announcement of 'guilty' by the prosecutor in charge of the case could be seen as such an interference.

[Brietta]

With thanks to a poster on WebSleuths who has been giving further thought to Brueckner’s artistic rant which either meant something to Brueckner or he might just have been amusing himself secure in the knowledge we would puzzle ourselves into knots about his deeper meaning.

Interestingly Brueckner has depicted a female prosecutor who is the head of the unit at the prosecutors office in Braunschweig, for investigating sexual offences, including child porn.

Brueckner knows about her involvement and what her department’s remit is.  I just took from his artwork that he is a worried man … and from that information, I can see why he might well be.

[Venturi Swirl]

I have no need to "refuse to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case" when the "sentient being" to whom everything is "staggeringly obvious" is you. You can hold whatever opinions you like, but if you want them to be treated as facts a little more evidence is required imo.

You want me to answer these questions?

"Here's a couple of questions for you - what factors influence whether or not someone receives a fair trial?  What factors specifically might influence a trial unfairly in the case of CB if he is ever put before a judge?"

There are many factors which can interfere with a person's right to a fair trial. In Brueckner's case an announcement of 'guilty' by the prosecutor in charge of the case could be seen as such an interference.

OK.  What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was an authority on the case up until the point he retired?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral considered himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman internationally that there has ever been?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in an accident and that her death was covered up?
What evidence would you require to satisfy you that the majority of Amaral's income since retirement has been generated by his book and the promotion of the contents of his book ever since?

If the answer is that no evidence would satisfy you of any of the above, do you instead lean more towards the view that Amaral was not an authority on the case, did not consider himself an authority on the case, nor was considered by anyone else as an authority on the case, was not the most (in)famous policeman to have ever come out of Portugal and wielded little or no influence on anyone with his book or media appearances, that the majority of his income since retirement has not been as a result of his link to the case, and that he has never once suggested that the McCanns covered up the death of their daughter?

As to your answer to my previous question:  Can you explain exactly how a public announcement of guilt by a person in charge of a case  might affect someone's right to a fair trial?  And how would stepping down from such a role change the effect that such a public announcement would have on the safety of a potential trial?

[G-Unit]

OK.  What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was an authority on the case up until the point he retired?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral considered himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman internationally that there has ever been?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in an accident and that her death was covered up?
What evidence would you require to satisfy you that the majority of Amaral's income since retirement has been generated by his book and the promotion of the contents of his book ever since?

If the answer is that no evidence would satisfy you of any of the above, do you instead lean more towards the view that Amaral was not an authority on the case, did not consider himself an authority on the case, nor was considered by anyone else as an authority on the case, was not the most (in)famous policeman to have ever come out of Portugal and wielded little or no influence on anyone with his book or media appearances, that the majority of his income since retirement has not been as a result of his link to the case, and that he has never once suggested that the McCanns covered up the death of their daughter?

As to your answer to my previous question:  Can you explain exactly how a public announcement of guilt by a person in charge of a case  might affect someone's right to a fair trial?  And how would stepping down from such a role change the effect that such a public announcement would have on the safety of a potential trial?

It's not up to me to decide what evidence you need to support your opinions, it's up to you.

All I know is that Article 10 prevents the authorities from making statements suggesting that someone is guilty of a criminal offence.

430. With regard to statements by the authorities concerning criminal investigations in progress,
the Court has reiterated that Article 6 § 2 cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public
about such investigations; however, it requires that they do so with all the discretion and
circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected (Fatullayev
v. Azerbaijan, §§ 159-162; Garycki v. Poland, § 69; Lavents v. Latvia, §§ 126-127; Slavov and Others
v. Bulgaria, §§ 128-130).
431. The Court has stressed the importance of the choice of words by public officials in their
statements before a person has been tried and found guilty of a particular criminal offence
(Daktaras v. Lithuania, § 41; see also, in the context of interviews to the national press, Butkevičius
v. Lithuania, § 50; Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, §§ 197 and 202-203).
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_10_eng.pdf

[Venturi Swirl]

It's not up to me to decide what evidence you need to support your opinions, it's up to you.

All I know is that Article 10 prevents the authorities from making statements suggesting that someone is guilty of a criminal offence.

430. With regard to statements by the authorities concerning criminal investigations in progress,
the Court has reiterated that Article 6 § 2 cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public
about such investigations; however, it requires that they do so with all the discretion and
circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected (Fatullayev
v. Azerbaijan, §§ 159-162; Garycki v. Poland, § 69; Lavents v. Latvia, §§ 126-127; Slavov and Others
v. Bulgaria, §§ 128-130).
431. The Court has stressed the importance of the choice of words by public officials in their
statements before a person has been tried and found guilty of a particular criminal offence
(Daktaras v. Lithuania, § 41; see also, in the context of interviews to the national press, Butkevičius
v. Lithuania, § 50; Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, §§ 197 and 202-203).
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_10_eng.pdf

I don't have to do anything, and it is extremely disingenuous of you to ask for evidence of something which is already self-evident in order to avoid addressing the point.  So where are we at? 
It appears you don't accept Amaral was an authority on the case. 
It appears you don't accept that he considers himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority on the case.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman there has ever been.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in the apartment and that her death was covered up.
It appears  you don't accept that Amaral made a career out of the case since he retired.
It appears you believe that all the above is only my opinion. 
Hilarious!!  You'll be asking me to provide evidence that the sky is blue next.   

[Brietta]

I don't have to do anything, and it is extremely disingenuous of you to ask for evidence of something which is already self-evident in order to avoid addressing the point.  So where are we at? 
It appears you don't accept Amaral was an authority on the case. 
It appears you don't accept that he considers himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority on the case.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman there has ever been.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in the apartment and that her death was covered up.
It appears  you don't accept that Amaral made a career out of the case since he retired.
It appears you believe that all the above is only my opinion. 
Hilarious!!  You'll be asking me to provide evidence that the sky is blue next.   

I don't think sceptics do have a very great opinion of Amaral else why do they keep insisting that the big boys dunnit and he was only the filing clerk (which he was rubbish at too if Rebelo is to be believed about the mess he inherited from him).

I knew he was bad, he has proudly documented many of the errors of the botched case as proof of that.  For example  -
Why was not the reconstitution done soon? In chapter 5, the former PJ tries to justify why the re-enactment of the night of the girl's disappearance was not performed.

Faced with "the contradictions" in the statements of the McCann group of friends, the investigators, still in May, considered carrying out this diligence.

It did not happen because of 'the high number of tourists who were in the village'.
The space 'would have to be closed for several hours, affecting everyone's holiday' that was there.

The presence of journalists on the scene was also taken into account.

"It was also feared that parents and friends were suspected" and it was not desirable to 'have a trial in the public square'. 
https://www.lux.iol.pt/sociedade/ultimas-noticias/maddie-os-erros-da-pj-segundo-goncalo-amaral


I think that was one but ranking ​on being the worst (difficult to choose because there are so many) would be Amaral's revelation that the PJ had the opportunity to rule Brueckner in or out of the investigation in the early days.  Much as it was left to DCI Redwood to trace and eliminate burglars whose phones, like Brueckner's activated phone masts in Luz on the night Madeleine was taken.

The choice was made to target the mother of a missing child in particular and to ignore criminals who were burglars and one who had been extradited from Portugal on paedophile charges.

[Anthro]

With thanks to a poster on WebSleuths who has been giving further thought to Brueckner’s artistic rant which either meant something to Brueckner or he might just have been amusing himself secure in the knowledge we would puzzle ourselves into knots about his deeper meaning.

Interestingly Brueckner has depicted a female prosecutor who is the head of the unit at the prosecutors office in Braunschweig, for investigating sexual offences, including child porn.

Brueckner knows about her involvement and what her department’s remit is.  I just took from his artwork that he is a worried man … and from that information, I can see why he might well be.

The ‘waiter’ in the drawing was also said to resemble Amaral.

[Anthro]

Extended funding seems to be aimed at the prime suspect, Brückner and collaboration between British and German law enforcement.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15641559/madeleine-mccann-cops-cash-boost-suspect/

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

I don't think sceptics do have a very great opinion of Amaral else why do they keep insisting that the big boys dunnit and he was only the filing clerk (which he was rubbish at too if Rebelo is to be believed about the mess he inherited from him).

I knew he was bad, he has proudly documented many of the errors of the botched case as proof of that.  For example  -
Why was not the reconstitution done soon? In chapter 5, the former PJ tries to justify why the re-enactment of the night of the girl's disappearance was not performed.

Faced with "the contradictions" in the statements of the McCann group of friends, the investigators, still in May, considered carrying out this diligence.

It did not happen because of 'the high number of tourists who were in the village'.
The space 'would have to be closed for several hours, affecting everyone's holiday' that was there.

The presence of journalists on the scene was also taken into account.

"It was also feared that parents and friends were suspected" and it was not desirable to 'have a trial in the public square'. 
https://www.lux.iol.pt/sociedade/ultimas-noticias/maddie-os-erros-da-pj-segundo-goncalo-amaral


I think that was one but ranking ​on being the worst (difficult to choose because there are so many) would be Amaral's revelation that the PJ had the opportunity to rule Brueckner in or out of the investigation in the early days.  Much as it was left to DCI Redwood to trace and eliminate burglars whose phones, like Brueckner's activated phone masts in Luz on the night Madeleine was taken.

The choice was made to target the mother of a missing child in particular and to ignore criminals who were burglars and one who had been extradited from Portugal on paedophile charges.

With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.

And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?

[Brietta]

With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.

And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?

What an ill informed and nasty post.

The reconstitution to which Amaral refers was in the days following Madeleine's abduction when many holidaymakers such as the Totman family https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/ were still continuing their holiday.

The Smiths were still there.
A reconstitution might have jogged their memories a fortnight before they remembered their encounter.

Who knows ~ perhaps Dr Totman would have been able to clarify why he was walking in the wrong direction or if he had seen anyone flip flopping up the road in towards him had the Portuguese police asked.

The Irish journalist John McGee and others like him might have been able to fill a few gaps had a reconstruction happened when quite few holidaymakers were still around to tell their story.
Snip
At no stage of the initial investigation, however, did local police attempt to interview us or anyone in our apartment complex, despite its proximity to the Ocean Club resort.
In our case, certain things we had witnessed over the previous week and indeed on the night of Madeleine's disappearance might have been of use to them.

The suspicious looking characters hanging around Hugo Beatty's bar two nights earlier - one of whom resembled the identikit photo issued by the Metropolitan Police years later; the pick-up-style truck that sped past us as we walked back to the apartment from the restaurant that fateful night; the elderly bearded man videoing children at a nearby theme park three days before.

At the time, their possible significance meant nothing to us, but they might have been of some help.
It was only when we arrived back in Dublin five days later that we felt compelled to volunteer statements to the gardai, who then passed them on to Interpol, by then already on the case.
Presumably, Interpol then passed them on to the Portuguese police.

In addition, the many photos we had taken during our holiday that might have provided clues or identified 'people of interest' in and around Praia da Luz and Lagos were uploaded to a website that was set up by the investigation.

We never heard anything back from the Portuguese police, who in July 2008 officially closed the case.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/crucial-madeleine-mccann-case-questions-that-remain-unanswered-after-a-decade-35670997.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11656.msg614750#msg614750

Jeremy Wilkins might have been able to make himself available in the early days rather than ~
Q. relative to the return to Portugal to realize a reconstitution;
I spoke with the police for a long time regarding this topic. I had some reservation about the press' intrusion onto my personal life and the hurt that resulted. I actually think that I would prefer not to take part. I have helped the investigation and am particularly interested in the investigative team gave me a solid base with would justify the reconstitution.  J Wilkins   Rogatory

              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The reason Bridget O'Donnell, wrote this article in December 2007.

Throughout all this, I have always believed that Gerry and Kate McCann are innocent.

When they were made suspects, when they were booed at, when one woman told me she was "glad" they had "done it" because it meant that her child was safe, I began to write this article - because I was there, and I believe that woman is wrong.

There were no drug-fuelled "swingers" on our holiday; instead, there was a bunch of ordinary parents wearing Berghaus and worrying about sleep patterns.

Secure in our banality, none of us imagined we were being watched. One group made a disastrous decision; Madeleine was vulnerable and was chosen. But in the face of such desperate audacity, it could have been any one of us.

The British police came round shortly after our return. Jes was pleased to give them a statement. The Portuguese police had never asked.

Bridget O'Donnell is a writer and director.

The fee from this article will be donated to the Find Madeleine fund

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2091.msg68843#msg68843


I make nothing "of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?"
Except to say at risk of dignifying such profound misogyny with a response, that your post tells me so much more about you than I want to know.


Snip
“This is the latest in a terrifying line of cases where high profile figures have systematically used their status, celebrity and power, to abuse and to rape.

“Clement Freud was a senior figure in the Liberals, our party’s predecessor, and we are deeply shocked and horrified by this news. Our party was never aware of what happened, and our hearts go out to the women who were affected.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sir-clement-freud-accused-abusing-two-girls-1940s-1970s_uk_5760f9a5e4b0681487dc2b0b


Clement Freud died in 2009.
The allegations were made much later; the article I have linked to is dated 2016.

As a member of a miscarriage of justice forum I have an inherent dislike of such claims made when the individual concerned cannot either face lawful process or make any kind of defence let alone a proper one.

[Eleanor]

With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.

And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?

Oh Dear.  You don't know very much, do you.

[G-Unit]

What an ill informed and nasty post.

The reconstitution to which Amaral refers was in the days following Madeleine's abduction when many holidaymakers such as the Totman family https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/ were still continuing their holiday.

The Smiths were still there.
A reconstitution might have jogged their memories a fortnight before they remembered their encounter.

Who knows ~ perhaps Dr Totman would have been able to clarify why he was walking in the wrong direction or if he had seen anyone flip flopping up the road in towards him had the Portuguese police asked.

The Irish journalist John McGee and others like him might have been able to fill a few gaps had a reconstruction happened when quite few holidaymakers were still around to tell their story.
Snip
At no stage of the initial investigation, however, did local police attempt to interview us or anyone in our apartment complex, despite its proximity to the Ocean Club resort.
In our case, certain things we had witnessed over the previous week and indeed on the night of Madeleine's disappearance might have been of use to them.

The suspicious looking characters hanging around Hugo Beatty's bar two nights earlier - one of whom resembled the identikit photo issued by the Metropolitan Police years later; the pick-up-style truck that sped past us as we walked back to the apartment from the restaurant that fateful night; the elderly bearded man videoing children at a nearby theme park three days before.

At the time, their possible significance meant nothing to us, but they might have been of some help.
It was only when we arrived back in Dublin five days later that we felt compelled to volunteer statements to the gardai, who then passed them on to Interpol, by then already on the case.
Presumably, Interpol then passed them on to the Portuguese police.

In addition, the many photos we had taken during our holiday that might have provided clues or identified 'people of interest' in and around Praia da Luz and Lagos were uploaded to a website that was set up by the investigation.

We never heard anything back from the Portuguese police, who in July 2008 officially closed the case.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/crucial-madeleine-mccann-case-questions-that-remain-unanswered-after-a-decade-35670997.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11656.msg614750#msg614750

Jeremy Wilkins might have been able to make himself available in the early days rather than ~
Q. relative to the return to Portugal to realize a reconstitution;
I spoke with the police for a long time regarding this topic. I had some reservation about the press' intrusion onto my personal life and the hurt that resulted. I actually think that I would prefer not to take part. I have helped the investigation and am particularly interested in the investigative team gave me a solid base with would justify the reconstitution.  J Wilkins   Rogatory

              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The reason Bridget O'Donnell, wrote this article in December 2007.

Throughout all this, I have always believed that Gerry and Kate McCann are innocent.

When they were made suspects, when they were booed at, when one woman told me she was "glad" they had "done it" because it meant that her child was safe, I began to write this article - because I was there, and I believe that woman is wrong.

There were no drug-fuelled "swingers" on our holiday; instead, there was a bunch of ordinary parents wearing Berghaus and worrying about sleep patterns.

Secure in our banality, none of us imagined we were being watched. One group made a disastrous decision; Madeleine was vulnerable and was chosen. But in the face of such desperate audacity, it could have been any one of us.

The British police came round shortly after our return. Jes was pleased to give them a statement. The Portuguese police had never asked.

Bridget O'Donnell is a writer and director.

The fee from this article will be donated to the Find Madeleine fund

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2091.msg68843#msg68843


I make nothing "of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?"
Except to say at risk of dignifying such profound misogyny with a response, that your post tells me so much more about you than I want to know.


Snip
“This is the latest in a terrifying line of cases where high profile figures have systematically used their status, celebrity and power, to abuse and to rape.

“Clement Freud was a senior figure in the Liberals, our party’s predecessor, and we are deeply shocked and horrified by this news. Our party was never aware of what happened, and our hearts go out to the women who were affected.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sir-clement-freud-accused-abusing-two-girls-1940s-1970s_uk_5760f9a5e4b0681487dc2b0b


Clement Freud died in 2009.
The allegations were made much later; the article I have linked to is dated 2016.

As a member of a miscarriage of justice forum I have an inherent dislike of such claims made when the individual concerned cannot either face lawful process or make any kind of defence let alone a proper one.

People tend to hypothesise on things, don't they? John McGee may have given statements, but they never reached the Portuguese police. Bridget O'Donnell is critial of the PJ, but she obviously didn't know that Amaral asked the British police to interview her husband. (and provided the questions to be asked)
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm

[Venturi Swirl]

With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.

And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?

Talk about re-writing history!!  You make it sound as if Kate enjoying Clement Freud’s company knowing he was a paedophile.  I know what I make of your post but I’d better keep it to myself.