UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Angelo222 on August 16, 2018, 09:14:24 AM
-
Just what are the repercussions of'not being cleared' in terms of the last edict from the Portuguese Supreme Court?
Both Maddie's parents were made arguidos in her disappearance which most people agree equates to official suspects. When the original investigation was archived due to a lack of evidence not to mention a lack of cooperation by the English witnesses, the arguidos statuses were removed. The parents claimed that the Attorney General in doing so had effectively cleared them of involvement in the child's disappearance. The Portuguese Supreme Court went out on a limb to dispute this claim effectively stating that they had not been cleared as far as Portugal was concerned.
My question to members is this. Is it unprecedented that doctors are allowed to practise medicine in such circumstances?
34
-
Just what are the repercussions of'not being cleared' in terms of the last edict from the Portuguese Supreme Court?
Both Maddie's parents were made arguidos in her disappearance which most people agree equates to official suspects. When the original investigation was archived due to a lack of evidence not to mention a lack of cooperation by the English witnesses, the arguidos statuses were removed. The parents claimed that the Attorney General in doing so had effectively cleared them of involvement in the child's disappearance. The Portuguese Supreme Court went out on a limb to dispute this claim effectively stating that they had not been cleared as far as Portugal was concerned.
My question to members is this. Is it unprecedented that doctors are allowed to practise medicine in such circumstances?
the mcanns were the last to see maddie so of course they will always be suspects IMO
-
Just what are the repercussions of'not being cleared' in terms of the last edict from the Portuguese Supreme Court?
Both Maddie's parents were made arguidos in her disappearance which most people agree equates to official suspects. When the original investigation was archived due to a lack of evidence not to mention a lack of cooperation by the English witnesses, the arguidos statuses were removed. The parents claimed that the Attorney General in doing so had effectively cleared them of involvement in the child's disappearance. The Portuguese Supreme Court went out on a limb to dispute this claim effectively stating that they had not been cleared as far as Portugal was concerned.
My question to members is this. Is it unprecedented that doctors are allowed to practise medicine in such circumstances?
Absolutely not and it is a ridiculous suggestion... They haven't been cleared because they haven't been accused or charged with anything
-
Just what are the repercussions of'not being cleared' in terms of the last edict from the Portuguese Supreme Court?
Both Maddie's parents were made arguidos in her disappearance which most people agree equates to official suspects. When the original investigation was archived due to a lack of evidence not to mention a lack of cooperation by the English witnesses, the arguidos statuses were removed. The parents claimed that the Attorney General in doing so had effectively cleared them of involvement in the child's disappearance. The Portuguese Supreme Court went out on a limb to dispute this claim effectively stating that they had not been cleared as far as Portugal was concerned.
My question to members is this. Is it unprecedented that doctors are allowed to practise medicine in such circumstances?
Lots of medical professionals have been found guilty and charged of a range of crimes and still practice. They never lost the presumption of innocence with respect to any criminal charges so there was no reason to suspend them.
-
wouldnt a portugese law interpetation have more meaning then a uk one?? since whatever did happen to maddie was in portugal not the uk?
-
Just what are the repercussions of'not being cleared' in terms of the last edict from the Portuguese Supreme Court?
Both Maddie's parents were made arguidos in her disappearance which most people agree equates to official suspects. When the original investigation was archived due to a lack of evidence not to mention a lack of cooperation by the English witnesses, the arguidos statuses were removed. The parents claimed that the Attorney General in doing so had effectively cleared them of involvement in the child's disappearance. The Portuguese Supreme Court went out on a limb to dispute this claim effectively stating that they had not been cleared as far as Portugal was concerned.
My question to members is this. Is it unprecedented that doctors are allowed to practise medicine in such circumstances?
The headline we are constantly reminded is that they are "not suspect's" so there is nothing to stop them practising.
-
wouldnt a portugese law interpetation have more meaning then a uk one?? since whatever did happen to maddie was in portugal not the uk?
From 2008 people in England would have been aware their arguido status was removed so I presume most considered the McCanns no longer suspects and free to practice. Did Gerry wait to be a non arguido before resuming work? The timing of that would need to be considered.
-
From 2008 people in England would have been aware their arguido status was removed so I presume most considered the McCanns no longer suspects and free to practice. Did Gerry wait to be a non arguido before resuming work? The timing of that would need to be considered.
Gerry was neither arrested nor charged... So I don't see how that would affect his registration
-
Gerry was neither arrested nor charged... So I don't see how that would affect his registration
When did he resume work?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1568014/Gerry-McCann-returns-to-work.html
This article is written in Nov 2007 "By Nick Britten3:03PM GMT 01 Nov 2007
Gerry McCann has returned to work for the first time since his daughter's disappearance and admitted he was not anticipating any breakthrough in the case."
So he returned to work before he was cleared as an arguido. That was surprising.
-
Just what are the repercussions of'not being cleared' in terms of the last edict from the Portuguese Supreme Court?
Both Maddie's parents were made arguidos in her disappearance which most people agree equates to official suspects. When the original investigation was archived due to a lack of evidence not to mention a lack of cooperation by the English witnesses, the arguidos statuses were removed. The parents claimed that the Attorney General in doing so had effectively cleared them of involvement in the child's disappearance. The Portuguese Supreme Court went out on a limb to dispute this claim effectively stating that they had not been cleared as far as Portugal was concerned.
My question to members is this. Is it unprecedented that doctors are allowed to practise medicine in such circumstances?
As far as I know Kate McCann hasn't worked as a doctor since her daughter disappeared.
-
When did he resume work?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1568014/Gerry-McCann-returns-to-work.html
This article is written in Nov 2007 "By Nick Britten3:03PM GMT 01 Nov 2007
Gerry McCann has returned to work for the first time since his daughter's disappearance and admitted he was not anticipating any breakthrough in the case."
So he returned to work before he was cleared as an arguido. That was surprising.
I don't see why. He hadn't been charged with anything, let alone been convicted.
-
Absolutely not and it is a ridiculous suggestion... They haven't been cleared because they haven't been accused or charged with anything
No - but who knows what would have happened if they had cooperated fully
Like answered all the questions
done the reconstruction
GA not been took off the case when he was at a crucial part.
IMO - you cannot say they would have been set up - they already had the A+ team in place,
Are you convinced that Madeleine McCann is dead?
Gonçalo Amaral - I do have that conviction. It is an interpretation in the light of the Law based in concrete elements, with the knowledge that I have of the inquest and of the diligences done. Yes, I am convinced that she died there.
If the father and the mother were constituted as arguidos it’s because they were suspects?
GM - They were suspects and there were evidences for them to be constituted as arguidos, actually, strong elements relatively to two types of crime: hiding a cadaver [corpse occultation] and simulation of a crime [faking the crime of kidnapping]. That was public and at the time that I left the investigation that was the situation.
And the crime of abandonment, for what reason aren’t the parents accused?
GM – The issue there is to know if the children were safe or not. For me it’s evident, even because the parents talked about kidnapping, that there was no safety.
Don’t you feel frustrated as the case isn’t moving forward?
GM – I do not feel any frustration over the decisions made in courts. I have been around for many years and I do have a great admiration for the magistrates. I understand up to where the work of magistrates can go.
However you don't understand why you had to leave?
GM – No, not that. I respected the decision as a professional. There was an understanding between the Portuguese and British authorities that the girl was dead and that there was a need to solidify the evidences that existed and move forward to try to understand where she could be.
Do you believe that the PJ's reaction had to do with the politicising of the case?
GM – I believe that there was more politics than police [at work]. But on the field we did our best and we never felt any defence [probably meaning defence by the Director of PJ towards the ongoing attacks].
Do you think that it is normal for the case to be archived?
GM – It doesn’t shock me.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id139.htm
-
No - but who knows what would have happened if they had cooperated fully
Like answered all the questions
done the reconstruction
GA not been took off the case when he was at a crucial part.
IMO - you cannot say they would have been set up - they already had the A+ team in place,
Are you convinced that Madeleine McCann is dead?
Gonçalo Amaral - I do have that conviction. It is an interpretation in the light of the Law based in concrete elements, with the knowledge that I have of the inquest and of the diligences done. Yes, I am convinced that she died there.
If the father and the mother were constituted as arguidos it’s because they were suspects?
GM - They were suspects and there were evidences for them to be constituted as arguidos, actually, strong elements relatively to two types of crime: hiding a cadaver [corpse occultation] and simulation of a crime [faking the crime of kidnapping]. That was public and at the time that I left the investigation that was the situation.
And the crime of abandonment, for what reason aren’t the parents accused?
GM – The issue there is to know if the children were safe or not. For me it’s evident, even because the parents talked about kidnapping, that there was no safety.
Don’t you feel frustrated as the case isn’t moving forward?
GM – I do not feel any frustration over the decisions made in courts. I have been around for many years and I do have a great admiration for the magistrates. I understand up to where the work of magistrates can go.
However you don't understand why you had to leave?
GM – No, not that. I respected the decision as a professional. There was an understanding between the Portuguese and British authorities that the girl was dead and that there was a need to solidify the evidences that existed and move forward to try to understand where she could be.
Do you believe that the PJ's reaction had to do with the politicising of the case?
GM – I believe that there was more politics than police [at work]. But on the field we did our best and we never felt any defence [probably meaning defence by the Director of PJ towards the ongoing attacks].
Do you think that it is normal for the case to be archived?
GM – It doesn’t shock me.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id139.htm
GA misunderstood the evidence as has been cited many times
-
Gerry was neither arrested nor charged... So I don't see how that would affect his registration
That's a mute point because had they not presented themselves for interview they would have been arrested.
-
GA misunderstood the evidence as has been cited many times
What you don't know is - exactly what the evidence he knows about is.
He was not a one man band.
IMO if that was the case why - are the mccanns not cleared of any involvement then.
-
That's a mute point because had they not presented themselves for interview they would have been arrested.
Opinion... They were not arrested ...fact
-
GA misunderstood the evidence as has been cited many times
He wasn't the only one involved in the decision to make the McCanns arguidos, so why not name them all?
-
He wasn't the only one involved in the decision to make the McCanns arguidos, so why not name them all?
I'm sure you are right but kizzy was quoting amaral and he's the one who has spoken in public and shown his misunderstanding
-
He wasn't the only one involved in the decision to make the McCanns arguidos, so why not name them all?
Was it the co-coordinator's decision, or that of the Prosecutor ?
-
What you don't know is - exactly what the evidence he knows about is.
He was not a one man band.
IMO if that was the case why - are the mccanns not cleared of any involvement then.
What we know for certain is he did not understand the important evidence.... What does that say about his ability to reach a valid conclusion
-
Was it the co-coordinator's decision, or that of the Prosecutor ?
The PJ make the immediate decision and they have 10 days to get a judge to agree. That is how I understand how it worked.
-
What you don't know is - exactly what the evidence he knows about is.
He was not a one man band.
IMO if that was the case why - are the mccanns not cleared of any involvement then.
If Amaral was not a one man band who took it upon himself to defame legally innocent people ... why do you set so much store by what he says?
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
Snip
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was dismissed this afternoon, after criticizing investigators of the English police who collaborate in investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, confirmed the PUBLIC.
https://www.publico.pt/2007/10/02/sociedade/noticia/maddie-coordenador-da-pj-de-portimao-demitido-apos-criticas-a-policia-inglesa-1306369
-
If Amaral was not a one man band who took it upon himself to defame legally innocent people ... why do you set so much store by what he says?
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
Snip
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was dismissed this afternoon, after criticizing investigators of the English police who collaborate in investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, confirmed the PUBLIC.
https://www.publico.pt/2007/10/02/sociedade/noticia/maddie-coordenador-da-pj-de-portimao-demitido-apos-criticas-a-policia-inglesa-1306369
Wheres the legal judgement he'd defamed anyone?
-
Wheres the legal judgement he'd defamed anyone?
IMO The SC judges agreed he did, but Amaral's right to free speech over ruled the right for the McCanns to a good name.
-
IMO The SC judges agreed he did, but Amaral's right to free speech over ruled the right for the McCanns to a good name.
I agree...
-
IMO The SC judges agreed he did, but Amaral's right to free speech over ruled the right for the McCanns to a good name.
So its opinion not fact then.
-
So its opinion not fact then.
I'm telling you what I understand they declared. I don't agree with their findings, that is my opinion.
-
IMO The SC judges agreed he did, but Amaral's right to free speech over ruled the right for the McCanns to a good name.
Can you provide a cite for that?
-
Can you provide a cite for that?
It says Imo... So a cite really isn't required... But if you read the SC report you will see they talk of the balance between reputation and free speech which indicates they had concern that the McCann's reputation was being affected
-
It says Imo... So a cite really isn't required... But if you read the SC report you will see they talk of the balance between reputation and free speech which indicates they had concern that the McCann's reputation was being affected
That isn’t the same as the SC judges defamed the McCanns which is what Rob said.
-
That isn’t the same as the SC judges defamed the McCanns which is what Rob said.
Check again I don't see Rob saying that
-
What you don't know is - exactly what the evidence he knows about is.
He was not a one man band.
IMO if that was the case why - are the mccanns not cleared of any involvement then.
That's davels favour mantra. As Amaral knew what ALL the evidence was and davel doesn't, I know who has most credibility.
-
Opinion... They were not arrested ...fact
True but they would have been had they scarpered like Kate said Gerry wanted to do when their lawyer announced the night before that they were going to to be made arguidos.
-
Was it the co-coordinator's decision, or that of the Prosecutor ?
Amaral was merely an evidence gatherer, it was up to the prosecutor who to make arguido.
-
If Amaral was not a one man band who took it upon himself to defame legally innocent people ... why do you set so much store by what he says?
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
Snip
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was dismissed this afternoon, after criticizing investigators of the English police who collaborate in investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, confirmed the PUBLIC.
https://www.publico.pt/2007/10/02/sociedade/noticia/maddie-coordenador-da-pj-de-portimao-demitido-apos-criticas-a-policia-inglesa-1306369
He was convinced of their involvement, only time will tell if he was correct.
-
He was convinced of their involvement, only time will tell if he was correct.
Time has told... The point is he is on record showing a complete disregard for the real evidence.... The 15 alleles confirmed nothing as it was from 3 to 5 persons... Amaral decided he knew better.. He didnt
-
That's davels favour mantra. As Amaral knew what ALL the evidence was and davel doesn't, I know who has most credibility.
Amaral didn't understand the evidence.. Fact... I do... Fact
-
That's davels favour mantra. As Amaral knew what ALL the evidence was and davel doesn't, I know who has most credibility.
You are making an assumption that amaral has more evidence on the McCann's.... That's, all it is.. An assumption
Amaral didn't have a clue... Imo ...And still doesn't
-
If Amaral was not a one man band who took it upon himself to defame legally innocent people ... why do you set so much store by what he says?
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
Snip
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was dismissed this afternoon, after criticizing investigators of the English police who collaborate in investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, confirmed the PUBLIC.
https://www.publico.pt/2007/10/02/sociedade/noticia/maddie-coordenador-da-pj-de-portimao-demitido-apos-criticas-a-policia-inglesa-1306369
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
You don't know his superiors wanted rid of him either - that is only your opinion.
IMO it was because his opinion was of value - that is why they wanted rid of him.[certain english politics]
.
According to a British correspondent, the Prime Minister personally called Stuart Prior to ask for confirmation of my dismissal. Why would the head of the British government be interested in a lowly Portuguese official? We refuse to believe the rumours going around, according to which the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon was dependent on my dismissal. Rumours, of course, nothing more. I cannot help but think that for the first time in its history, the judiciary police has dismissed a simple official from his post because of external pressure
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AMARALS_BOOK_ENGLISH.htm#abc19
-
If Amaral was not a one man band who took it upon himself to defame legally innocent people ... why do you set so much store by what he says?
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
Snip
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was dismissed this afternoon, after criticizing investigators of the English police who collaborate in investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, confirmed the PUBLIC.
https://www.publico.pt/2007/10/02/sociedade/noticia/maddie-coordenador-da-pj-de-portimao-demitido-apos-criticas-a-policia-inglesa-1306369
from your portuguese link above.....took of case for criticising english police
IMO he was right to do so then and now.
NELSON GARRIDO / PUBLIC (ARCHIVE)
PUB
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was dismissed this afternoon, after criticizing investigators of the English police who collaborate in investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, confirmed the PUBLIC.
The order to end the commission was signed today by the National Directorate of the PJ, hours after the "Diário de Notícias" published statements by the official, who accused British investigators of investigating "only" what was appropriate to the parents of the British child.
MORE POPULAR
-
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
You don't know his superiors wanted rid of him either - that is only your opinion.
IMO it was because his opinion was of value - that is why they wanted rid of him.[certain english politics]
.
According to a British correspondent, the Prime Minister personally called Stuart Prior to ask for confirmation of my dismissal. Why would the head of the British government be interested in a lowly Portuguese official? We refuse to believe the rumours going around, according to which the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon was dependent on my dismissal. Rumours, of course, nothing more. I cannot help but think that for the first time in its history, the judiciary police has dismissed a simple official from his post because of external pressure
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AMARALS_BOOK_ENGLISH.htm#abc19
Amaral gives no source for this claim... So it has no validity
Basically just gossip
-
Amaral was merely an evidence gatherer, it was up to the prosecutor who to make arguido.
Exactly so in my opinion ... was it therefore appropriate for him to take upon himself the role of judge jury and prosecution and decide that he alone "knew" what had happened to Madeleine.
To forge a career out of his "knowledge" which was certainly inferior to that of the Portuguese authorities and the Policia Judiciaria under Rebelo who understood the significance of evidence within a lawful context.
-
He was sacked from Madeleine's case by his superiors in the Policia Judiciaria so why you would think his opinion is of value ... his superiors most certainly did not.
You don't know his superiors wanted rid of him either - that is only your opinion.
IMO it was because his opinion was of value - that is why they wanted rid of him.[certain english politics]
.
According to a British correspondent, the Prime Minister personally called Stuart Prior to ask for confirmation of my dismissal. Why would the head of the British government be interested in a lowly Portuguese official? We refuse to believe the rumours going around, according to which the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon was dependent on my dismissal. Rumours, of course, nothing more. I cannot help but think that for the first time in its history, the judiciary police has dismissed a simple official from his post because of external pressure
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AMARALS_BOOK_ENGLISH.htm#abc19
Oh, I see ... the proud Portuguese State allowed itself to be subordinate to the English? I very much doubt that.
And the arrogance of the man if not the utter stupidity to insinuate (only a rumour though) that he had to be sacked or no Lisbon Treaty.
WOW ... what an ego!
-
That isn’t the same as the SC judges defamed the McCanns which is what Rob said.
You read my post wrongly. I said "IMO The SC judges agreed he did, ..." IMO the judges were aware that Amaral had defamed the McCanns. I'm not saying the SC judges defamed the McCanns. Davel has got it correct.
-
True but they would have been had they scarpered like Kate said Gerry wanted to do when their lawyer announced the night before that they were going to to be made arguidos.
Is that from Kate's book? I must have missed that bit. Cite please.
-
Exactly so in my opinion ... was it therefore appropriate for him to take upon himself the role of judge jury and prosecution and decide that he alone "knew" what had happened to Madeleine.
To forge a career out of his "knowledge" which was certainly inferior to that of the Portuguese authorities and the Policia Judiciaria under Rebelo who understood the significance of evidence within a lawful context.
He wrote a book based on the police 'thinking' at that time. a thesis. Have the PJ spokesperson come out and called Amaral all the names you supporters give him? No! that is worth remembering.
The behaviour of the Tapas as arrogant, uncaring and bloody minded about THEIR child caring issues brought this situation on themselves. no point in shouting at others. Really No POINT!
-
He wrote a book based on the police 'thinking' at that time. a thesis. Have the PJ spokesperson come out and called Amaral all the names you supporters give him? No! that is worth remembering.
The behaviour of the Tapas as arrogant, uncaring and bloody minded about THEIR child caring issues brought this situation on themselves. no point in shouting at others. Really No POINT!
I don't put the blame onto the mccanns... I believe maddie was taken and blame the abductor
-
He wrote a book based on the police 'thinking' at that time. a thesis. Have the PJ spokesperson come out and called Amaral all the names you supporters give him? No! that is worth remembering.
The behaviour of the Tapas as arrogant, uncaring and bloody minded about THEIR child caring issues brought this situation on themselves. no point in shouting at others. Really No POINT!
That is wrong - I think you will find it was based on Amaral's thinking at the time of making the McCanns arguidos.
When did he write the book, when were the PJ files released. When was the case archived?
-
That is wrong - I think you will find it was based on Amaral's thinking at the time of making the McCanns arguidos.
When did he write the book, when were the PJ files released. When was the case archived?
21st July 2008
-
Amaral gives no source for this claim... So it has no validity
Basically just gossip
I would say it was true and Amaral was right to speak out. In fact it wasn't that long ago that Rowley said the very same thing.
-
Oh, I see ... the proud Portuguese State allowed itself to be subordinate to the English? I very much doubt that.
And the arrogance of the man if not the utter stupidity to insinuate (only a rumour though) that he had to be sacked or no Lisbon Treaty.
WOW ... what an ego!
Well no one has said different or contradicted it - and its there for all to see in his book.
Don't even go there B about arrogance and ego - imo gmcc can win him hands down on that.
Lets face it also - gmcc lost his little girl GA was trying to find her.
GA doesn't have to justify himself gmcc does imo
-
I would say it was true and Amaral was right to speak out. In fact it wasn't that long ago that Rowley said the very same thing.
Cite... He never said anything like it
-
Amaral didn't understand the evidence.. Fact... I do... Fact
Perhaps Scotland Yard should employ you then Davel. According to you, you understand all the evidence so clearly have solved the case and know who the perpetrator is IMO.
-
Perhaps Scotland Yard should employ you then Davel. According to you, you understand all the evidence so clearly have solved the case and know who the perpetrator is IMO.
Davel forgets about all the information gathered by police which never reached the internet.
-
Davel forgets about all the information gathered by police which never reached the internet.
No I don't... But as, we don't know what it entails.. How can we assess it... Pure guesswork... The PJ said they have no evidence against the McCann's.. I don't see any reason to doubt that
-
Davel forgets about all the information gathered by police which never reached the internet.
Do you think there is more evidence secretly held against the McCann's... I think you are dreaming
-
Davel forgets about all the information gathered by police which never reached the internet.
Are you claiming as fact that there is evidence against the McCann's, we don't know about... Ridiculous
-
That is wrong - I think you will find it was based on Amaral's thinking at the time of making the McCanns arguidos.
When did he write the book, when were the PJ files released. When was the case archived?
Is this when the file was released as given by this clue?
"ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF
OFFICIAL INQUIRY FILES and DOCUMENTS
This information belongs to the Ministerio Publico in Portimao, Portugal.
It was released to the public on 4 August 2008 in accordance with Portuguese Law
So when did Amarals book first get published?
Is this a correct clue "Published July 2008 by Guerra e Paz (first published January 1st 2008)"
and case archived "When was the case archived? 21st July 2008"
That puts a big stick in any SC contention that the information in the case was made public before the book came out.
-
Is this when the file was released as given by this clue?
"ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF
OFFICIAL INQUIRY FILES and DOCUMENTS
This information belongs to the Ministerio Publico in Portimao, Portugal.
It was released to the public on 4 August 2008 in accordance with Portuguese Law
So when did Amarals book first get published?
Is this a correct clue "Published July 2008 by Guerra e Paz (first published January 1st 2008)"
and case archived "When was the case archived? 21st July 2008"
That puts a big stick in any SC contention that the information in the case was made public before the book came out.
Is it of importance?
-
Is it of importance?
Its been a while since the SC decision but didn't the judges try and make out the information in Amarals book was already public before his book was published but according to those dates (which I call clues ) show the book preceded the release a full 8 months. Surely that is a mistake.
-
Its been a while since the SC decision but didn't the judges try and make out the information in Amarals book was already public before his book was published but according to those dates (which I call clues ) show the book preceded the release a full 8 months. Surely that is a mistake.
Doesn't matter. the Supreme Court word is final.
-
Doesn't matter. the Supreme Court word is final.
Even if what they claim was blatantly wrong? Maybe it is still final, but it shows everyone what sort of beast we are dealing with doesn't it.
-
Even if what they claim was blatantly wrong? Maybe it is still final, but it shows everyone what sort of beast we are dealing with doesn't it.
"We" are not dealing with anything Rob.
-
Even if what they claim was blatantly wrong? Maybe it is still final, but it shows everyone what sort of beast we are dealing with doesn't it.
No good crying over spilled milk. Move on.
-
No good crying over spilled milk. Move on.
Don't you fight for justice and honesty etc. Those good values? I'm no angel but even I can see the issue here.
-
Don't you fight for justice and honesty etc. Those good values? I'm no angel but even I can see the issue here.
Who do you suggest I should fight - and how?
-
t
Doesn't matter. the Supreme Court word is final.
It isn't final.... They can be corrected and potentially humiliated
-
Is this when the file was released as given by this clue?
"ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF
OFFICIAL INQUIRY FILES and DOCUMENTS
This information belongs to the Ministerio Publico in Portimao, Portugal.
It was released to the public on 4 August 2008 in accordance with Portuguese Law
So when did Amarals book first get published?
Is this a correct clue "Published July 2008 by Guerra e Paz (first published January 1st 2008)"
and case archived "When was the case archived? 21st July 2008"
That puts a big stick in any SC contention that the information in the case was made public before the book came out.
24th July 2008.
-
Even if what they claim was blatantly wrong? Maybe it is still final, but it shows everyone what sort of beast we are dealing with doesn't it.
I think you need to check your facts. Amaral's book was published three days after the case was archived.
-
Is this when the file was released as given by this clue?
"ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF
OFFICIAL INQUIRY FILES and DOCUMENTS
This information belongs to the Ministerio Publico in Portimao, Portugal.
It was released to the public on 4 August 2008 in accordance with Portuguese Law
So when did Amarals book first get published?
Is this a correct clue "Published July 2008 by Guerra e Paz (first published January 1st 2008)"
and case archived "When was the case archived? 21st July 2008"
That puts a big stick in any SC contention that the information in the case was made public before the book came out.
According to this Rob it was after the case was archived, but a big caveat needs to be added, its the s..m.
Mr Amaral released the book three days after the case was closed in 2008.
He later took part in a documentary for Portuguese television in which he claimed that Madeleine was dead, there had been no abduction and the McCanns had hidden her body.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2788143/top-cop-who-accused-madeleine-mccanns-parents-of-covering-up-her-death-is-planning-to-write-another-book-after-winning-libel-appeal/
-
Found another confirmation it was 24/07/2008.
Availability: Pre-launch: available to be dispatched from 24 of July 2008
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/07/truth-of-lie-release-of-gonalo-amarals.html
-
It isn't final.... They can be corrected and potentially humiliated
I fear getting my hopes up.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jul/24/madeleinemccann.portugal
-
I fear getting my hopes up.
Unfortunately it will take a long time... But unlike some on here I've looked at quite a few past cases to get a feel for the, way the ECHR rule on defamation and imo the McCann's have a very strong case
-
I fear getting my hopes up.
Don't bother - he's flogging a dead horse.
-
Don't bother - he's flogging a dead horse.
I somehow feel you know little about ECHR law, on defamation
-
I think you need to check your facts. Amaral's book was published three days after the case was archived.
"Published July 2008 by Guerra e Paz (first published January 1st 2008)" was from the site selling Amaral's book, so why should I doubt that it was first published in some form in Jan 2008.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7123532-maddie---a-verdade-da-mentira?rating=1
"Paperback, 220 pages
Published July 2008 by Guerra e Paz (first published January 1st 2008)
ISBN 9898174129 (ISBN13: 9789898174123)
Edition LanguagePortuguese
URLhttp://www.guerraepaz.net/conteudo.aspx?caso=ecommerce&lang=pt&id_object=2401&name=MADDIE
Other Editions (4)"
-
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jul/24/madeleinemccann.portugal
There seems to be a claim it was also published prior to that.
-
I somehow feel you know little about ECHR law, on defamation
This is a civil case the SC didn't rule on anything other than a civil dispute. He says- she says- The McCanns failed to produce evidence that Amarals book impeded the search for the daughter whom they left alone every night- I think they lost the right to a 'good name' by their own actions!
-
There seems to be a claim it was also published prior to that.
I am sure there is.
Claiming is one thing being correct is another.
-
Are you claiming as fact that there is evidence against the McCann's, we don't know about... Ridiculous
It's very simple, we don't know what that PJ really think or what evidence they actually hold. The police will NEVER reveal their hand in any live enquiry, that is basic policing.
-
This is a civil case the SC didn't rule on anything other than a civil dispute. He says- she says- The McCanns failed to produce evidence that Amarals book impeded the search for the daughter whom they left alone every night- I think they lost the right to a 'good name' by their own actions!
They weren't aware then of course that much of what they did and said would be disseminated across the www.
-
It's very simple, we don't know what that PJ really think or what evidence they actually hold. The police will NEVER reveal their hand in any live enquiry, that is basic policing.
Indeed if you look at the Mary Bell case as just one instance- they did not disclose the crime scene yet she drew it!
-
They weren't aware then of course that much of what they did and said would be disseminated across the www.
Indeed John, however, they created so many monsters, who were 'nasty' to them, and went on the attack with their 'supporter club' to try and purge the dissent, by calling non lovvies ' evil trolls etc.
They also couldn't really answer very simple questions put to them at times. and the LP rogs are shameful!
Sadly there is no justice for MBM.
-
Indeed John, however, they created so many monsters, who were 'nasty' to them, and went on the attack with their 'supporter club' to try and purge the dissent, by calling non lovvies ' evil trolls etc.
They also couldn't really answer very simple questions put to them at times. and the LP rogs are shameful!
Sadly there is no justice for MBM.
Since I have become interested in the case I have been surprised that whilst the original Portuguese case was ongoing the McCanns said they could answer questions because of judicial secrecy then when the case was suspended in July 2008 they still didn't answer questions. I would have expected them to be open and honest with their supportive public and answer all questions asked.
-
Since I have become interested in the case I have been surprised that whilst the original Portuguese case was ongoing the McCanns said they could answer questions because of judicial secrecy then when the case was suspended in July 2008 they still didn't answer questions. I would have expected them to be open and honest with their supportive public and answer all questions asked.
What questions haven't they answered and who was, asking
-
Since I have become interested in the case I have been surprised that whilst the original Portuguese case was ongoing the McCanns said they could answer questions because of judicial secrecy then when the case was suspended in July 2008 they still didn't answer questions. I would have expected them to be open and honest with their supportive public and answer all questions asked.
Indeed. However, their version was being blasted by the family in every media outlet. They started telling their story to the media before the police even got there! Mitchell and PR team were drafted in to clean up their mess. The more aggressive their attack on the PJ- which began that first night! the more I suspected something isn't right here.
-
Indeed. However, their version was being blasted by the family in every media outlet. They started telling their story to the media before the police even got there! Mitchell and PR team were drafted in to clean up their mess. The more aggressive their attack on the PJ- which began that first night! the more I suspected something isn't right here.
t
It's quite normal to involve the media in the uk
-
t
It's quite normal to involve the media in the uk
Is it usual to get your family to criticize the investigating police force within hours though?
Davel regards questions I was talking about the questions that they were asked by various interviewers during the enquiry up till July 2008 and said they couldn't answer them. They never did answer a lot of them even after the police case was shelved . Why not?
All IMO of course