The tapas group and the 'reconstitution' that was never to take place.

[sadie]

Perhaps you could remove the word reconstruction from the title of this thread if it is now a proscribed word then.


Done 
Edit by editor.

This thread is hilarious. 

It is Johns thread and in the title HE called it "reconstruction".  He then ticked Alfred off for using the word "recontruction" and said he must use the word "reconstitution"

Reconstitution is obviously a mis-translation, cos if it aint then some dirty hokey pokey was going on  .... in other words it was about processing what happened, in an unhealthy way, to presumably abide to Amarals agenda?



Are you totally sure that we should call it a reconstitution John? 

[faithlilly]

John tells us that the Portuguese refer to it as a reconstitution. 
That is hilarious cos it implies changing and the addition of stuff.... an imitation.

Reconstruction means rebuilding as it was.



Personally I NEVER buy reconstituted ham, cos it is different and little like the real mccoy.  But I can reconstruct a very nice, honest and true, ham sandwich from little bits of unadulterated ham simply placed together between buttered bread slices.

I wonder if that is what the whole business was about ?  To gather stuff and change it to suit Amarals agenda?
Maybe that is why Amaral calls it reconstituted?

Amaral was not the coordinator at the time of the reconstitution request, Rebelo was.

More myth making sadie ?

[John]

That's all very well but doesn't address the question.  It's all very well saying a detective knows the difference between a lie and a mistake but it would need actual evidence to prove that it was a lie and not a mistake to make any difference to anything.  So, how would a "reconstitution" prove any supposed lies told?  How could it prove anything at all, how in fact could it prove the McCanns' innocence?

A reconstitution is about establishing the facts and ironing out misunderstandings.

[Lyall]

That's all very well but doesn't address the question.  It's all very well saying a detective knows the difference between a lie and a mistake but it would need actual evidence to prove that it was a lie and not a mistake to make any difference to anything.  So, how would a "reconstitution" prove any supposed lies told?  How could it prove anything at all, how in fact could it prove the McCanns' innocence?

You're all contradicting yourselves on this issue: one minute you're saying the McCanns were happy to go back to do it, and then you're giving all sorts of reasons why it was a waste of time anyway or it was a trap. You can't have it both ways.

[sadie]

The final decision with regard to the earlier reconstruction lay with Amaral's superiors not Amaral.

And how do YOU know that Faith?

Why wasn't it done at the time, when memories were fresh?

[Lyall]

And how do YOU know that Faith?

Why wasn't it done at the time, when memories were fresh?

TV helicopters and disagreement over the importance of JT's sighting.

[John]

This thread is hilarious. 

It is Johns thread and in the title HE called it "reconstruction".  He then ticked Alfred off for using the word "recontruction" and said he must use the word "reconstitution"

Reconstitution is obviously a mis-translation, cos if it aint then some dirty hokey pokey was going on  .... in other words it was about processing what happened, in an unhealthy way, to presumably abide to Amarals agenda?



Are you totally sure that we should call it a reconstitution John?

A simple check of online dictionaries reveals reconstitution as the appropriate definition for a crime scene reenactment.

[Miss Taken Identity]

Or to demonstrate that they hadn't. Clarification is what they were searching for.

That is exactly what they were looking for!  What people fail to realize or understand i, there are two sides to this story. The McCanns and the PJ who had to deal with the initial situation.

The police were suspicious of several things, importantly the parents behavior, and the initial timeline situation. The police had probably,quite rightly, dismissed the fact that the Tapas had a well planned- orginised-timed checking procedure. ( which is what was being implied by K and M in the beginning)  They were being asked awkward questions, but so what, they needed to be asked why not just say there and then we just checked every so often. ( this would have not been well received by the public- preserving reputations even at this early stage). That is why to this day we ware told  the children were checked every 15/20 mins- depends on who is telling the story ofcourse.

And and as someone else has mentioned, why do the McCanns think they have the right to direct the investigation? and more importantly WHY would they? Hmm even that sparks off suspicion.

The McCanns wanted a crime watch reconstruction to 'help jog memories of an abductor scenario.  The police wanted to find out where there was an opportunity for an abductor- hence ask the tapas to do what they did that night to see if there was an opportunity and a stranger abduction from the apartment was a plausable lead to be further investigated.

As John has mentioned- it beggers belief they chose NOT to co operate. Thus causing suspicion and probably bad press.


Snip
«Portuguese Journalist: A reconstruction. If you volunteer to do a reconstruction wouldn't that open the case?

Gerry McCann: We want to create information that will lead us to us helping find Madeleine.

Portuguese Journalist: That will help Madeleine. Don't you think so?

Gerry McCann: Well if it does then, you know, we will participate.

Portuguese Journalist: You are in Lisbon. You could take that step today. Ask for the case to be reopened and do a reconstruction with your friends.

Gerry McCann: We are going round in circles. We would be more than happy for the case to be reopened.»

Excerpt from: Exclusive Video: McCanns Press Conference, February 12, 2010

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com

[sadie]

The final decision with regard to the earlier reconstruction lay with Amaral's superiors not Amaral.

Btw, Faith

You are going against Johns new rule

Reconstitued NOT reconstructed 




I like reconstuted better than reconstructed, because that is what I think it was all about
To attempt to get the bits together then shift them around and add bits in .... and Voila, it is PROVEN beyond doubt that The Mccanns Dunnit
RECONSTITUED, like bad ham.


Cunning ploy if I am right.

[Alfred R Jones]

A reconstitution is about establishing the facts and ironing out misunderstandings.

Still not answering the question though are you?  How would it uncover lies and prove innocence?  Answer - it would and it can't.

[Alfred R Jones]

You're all contradicting yourselves on this issue: one minute you're saying the McCanns were happy to go back to do it, and then you're giving all sorts of reasons why it was a waste of time anyway or it was a trap. You can't have it both ways.

As far as I was aware there is only one of me and I am speaking for myself, not the McCanns or anyone else.  The McCanns may very well have been happy to go back and do the "reconstitution" but it certainly would not have uncovered any lies or proven their innocence.  See, I can have it both ways!

[John]

Still not answering the question though are you?  How would it uncover lies and prove innocence?  Answer - it would and it can't.

By getting those involved to reenact events together, discrepancies are revealed.

[faithlilly]

Btw, Faith

You are going against Johns new rule

Reconstitued NOT reconstructed 




I like reconstuted better than reconstructed, because that is what I think it was all about
To attempt to get the bits together then shift them around and add bits in .... and Voila, it is PROVEN beyond doubt that The Mccanns Dunnit
RECONSTITUED, like bad ham.


Cunning ploy if I am right.

Then it must have been Rebelo's cunning plan. Is that what you are claiming sadie ?

[Lyall]

As far as I was aware there is only one of me and I am speaking for myself, not the McCanns or anyone else.  The McCanns may very well have been happy to go back and do the "reconstitution" but it certainly would not have uncovered any lies or proven their innocence.  See, I can have it both ways!

Think of 'prove their innocence' more as demonstrate it. It was an opportunity.

[DCI]

TV helicopters and disagreement over the importance of JT's sighting.

Nothing to do with JT sighting Lyall.

Amaral in his book says

The reconstruction was never to take place. The reasons put forward to justify that decision - in spite of opinions to the contrary - are multiple. There are lots of holiday-makers at this time and sealing off the perimeter would ruin their stay; the airspace would have to be closed; the hotel complex would be overrun with hordes of journalists; people might think that the parents and their friends were suspects and, of course, the field mustn't be left open for that kind of deliberation. For all that, a more discreet reconstruction, even partial, with only the couple present, might provide useful information. No a priori judgment is implied, quite the contrary. It's quite simply the co-operation that we have the right to expect on the part of parents faced with such a situation.