Kate was interviewed by the police on just two occasions

[icabodcrane]

Once,  on the 4th of May 2007,   and then again on the 6/7th of September 20007 ( during which she refused to tell the police anything about what happened that night

There had been an interview arranged for Kate on the 11th of May,  but that was cancelled

Isn't that remarkable  ? 

[faithlilly]

Once,  on the 4th of May 2007,   and then again on the 6/7th of September 20007 ( during which she refused to tell the police anything about what happened that night

There had been an interview arranged for Kate on the 11th of May,  but that was cancelled

Isn't that remarkable  ?

The interview on the 4th of May Gerry was allowed to sit in on. The first day of the arguido interviews Kate answered the PJ's questions, the second day, which concentrated on events after her check, she didn't .

[Rachel Granada]

If that is so "incriminating" then why were they never even arrested, never mind charged or convicted of anything?

[Rachel Granada]

If that is so "incriminating" then why were they never even arrested, never mind charged or convicted of anything?

Because the police don't charge until they have enough evidence to secure a conviction, despite what some people on here choose to believe.  They haven't been charged.  The word "yet" may well feature somewhere prominently in that statement if it was to be more accurate, however.

Exactly.  They haven't been charged... and I believe in innocent until proven guilty.  So do you think that the PJ will glean further evidence, C Edwards?

[C.Edwards]

If that is so "incriminating" then why were they never even arrested, never mind charged or convicted of anything?

Because the police don't charge until they have enough evidence to secure a conviction, despite what some people on here choose to believe.  They haven't been charged.  The word "yet" may well feature somewhere prominently in that statement if it was to be more accurate, however.

Exactly.  They haven't been charged... and I believe in innocent until proven guilty.  So do you think that the PJ will glean further evidence, C Edwards?

Probably not, no.  The chance has probably been lost now.  Had the McCanns and their friends been forced to do the reconstruction as requested by the police, I think they would have managed to prove the timelines were impossible to recreate as a starting point and that may have been the crucial starting point.  That will almost certainly not happen now and the chances are there will only be progress in this case now if someone in the know talks.  That's unlikely to happen also.

It's 95% certain to me, if not more, that the McCanns will never be charged with anything and yet I live in hope. :-)

[debunker]

If that is so "incriminating" then why were they never even arrested, never mind charged or convicted of anything?

Because the police don't charge until they have enough evidence to secure a conviction, despite what some people on here choose to believe.  They haven't been charged.  The word "yet" may well feature somewhere prominently in that statement if it was to be more accurate, however.

Exactly.  They haven't been charged... and I believe in innocent until proven guilty.  So do you think that the PJ will glean further evidence, C Edwards?

Probably not, no.  The chance has probably been lost now.  Had the McCanns and their friends been forced to do the reconstruction as requested by the police, I think they would have managed to prove the timelines were impossible to recreate as a starting point and that may have been the crucial starting point.  That will almost certainly not happen now and the chances are there will only be progress in this case now if someone in the know talks.  That's unlikely to happen also.



It's 95% certain to me, if not more, that the McCanns will never be charged with anything and yet I live in hope. :-)

There is no mechanism to force a full reconstruction. It is almost impossible to think of a source of further evidence.

I hope that the McCanns are never charged unless really convincing evidence is produced.

[Rachel Granada]

If that is so "incriminating" then why were they never even arrested, never mind charged or convicted of anything?

Because the police don't charge until they have enough evidence to secure a conviction, despite what some people on here choose to believe.  They haven't been charged.  The word "yet" may well feature somewhere prominently in that statement if it was to be more accurate, however.

Exactly.  They haven't been charged... and I believe in innocent until proven guilty.  So do you think that the PJ will glean further evidence, C Edwards?

Probably not, no.  The chance has probably been lost now.  Had the McCanns and their friends been forced to do the reconstruction as requested by the police, I think they would have managed to prove the timelines were impossible to recreate as a starting point and that may have been the crucial starting point.  That will almost certainly not happen now and the chances are there will only be progress in this case now if someone in the know talks.  That's unlikely to happen also.

It's 95% certain to me, if not more, that the McCanns will never be charged with anything and yet I live in hope. :-)

Please feel free to correct me, CEdwards, but I was under the impression that the holiday party were quite willing to do a recon soon after the event but the PJ put the brakes on it due to some nonsense about "having to close the airspace".  Again, please correct me if I am wrong.  And by the time the holiday party were requested to return in 2008 for a recon it had become rather clear to them that the PJ  were trying to fit Kate and Gerry McCann up on the back of their failure to correctly interpret the forensics.  So I don't blame any of the holiday party for saying no.

[C.Edwards]

Please feel free to correct me, CEdwards, but I was under the impression that the holiday party were quite willing to do a recon soon after the event but the PJ put the brakes on it due to some nonsense about "having to close the airspace".  Again, please correct me if I am wrong.  And by the time the holiday party were requested to return in 2008 for a recon it had become rather clear to them that the PJ  were trying to fit Kate and Gerry McCann up on the back of their failure to correctly interpret the forensics.  So I don't blame any of the holiday party for saying no.

I'm sorry, I can't agree.  I think it's utterly outrageous that the McCanns and their friends collectively refused to do the reconstruction a year later.  If they were convinced of their innocence then they would have nothing to hide and could have cooperated fully. Fears of Portuguese "fitting up" in such a high profile case are weasel words in my opinion.

[debunker]

Please feel free to correct me, CEdwards, but I was under the impression that the holiday party were quite willing to do a recon soon after the event but the PJ put the brakes on it due to some nonsense about "having to close the airspace".  Again, please correct me if I am wrong.  And by the time the holiday party were requested to return in 2008 for a recon it had become rather clear to them that the PJ  were trying to fit Kate and Gerry McCann up on the back of their failure to correctly interpret the forensics.  So I don't blame any of the holiday party for saying no.

I'm sorry, I can't agree.  I think it's utterly outrageous that the McCanns and their friends collectively refused to do the reconstruction a year later.  If they were convinced of their innocence then they would have nothing to hide and could have cooperated fully. Fears of
Portuguese "fitting up" in such a high profile case are weasel words in my opinion.

Important phrase "in my opinion"- no more valuable than any other opinion.

[Rachel Granada]

Please feel free to correct me, CEdwards, but I was under the impression that the holiday party were quite willing to do a recon soon after the event but the PJ put the brakes on it due to some nonsense about "having to close the airspace".  Again, please correct me if I am wrong.  And by the time the holiday party were requested to return in 2008 for a recon it had become rather clear to them that the PJ  were trying to fit Kate and Gerry McCann up on the back of their failure to correctly interpret the forensics.  So I don't blame any of the holiday party for saying no.

I'm sorry, I can't agree.  I think it's utterly outrageous that the McCanns and their friends collectively refused to do the reconstruction a year later.  If they were convinced of their innocence then they would have nothing to hide and could have cooperated fully. Fears of Portuguese "fitting up" in such a high profile case are weasel words in my opinion.

Fears of Portuguese fitting up.... oh dear! How's about the young German chap who was beaten senseless by the PT Police for the terrible crime of not having a tram ticket? Or the railway worker who was beaten up by the PJ in 2000 (case was finalised this year... was it not Vitor TAVARES de Almeida convicted?). Michael Cook.  Leonor Cipriano.  I'm not surprised that the British Ambassador and the UK Government stepped in straight away. Portugal is a third world country when it comes to police brutality. 

[icabodcrane]

Please feel free to correct me, CEdwards, but I was under the impression that the holiday party were quite willing to do a recon soon after the event but the PJ put the brakes on it due to some nonsense about "having to close the airspace".  Again, please correct me if I am wrong.  And by the time the holiday party were requested to return in 2008 for a recon it had become rather clear to them that the PJ  were trying to fit Kate and Gerry McCann up on the back of their failure to correctly interpret the forensics.  So I don't blame any of the holiday party for saying no.

I'm sorry, I can't agree.  I think it's utterly outrageous that the McCanns and their friends collectively refused to do the reconstruction a year later.  If they were convinced of their innocence then they would have nothing to hide and could have cooperated fully. Fears of Portuguese "fitting up" in such a high profile case are weasel words in my opinion.

 The idea that  the tapas 9  fully cooperated with the police is  another myth in this case
 
Take the subject of this thread,  as a case point

Kate McCann was due a second police interview on the 11th of May  ... she did not attend,  having Alan Pike  ( trauma psychologist )  postpone it for her due to  'concerns for her wellbeing'

In her book Kate McCann says,  of the police interview she failed to attend :  ...  "The PJ  couldn't have considered it all that important:  it was 6 September before I was interviewd again"

What I don't understand is why Kate,  herself,  didn't think it was  'important'  for her to give the police as much information as possible.

If she felt unwell on the 11th of May,  or too fragile  to endure a police interview,  why didn't she  follow it up as soon as she  did  feel able  (  this was just a week after Madeleine disappeared remember,  so there was no question of them feeling under threat at that point  )

I should mention that the  fragility that prevented Kate from attending her  May 11th interview with the police was not so incapacitating  that she couldn't hold meetings,  that very day,   with a Barrister and paralegal  who had flown in from Leicester

[C.Edwards]

The idea that  the tapas 9  fully cooperated with the police is  another myth in this case
 
Take the subject of this thread,  as a case point

Kate McCann was due a second police interview on the 11th of May  ... she did not attend,  having Alan Pike  ( trauma psychologist )  postpone it for her due to  'concerns for her wellbeing'

In her book Kate McCann says,  of the police interview she failed to attend :  ...  "The PJ  couldn't have considered it all that important:  it was 6 September before I was interviewd again"

What I don't understand is why Kate,  herself,  didn't think it was  'important'  for her to give the police as much information as possible.

If she felt unwell on the 11th of May,  or too fragile  to endure a police interview,  why didn't she  follow it up as soon as she  did  feel able  (  this was just a week after Madeleine disappeared remember,  so there was no question of them feeling under threat at that point  )

I should mention that the  fragility that prevented Kate from attending her  May 11th interview with the police was not so incapacitating  that she couldn't hold meetings,  that very day,   with a Barrister and paralegal  who had flown in from Leicester

I think that the McCann supporters tend to fall back on "well why should they cooperate with the police when they're doing and awful job/stitching the McCanns up" once it's pointed out that they weren't cooperating in any sense of the word according to most sane people.

[Rachel Granada]

Is anyone going to address the police brutality issues that I aired earlier in this thread? The UK Embassy and Government will have stepped in quickly in the McCann case, as they will have been fully aware of all the people that the PJ beat up. 

[Rachel Granada]

Exactly- meaningless drivel.

You're definitely the master of me there, I admit it.  World class driveller and no mistake ;-)

Meaningless drivel.

Well this is a new and interesting turn of style for master debater debunker! Not content with flitting from thread to thread squealing "cite" and "[ censored word ]" at every opportunity, we're now to be treated to a subjective opinion-based response to every word.  I look forward to such classics as "meaningless drivel" and "more meaningless drivel" coming to a thread near us soon!

You're a tiresome prat masquerading as a neutral fencesitter. You seem to be of the mistaken opinion that you hold some level of importance on this board as your obviously tedious existence leads you to cling to this forum virtually 24/7 spouting hypocritical nonsense and trying to pass it off as thoughtful insight.

Do carry on. I'm sure you have your army of admirers simply moist with anticipation.

Posts of this nature are shrinking your credibility on this forum, C Edwards.

[Rachel Granada]

This is a civil and intelligent forum.  Calling someone a "tedious twerp"  or "tiresome pratt" and other insults does your credibility no favours.