Gonçalo Amaral said the Maddie-case has 'ruined' him

[sadie]

I think history has shown us that conspiracies can arise accidentally and that some 'conspirators' don't enter them willingly.

Speaking hypothetically of course.

I wonder how many peeps are involved in a conspiracy to protect the abductors?  In a case like that, I could imagine many wouldn't enter such a conspiracy willingly.

[slartibartfast]

I wonder how many peeps are involved in a conspiracy to protect the abductors?  In a case like that, I could imagine many wouldn't enter such a conspiracy willingly.

Unless it is entered by accident.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Thats not the point SH

The tapas seven have never been mentioned by the press in any detail or interviewed them...apart from one glitch....they were there...but they interviewed loads of others that werent there

maybe that "myth" of "pact of slience" want such a myth.....

I see what you mean Red, but SBF's words related to the fact that the press had never placed the Tapas 7 under much scrutiny. That is a different question from the reasons T7 themselves would have for keeping quiet.

[Lyall]

I wonder how many peeps are involved in a conspiracy to protect the abductors?  In a case like that, I could imagine many wouldn't enter such a conspiracy willingly.

Yep, it's possible, Sadie.

Everything still is in this case.

[Redblossom]

The Laws of PT did not allow them to speak.

well at least four of them did but

Tanner certainly broke the secrecy rule

[Redblossom]

I see what you mean Red, but SBF's words related to the fact that the press had never placed the Tapas 7 under much scrutiny. That is a different question from the reasons T7 themselves would have for keeping quiet.

Yes but your answer to sbhs queston about it being strange the tapas 7 were never interviewed or "assessed" by the press was just to say....isnt it bizarre to think they all colluded...which didnt address his question

[slartibartfast]

Yes but your answer to sbhs queston about it being strange the tapas 7 were never interviewed or "assessed" by the press was just to say....isnt it bizarre to think they all colluded...which didnt address his question

Yes, everyone else who was in the area at the time has been targeted in press stories, Tannerman, Smithman , Murat etc etc. just not the Tapas 7.

[Redblossom]

I wonder how many peeps are involved in a conspiracy to protect the abductors?  In a case like that, I could imagine many wouldn't enter such a conspiracy willingly.

Deleted

Cant be bothered.....

[Eleanor]

What question?  Amaral never dragged them in for questioning, not even in passing.

[Redblossom]

Yes, everyone else who was in the area at the time has been targeted in press stories, Tannerman, Smithman , Murat etc etc. just not the Tapas 7.

its ok to point the finger at some but not at others......not a single interview though with any of them apart from rachel oldfield on radio and tanner on panorama...anyway i dont think diane webster dun it


 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Yes, everyone else who was in the area at the time has been targeted in press stories, Tannerman, Smithman , Murat etc etc. just not the Tapas 7.

Well what I mean is , if the press were intent on pursuing the tapas 7 they could have done so.  They hound people for far lesser reasons than suspecting people of being involved in a cover-up.

Perhaps the press found the idea of a cover-up too unlikely. A good story and a lot of money to be made, so why not go for it?

[Lyall]

Well what I mean is , if the press were intent on pursuing the tapas 7 they could have done so.  They hound people for far lesser reasons than suspecting people of being involved in a cover-up.

Perhaps the press found the idea of a cover-up too unlikely. A good story and a lot of money to be made, so why not go for it?

The press was always actually supportive, despite the narrative that came later at Leveson and in the book. There were lurid front pages that went too far, but elsewhere in the same papers on the same days there was still support. Editorials and columnists were always supportive (you can count on your fingers the number of articles that weren't). The papers never really investigated.

[Estuarine]

Well what I mean is , if the press were intent on pursuing the tapas 7 they could have done so.  They hound people for far lesser reasons than suspecting people of being involved in a cover-up.

Perhaps the press found the idea of a cover-up too unlikely. A good story and a lot of money to be made, so why not go for it?

There is a suggestion in the PJ Files that "The Bogeyman" had JT pegged as a "romancer". Maybe others did too and figured it wasn't good copy like you said.

[Redblossom]

Well what I mean is , if the press were intent on pursuing the tapas 7 they could have done so.  They hound people for far lesser reasons than suspecting people of being involved in a cover-up.

Perhaps the press found the idea of a cover-up too unlikely. A good story and a lot of money to be made, so why not go for it?

But why include the idea of a cover up in the first place anyway? Why didnt the press ask who are the tapas  7?

They have done it for all and sundry in many cases....

[Lyall]

It ain't over until the fat person of interest sings