Are The Tabloids Running Scared?

[Erngath]

If by that you mean me (I'm a sceptical person, but I certainly don't see myself as a sceptic as defined by many supporters), I don't know if CB is involved or not.

As to evidence he should have enough to prove that his statements are true before he makes them. By his own admission he hasn't got that evidence.

I don't.know if he.is involved in Madeleine`s abduction but he does present as someone who is much more likely to  be than Madeleine`s own parents.
In my opinion

[Erngath]

Posts completed for the day.
Many more than usual.
Going out to meet up with our youngest son and family for an early dinner in a restaurant celebrating his birthday.
The only place we can meet.
Fortunately they are a family of four......any more and they would be left behind.
We had this booked........and as all pubs and restaurants shut tomorrow.......again......going to enjoy.
Such is life at the moment.
Have a nice evening all.

[Brietta]

What else can it be but a thin thread, imo he was hoping for more -  started the ball rolling and it has obviously stopped.

It seems to me everything walters says has to be taken as proof he has something ...it isn't.

GA is slated by some for doing the exact same as what CWH is doing.

GA speaks from documented police files....What is Wolters speaking from imo uncorroborated evidence.

True he has used police files from the botched investigation which he led to malign the McCanns over a period of years and until the present, day but these were overwritten when proper diligences were introduced to the case by an efficient team who had to take over as a result of his incompetence.
That Policia Judiciaria team examined the evidence and concluded there was none which supported any suspicion against Kate and Gerry.

Quite incomprehensible why the man who was sacked because of his loose tongue to a journalist and who wasted precious time vilifying Madeleine's parents in leaks to the tabloids throughout his botched investigation has become the cheer leader for (scapegoat) Brueckner.

No I don't think the tabloids are running scared and most definitely not as far as Brueckner is concerned.  But it does draw into contrast the different behaviours employed by Amaral against Madeleine's parents and his defence of rapist and paedophile Brueckner.

Quite inexplicable to me.

[Brietta]

In my opinion a constant theme has been that the McCanns should be believed because there's nothing in their past which suggests they might be guilty of wrongdoing.

At the same time Amaral's conviction for perjury has been used to suggest he is a liar and therefore should not be believed.

Now we have a pair of criminals accusing another criminal of wrongdoing, but being believed by some. I think that's inconsistent and illogical.

It is not a suggestion - it is a fact that Amaral is a convicted liar.

perjury
/ˈpəːdʒ(ə)ri/

nounLAW
the offence of wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath.
"he claimed two witnesses at his trial had committed perjury"
Similar:
lying under oath - violation of an oath - forswearing oneself - making false statements - wilful falsehood - mendacity.

[The General]

It is not a suggestion - it is a fact that Amaral is a convicted liar.

perjury
/ˈpəːdʒ(ə)ri/

nounLAW
the offence of wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath.
"he claimed two witnesses at his trial had committed perjury"
Similar:
lying under oath - violation of an oath - forswearing oneself - making false statements - wilful falsehood - mendacity.

Who cares? I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd rather he backed his men as opposed to throwing them under the wagon. None of us know what they've collectively been through. They've probably seen more depravity in a day's police work than we see in a lifetime.
He still has their respect and trust, even to this day no doubt, and in law enforcement or the military there's few things more important.
Perjury? Pffft, that's a token gesture. Move along.

[jassi]

Who cares? I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd rather he backed his men as opposed to throwing them under the wagon. None of us know what they've collectively been through. They've probably seen more depravity in a day's police work than we see in a lifetime.
He still has their respect and trust, even to this day no doubt, and in law enforcement or the military there's few things more important.
Perjury? Pffft, that's a token gesture. Move along.

 

[faithlilly]

I don't.
Why should I?

You don’t of course have to but it would only be manners when other members answer your queries.

[faithlilly]

And therein lies your problem.
Just because you have not seen any evidence does not mean there is none.

Of course it doesn’t but as we haven’t seen any there really is nothing to say Brueckner is involved.

[G-Unit]

True he has used police files from the botched investigation which he led to malign the McCanns over a period of years and until the present, day but these were overwritten when proper diligences were introduced to the case by an efficient team who had to take over as a result of his incompetence.
That Policia Judiciaria team examined the evidence and concluded there was none which supported any suspicion against Kate and Gerry.

Quite incomprehensible why the man who was sacked because of his loose tongue to a journalist and who wasted precious time vilifying Madeleine's parents in leaks to the tabloids throughout his botched investigation has become the cheer leader for (scapegoat) Brueckner.

No I don't think the tabloids are running scared and most definitely not as far as Brueckner is concerned.  But it does draw into contrast the different behaviours employed by Amaral against Madeleine's parents and his defence of rapist and paedophile Brueckner.

Quite inexplicable to me.

There's no need for anyone to defend Brueckner, because there's no known evidence connecting him to Madeleine McCann.

[kizzy]

True he has used police files from the botched investigation which he led to malign the McCanns over a period of years and until the present, day but these were overwritten when proper diligences were introduced to the case by an efficient team who had to take over as a result of his incompetence.
That Policia Judiciaria team examined the evidence and concluded there was none which supported any suspicion against Kate and Gerry.

Quite incomprehensible why the man who was sacked because of his loose tongue to a journalist and who wasted precious time vilifying Madeleine's parents in leaks to the tabloids throughout his botched investigation has become the cheer leader for (scapegoat) Brueckner.

No I don't think the tabloids are running scared and most definitely not as far as Brueckner is concerned.  But it does draw into contrast the different behaviours employed by Amaral against Madeleine's parents and his defence of rapist and paedophile Brueckner.

Quite inexplicable to me.

Quite incomprehensible why the man who was sacked because of his loose tongue to a journalist and who wasted precious time vilifying Madeleine's parents in leaks to the tabloids throughout his botched investigation


Dont be too sure that HCW wont turn out just the same ......as your words IMO

[kizzy]

Who cares? I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd rather he backed his men as opposed to throwing them under the wagon. None of us know what they've collectively been through. They've probably seen more depravity in a day's police work than we see in a lifetime.
He still has their respect and trust, even to this day no doubt, and in law enforcement or the military there's few things more important.
Perjury? Pffft, that's a token gesture. Move along.

 

[barrier]

Then at least arrest and question Brueckner.

This thing about keeping his powder dry is absolute nonsense.

I have never seen a criminal case conducted in this way and I hope I never will again.

John Canaan is the chief suspect in the Suzi Lamplugh case,the police have even questioned him,yet with out the evidence to prosecute,Wolters can't even get that far.

[Brietta]

Whatever Wolters was doing he seems to have stopped. What he has done in my opinion is to publicly accuse someone of murder, despite admitting he hasn't enough evidence to lay charges against them.

I can just imagine the fuss if José de Magalhaes e Menezes had publicly accused the McCanns of staging an abduction while admitting he didn't have enough evidence to charge them.

I can just imagine the fuss if José de Magalhaes e Menezes had publicly accused the McCanns of staging an abduction while admitting he didn't have enough evidence to charge them.      Gunit


Hmmmm ~ didn't you notice that is precisely what Amaral has been doing relentlessly for over thirteen years.  Even writing a book and having a video made just to reinforce his point.

The tabloids printed lies against the McCanns as though they were the truth.  But just because Brueckner has not received the scathing press they suffered does not signal to me that anyone is running scared.
Perhaps the tabloids are sensibly waiting for the next stage in revelations yet to come.

[sadie]

Who cares? I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd rather he backed his men as opposed to throwing them under the wagon. None of us know what they've collectively been through. They've probably seen more depravity in a day's police work than we see in a lifetime.
He still has their respect and trust, even to this day no doubt, and in law enforcement or the military there's few things more important.
Perjury? Pffft, that's a token gesture. Move along.

You are joking of course. 
1.  He was happy to undermine The Cipriano case by telling lies.   To try and get them a longer jail sentence.   But that is OK by you, is it?   

2.  Oh and then there was an assortment of lies in his "O Enigma writings" as pointed out at the time. 

3.  And there was the lie told to Gerry on the day that he and Kate were taken in for separate questioning.   Gerry knew that it was a total lie and it must have been at that stage Gerry realised that they were definitely being stitched up.

4.  Various  other lies blaming the Mccanns  with absolutely no proof, which I am sure other posters will be able to detail

5.  And of course, the Courts found him out with lies that criminalized him.  Deliberate PERJURY and by a senior PJ Officer.  Disgusting.

6.  And I ask myself, why did he authorise the changing of Processos 809 which was compiled by PJ officers on the spot up in Porto.  He negated that in order to produce another Processos 807-808, which was full of dis/misinformation.   The original Processos 809 was about a man (Anglo-Portuguese(?)), who took a taxi from near Campanha (Porto) railway station carrying a little girl who appeared to be sleeping at mid-day.   This was on the morning of the 4th May 2007.   The taxi driver dropped them off near ?79 Rua Andre de Castro, in Vila Nova de Gaia, also Porto, but on the other side of the river Douro.   

So much detail was changed in the later 808-809 807-808 Processos and much of it was wrong..   I went there and checked it out.   I think that S.I.L also has done some checking and found that what I said was correct.  I have seen it written by him somewhere, maybe on here when I was in hospital, or maybe on his blog.  It was good to see him agreeing with me.
Amaral even changed the railway station from Campanha in Porto to the railway station in Vila Nova de Gaia, also Porto.   Why did he do this?  FGS the Taxi driver knew which station he was  picked up at.

I think I counted 5 facts that he altered from the original.  Why?

7.  Then there were the sightings up near Porto/ Giumares areas.  Some of these he 'disallowed'. with excuses such as: 'Given by an old lady' etc.

8.  Why weren't the multiple sightings from Malta/ Gozo given any publicity ? 
There were 29 [Twenty Nine!] sightings in all, but only people who delved into that pathway, really deeply, found them.  I initially only came across them from trying to puzzle out the writing and runes from Matt James.   He mentioned them on his site.   Why didn't Amaral, as far as I know, investigate them at all?  I never heard him mention them and 29 of them !

Sorry to keep going on Gen (Sir) but do you still find Amaral a truthful man that you can trust?


I just can't understand why he ignored things that he should have delved into and why he changed Processos


Definitely NOT a man to be trusted IMO based upon these facts.

One last thing:  You say that he has his mens respect and trust ... hahahah!   
His wife publicly complained that his officers did not give him the usual send off after his last day at the PJ Office.   I wonder why?   


All the above is either my opinion or fact.  Most is fact

[G-Unit]

I can just imagine the fuss if José de Magalhaes e Menezes had publicly accused the McCanns of staging an abduction while admitting he didn't have enough evidence to charge them.      Gunit


Hmmmm ~ didn't you notice that is precisely what Amaral has been doing relentlessly for over thirteen years.  Even writing a book and having a video made just to reinforce his point.

The tabloids printed lies against the McCanns as though they were the truth.  But just because Brueckner has not received the scathing press they suffered does not signal to me that anyone is running scared.
Perhaps the tabloids are sensibly waiting for the next stage in revelations yet to come.

Precisely. Amaral has been relentlessly attacked for over thirteen years too. Wolters has less evidence to support his accusations than Amaral had, but he's lauded and believed. That's hypocritical imo.