Netflix launches new 8-part documentary about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

[G-Unit]

I don't know what Freud was told about the dogs but I know what Kate McCann said his response was. His response was, in my opinion, designed to belittle the dog's alerts. It's the type of thing people say to reassure someone in my opinion.

[Robittybob1]

There is a time for everything.   --- it is a time to stop.

[G-Unit]

so you dont object to the lies of never been wrong in 200 cases...100 record...he wasnt belittling but telling the truth

I'm talking about why Freud seemed to think the McCanns needed reassurance. Were they worried about the dogs? They knew, of course, that the PJ suspected them. That had been clear since their encounter with Encarnacao and Neves on 8th August. Now they had had it confirmed; they were to be made arguido.

[Mr Gray]

I'm talking about why Freud seemed to think the McCanns needed reassurance. Were they worried about the dogs? They knew, of course, that the PJ suspected them. That had been clear since their encounter with Encarnacao and Neves on 8th August. Now they had had it confirmed; they were to be made arguido.

Of course they needed reassurance... What's wrong with that

[G-Unit]

Of course they needed reassurance... What's wrong with that

About the dogs in particular?

[Mr Gray]

About the dogs in particular?

I don't see why you think it's so significant.... With the PJ falsely promoting the dogs as being infallible... Some balance and truth was needed

[Vertigo Swirl]

When the deception comes with full admission, like say, "We'd never lied about anything – not to the police, not to the media, not to anyone else. BUT NOW we found ourselves in one of those tricky situations where we just didn't seem to have a choice... As it happened, Gerry had a mild stomach upset which we used as an excuse to postpone the trip."
That is a clear admission of deception in anyone's book, even Davel's!

Here's my problem:
Now knowing as I do, that they have admitted they were prepared to deceive everyone about things when they were in tricky situations, how can we know they never done it more than this once? Is the jemmied shutter an innocent discrepancy for example? Because it was none of the sort. How can we know if that was an innocent discrepancy by four people who all relayed identical discrepancies, or a deception that the McCanns deliberately got them to innocently pass on to us because they were 'in another tricky situation'?
   
If there is no way for Peter Hyatt to know when they're lying, how have the supporters on here been able to know if the jemmied shutter was an innocent discrepancy, or a deliberate deception on the part of the parents because they were in another tricky situation?

It’s logical to assume the McCanns did not fake the shutter and window being open a) because it’s not the first thing you’d think to do if you believed your child may have left the building under her own steam and b) because if you were faking it by staging a break in you wouldn’t close the window again before the police arrived. LOGIC. 

[G-Unit]

I don't see why you think it's so significant.... With the PJ falsely promoting the dogs as being infallible... Some balance and truth was needed

Were the PJ promoting the dogs as infallible in early Septemver 2007?  Not by the looks of VS's cite. Olegario Sousa
seemed to be very cautious about what he said.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560443/Madeleine-sniffer-dogs-detect-scent-of-body.html

[John]

john and others are assuming the maccanns told CF about the dogs...why would they have to...it wa scommon knowledge courtesy of the breach of judicial secrecy by the pj

It is self-evident from Kate's own account of what occurred that CF was unaware of what had taken place with the dogs until the McCanns enlightened him.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Is thinking to delete your cell phone data a logical thing to think of when you're daughter goes missing?
Gerry tampering with the shutter was anything but logical if one believed, as he claims he did, that an abductor had entered or exited the apartment via the missing child's bedroom window, was it? Contaminating the crime scene was completely ILLOGICAL for a man with a vast understanding of biological science, IMO.

I fail to see what's logical about the content of your answer, in light of the facts.

Yes deleting call phone data is logical if your phone memory is near capacity and you are expecting a high volume of texts and messages.  As for Gerry “tampering “ with the shutter, the logical explanation is he was checking to see if and how the shutter had been lifted, it’s a natural reaction to a virtually incomprehensible situation, to try and make sense of it, and to try and get some clarity about events.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It is self-evident from Kate's own account of what occurred that CF was unaware of what had taken place with the dogs until the McCanns enlightened him.

No it is not self-evident.  Freud was fully aware of what was going on from media reports which is why he reached out to them in the first place.  The idea that he, by now a friend of the McCanns, stopped being aware of media stories about the case including the dog alerts three weeks earlier is quite ludicrous.  IMO.  Why are you sticking up for Faithlilly’s false accusation?

[John]

No it is not self-evident.  Freud was fully aware of what was going on from media reports which is why he reached out to them in the first place.  The idea that he, by now a friend of the McCanns, stopped being aware of media stories about the case including the dog alerts three weeks earlier is quite ludicrous.  IMO.  Why are you sticking up for Faithlilly’s false accusation?

I think you should read Kate's comments in her book. The press had only minimal information about the dog deployments so there was no way Freud would have known the whole story.

From Madeleine by Kate McCann:

"When he  heard  about  the  dogs,  he  remarked  laconicaly, ‘So  what  are  they  going  to  do?  Put  them  on  the stand?  One  bark  for  yes,  two  for  no?’  He  was  right, of  course;  it  was  ridiculous."

This comment was in the present tense, Freud only learned about the dog horrors from the McCanns on that visit just before they were made arguidos. There is no other possible interpretation of Kate's comments. Faith is correct to state that the McCanns breached judicial secrecy (albeit a minor breach), I believe it is she (Faith) who is owed the apology and Rob too for the criticism he has had to put up with this evening.


There's more too. The next paragraph also suggests that the McCanns had discussed the case with Freud and sought his advice.

"A couple  of  hours  later,  fortified  by  our  brandies  (it was  my  first-ever  taste  of  the  stuff),  some  useful snippets  of  advice  and  several  amusing  anecdotes, we  left  our  friend  feeling  quite  a  bit  better  than  we had  when we’d  arrived."

[Robittybob1]

What are the rules of judicial secrecy?  We are asking whether Kate broke the rules but has anyone defined  what it means yet?

"The Secrecy of Justice rule applies only during the investigation of the crime. Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code states that all parties to the investigation are bound by a duty of secrecy."
https://www.portugalresident.com/2007/05/16/the-rule-of-secrecy-of-justice-explained/

I would find it odd if a suspect in a case is not allowed to talk about what has happened to another friend, or family or to a lawyer.

[John]

What are the rules of judicial secrecy?  We are asking whether Kate broke the rules but has anyone defined  what it means yet?

"The Secrecy of Justice rule applies only during the investigation of the crime. Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code states that all parties to the investigation are bound by a duty of secrecy."
https://www.portugalresident.com/2007/05/16/the-rule-of-secrecy-of-justice-explained/

I would find it odd if a suspect in a case is not allowed to talk about what has happened to another friend, or family or to a lawyer.

Quite simply, anyone involved in the investigation should not be revealing information related to said investigation to outsiders.

[G-Unit]

No it is not self-evident.  Freud was fully aware of what was going on from media reports which is why he reached out to them in the first place.  The idea that he, by now a friend of the McCanns, stopped being aware of media stories about the case including the dog alerts three weeks earlier is quite ludicrous.  IMO.  Why are you sticking up for Faithlilly’s false accusation?

Kate McCann tells us 'when he heard about the dogs he remarked' His remaks were clearly in answer to what he heard. She doesn't tell us what he heard, but whatever it was he heard it from one of the two people speaking to him at the time.