Criminal profiler Lee Rainbow's Report and how it was used in Court

[Redblossom]

DCI, thanks for that Express article. The point is that if someone claims to know what Mr Rainbow said or didnt say, what he wrote or didn't write in a report, accuses lawyers of fabricating things, then newspaper articles are not a source to prove very much at all if anything. Only the original report would do.

[DCI]

DCI, thanks for that Express article. The point is that if someone claims to know what Mr Rainbow said or didnt say, what he wrote or didn't write in a report, accuses lawyers of fabricating things, then newspaper articles are not a source to prove very much at all if anything. Only the original report would do.

Or Amarals, book? 

ETA, how would the Express know it was a 30 page document, if they hadn't been told?

[AnneGuedes]

But the judge did not ask for the report.  Cabrita only used a summary of Lee Rainbow's report on the closing arguments.

How do you know that the judge didn't ask for the report ?
Why didn't Isabel Duarte protest ?
This doesn't sound like being a summary and wasn't presented as one. You'll have noted that the LR's report isn't in the files. Do you know why ?

[Redblossom]

DCI, thanks for that Express article. The point is that if someone claims to know what Mr Rainbow said or didnt say, what he wrote or didn't write in a report, accuses lawyers of fabricating things, then newspaper articles are not a source to prove very much at all if anything. Only the original report would do.

Or Amarals, book? 

ETA, how would the Express know it was a 30 page document, if they hadn't been told?

Its nothing to do with Mr Amarals book or the Express or the Mail. It is all to do withlive journalistic tweets from the court at the time and those tweets said that Mr Rainbow had said there were statement inconsistencies from Gerry Mccann and that he thought the Mccann couple were united in covering up a tragedy. Those tweets reporting from the court can only be called untrue once someone provides evidence they are untrue. The Rainbow report is the only source.

[AnneGuedes]

LR said inconsistencies were compatible with a covering, he didn't say there was one.

[DCI]

DCI, thanks for that Express article. The point is that if someone claims to know what Mr Rainbow said or didnt say, what he wrote or didn't write in a report, accuses lawyers of fabricating things, then newspaper articles are not a source to prove very much at all if anything. Only the original report would do.

Or Amarals, book? 

ETA, how would the Express know it was a 30 page document, if they hadn't been told?

Its nothing to do with Mr Amarals book or the Express or the Mail. It is all to do withlive journalistic tweets from the court at the time and those tweets said that Mr Rainbow had said there were statement inconsistencies from Gerry Mccann and that he thought the Mccann couple were united in covering up a tragedy. Those tweets reporting from the court can only be called untrue once someone provides evidence they are untrue. The Rainbow report is the only source.

Show us the tweets then, Those tweets reporting from the court can only be called true once someone provides evidence they are true.

[Redblossom]

LR said inconsistencies were compatible with a covering, he didn't say there was one.

Thats  the point of profiling, he was doing his job.And then up to police to follow up.

[AnneGuedes]

That is entirely consistent with what the prosecutors said, one of whom expressed the opinion at the first hearing into the injunction against Amaral's book that he considered it "50-50" whether Madeleine is alive or dead.

He clearly would not have said that if he believed the McCanns had done done something sinister to Madeleine ....
Do you know under which circumstances  Magalhães e Menezes said that 50/50 ?

[Redblossom]

DCI, thanks for that Express article. The point is that if someone claims to know what Mr Rainbow said or didnt say, what he wrote or didn't write in a report, accuses lawyers of fabricating things, then newspaper articles are not a source to prove very much at all if anything. Only the original report would do.

Or Amarals, book? 

ETA, how would the Express know it was a 30 page document, if they hadn't been told?

Its nothing to do with Mr Amarals book or the Express or the Mail. It is all to do withlive journalistic tweets from the court at the time and those tweets said that Mr Rainbow had said there were statement inconsistencies from Gerry Mccann and that he thought the Mccann couple were united in covering up a tragedy. Those tweets reporting from the court can only be called untrue once someone provides evidence they are untrue. The Rainbow report is the only source.

Show us the tweets then, Those tweets reporting from the court can only be called true once someone provides evidence they are true.

I will once I find them. not the easiest of things to find. Unless you think a plethora of people imagined them! Or lied they existed.

[DCI]

DCI, thanks for that Express article. The point is that if someone claims to know what Mr Rainbow said or didnt say, what he wrote or didn't write in a report, accuses lawyers of fabricating things, then newspaper articles are not a source to prove very much at all if anything. Only the original report would do.

Or Amarals, book? 

ETA, how would the Express know it was a 30 page document, if they hadn't been told?

Its nothing to do with Mr Amarals book or the Express or the Mail. It is all to do withlive journalistic tweets from the court at the time and those tweets said that Mr Rainbow had said there were statement inconsistencies from Gerry Mccann and that he thought the Mccann couple were united in covering up a tragedy. Those tweets reporting from the court can only be called untrue once someone provides evidence they are untrue. The Rainbow report is the only source.

Yes but, you said Journalists don't count, or is it just the Express and the Mail journo's? Lee Rainbow was not in the court, so they were only relaying what Cabrita was saying.

By the way, were you there?

[Redblossom]

DCI, thanks for that Express article. The point is that if someone claims to know what Mr Rainbow said or didnt say, what he wrote or didn't write in a report, accuses lawyers of fabricating things, then newspaper articles are not a source to prove very much at all if anything. Only the original report would do.

Or Amarals, book? 

ETA, how would the Express know it was a 30 page document, if they hadn't been told?

Its nothing to do with Mr Amarals book or the Express or the Mail. It is all to do withlive journalistic tweets from the court at the time and those tweets said that Mr Rainbow had said there were statement inconsistencies from Gerry Mccann and that he thought the Mccann couple were united in covering up a tragedy. Those tweets reporting from the court can only be called untrue once someone provides evidence they are untrue. The Rainbow report is the only source.

Yes but, you said Journalists don't count, or is it just the Express and the Mail journo's? Lee Rainbow was not in the court, so they were only relaying what Cabrita was saying.

By the way, were you there?

No I was not there. Journalists tweeting instant news from a live scene is different to journalists writing copy which they have licence to embelish.

[AnneGuedes]

LR's quote didn't mention cadaver scent, anyhow, which it this thread's subject.
The fact Isabel Duarte did'nt scream speaks volumes, because she vociferates a lot when she feels like and this is frightening !

[DCI]

LR's quote didn't mention cadaver scent, anyhow, which it this thread's subject.
The fact Isabel Duarte did'nt scream speaks volumes, because she vociferates a lot when she feels like and this is frightening !

Anne, do lawyers usually scream, when the other one is closing arguments ?

If Cabrita had still been Amarals lawyer and had not come back to this subject, I believe Isabel Duarte may well have forced him to.

[Redblossom]

LR's quote didn't mention cadaver scent, anyhow, which it this thread's subject.
The fact Isabel Duarte did'nt scream speaks volumes, because she vociferates a lot when she feels like and this is frightening !

Anne, do lawyers usually scream, when the other one is closing arguments ?

If Cabrita had still been Amarals lawyer and had not come back to this subject, I believe Isabel Duarte may well have forced him to.

Duarte did all the time
 

[DCI]

LR's quote didn't mention cadaver scent, anyhow, which it this thread's subject.
The fact Isabel Duarte did'nt scream speaks volumes, because she vociferates a lot when she feels like and this is frightening !

Anne, do lawyers usually scream, when the other one is closing arguments ?

If Cabrita had still been Amarals lawyer and had not come back to this subject, I believe Isabel Duarte may well have forced him to.

Duarte did all the time
 

And you know this, How? Do you often go to trials Isabel is on?  8-)(--)