Pick any sentence from Kate's book.

[ShiningInLuz]

That one would have been extremely useful (if working), as it would have shown the various comings & goings, together with an accurate time line.

The odds are stacked heavily against that.

The Estrela does not have a single entrance point, monitored by a single CCTV.  It has I think 9 entrances, monitored by 10 cameras (one entrance has 2 cameras), plus 24 hour reception, which I would be willing to bet has another, though I do not know it for a fact.

So there was about a 1 in 10 chance it would tell us anything, and that was assuming Amaral foretold the rise of the Smiths and the importance of them to the time line.

I do not wish to derail this thread, so perhaps any further discussion should be taken somewhere more appropriate.

[ShiningInLuz]

That one would have been extremely useful (if working), as it would have shown the various comings & goings, together with an accurate time line.

My apologies, Jassi.  I now see that you have bolded possible deployment in the Tapas area, and are thus referring to getting a check on the T9 and others that week.

Mea Culpa.

[ShiningInLuz]

More veiled insults from the moderator Shining In Luz I see.  I am not having an "off" day FYI, I am very much bang on actually.   I don't think it is asking too much for the police to check ALL the CCTV footage in small town where a child has gone missing, irrespective of when further evidence was brought forward. 

No doubt this post will trigger another haughty put down and accusations of propaganda spreading.

It's a pity you chose not to quote those 'veiled insults'.

This appears to be the part you are referring to.  Please correct me if I am wrong.

Smithman did not arise until 26 May 2007.  Any suggestion that Amaral's team should before then have gathered that, plus CCTV from several Luz ATMs on the off chance that something might turn up on it is having an off day, IMO. 

If you think that my opinion is a 'veiled insult', perhaps you have an overly thin skin.

I have done the donkey work on finding the legal position on installing and using CCTV in Portugal in 2007.  Are you going to do the donkey work in finding what process the PJ was required to go through in order to grab or copy all the CCTV in Luz?  IMO, you are not.

And are you going to stop at Luz?  There's Lagos, motorways, airports, marinas and harbours to think of.

If you ever get round to digging up that legal process, you may have a leg to stand on.

Until then, it is your opinion only as to what the PJ should have done, regardless of whether what you are suggesting is legal or not.

[G-Unit]

I think you'll find these allegations in the book, and discussed with Amaral on various TV programmes. 

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hid-body-7277975

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-parents-cops-claims-3830246

I have Amaral's book and Kate's book and neither of them seem to have anything about fridges, freezers or coffins in them.

Amaral mentions it in an interview with Correio da Manhã;

Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time [of the year], part of the ice melted. On a curb, for example, something fell from the trunk’s right side, above the wheel. It may be said that this is speculation, but it’s the only way to explain what happened there.
http://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/interview-with-gonalo-amaral-cadaver.html

He was trying to explain the dogs alerting to the car. As far as I know Eddie never alerted inside the car, however; it was just Keela. I think he added two and two to five in this instance.

[Alfie]

I have Amaral's book and Kate's book and neither of them seem to have anything about fridges, freezers or coffins in them.

Amaral mentions it in an interview with Correio da Manhã;

Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time [of the year], part of the ice melted. On a curb, for example, something fell from the trunk’s right side, above the wheel. It may be said that this is speculation, but it’s the only way to explain what happened there.
http://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/interview-with-gonalo-amaral-cadaver.html

He was trying to explain the dogs alerting to the car. As far as I know Eddie never alerted inside the car, however; it was just Keela. I think he added two and two to five in this instance.

So is it your contention that Amaral has never publicly suggested (either overtly or by inference) that her parents stored her body in a freezer or hid it in a coffin?

[G-Unit]

So is it your contention that Amaral has never publicly suggested (either overtly or by inference) that her parents stored her body in a freezer or hid it in a coffin?

It's not in his book, which is what you said. It's not in 'Madeleine', which is what the thread is about.

If you wish to continue feel free. but you might need to find the cites.

[Alfie]

It's not in his book, which is what you said. It's not in 'Madeleine', which is what the thread is about.

If you wish to continue feel free. but you might need to find the cites.

Before I do could you please just answer this question I asked you before (note: I never actually mentioned Amaral or his book), it's more about the principle of rights, and what people do and don't have a right to say that I'm interested in exploring with you):
"whilst we're on the subject of "rights", do you think anyone has the right to suggest that someone else hid their child's body in a fridge or a coffin in a church without providing any actual evidence for this?"

[ferryman]

Before I do could you please just answer this question I asked you before (note: I never actually mentioned Amaral or his book), it's more about the principle of rights, and what people do and don't have a right to say that I'm interested in exploring with you):
"whilst we're on the subject of "rights", do you think anyone has the right to suggest that someone else hid their child's body in a fridge or a coffin in a church without providing any actual evidence for this?"

Your question really gets to the nub of why English libel law places the onus on the person who makes a statement to establish its truth, rather than on the person accused to establish its untruth.

The McCanns, really, shouldn't have to prove that they didn't feign an abduction or dump Madeleine's body anywhere.

It should be for Amaral to prove that they did. 

By English law it would be.

And if he could (in either country) the McCanns would be in jail.

[ShiningInLuz]

It sounds more like a fictional story rather than real life doesn't it.  An author may say this about his characters in a novel.
An investigating police officer may think up these scenarios but should he say them publicly?  Good questions Alfie.  I must admit when I heard Goncalo say the McCanns could have had Madeleine cremated by hiding her in a coffin I was quite shocked.

So provide the cite that shows an investigating police officer said these things.

Amaral was out of the PJ when his book came out, so he was not an investigating police officer at the time you claim he said this.  You claim it without providing a supporting cite, so that forum members can check what was actually said and in what context.

You are 1) into libel territory again and 2) seriously off-topic.  Does this have anything whatsoever to do with a line from Kate's book?

[Robittybob1]

Your question really gets to the nub of why English libel law places the onus on the person who makes a statement to establish its truth, rather than on the person accused to establish its untruth.

The McCanns, really, shouldn't have to prove that they didn't feign an abduction or dump Madeleine's body anywhere.

It should be for Amaral to prove that they did. 

By English law it would be.

And if he could (in either country) the McCanns would be in jail.

I was planning not to post but you've shown a real flaw in your thinking Ferryman for you said the McCanns would be in jail, but Alfie just said "someone" put their daughter's body in the freezer or "someone" put her in the coffin.  There would need to be proof that that "someone" was one/both of the McCanns in your case additionally too.

[Alfie]

Your question really gets to the nub of why English libel law places the onus on the person who makes a statement to establish its truth, rather than on the person accused to establish its untruth.

The McCanns, really, shouldn't have to prove that they didn't feign an abduction or dump Madeleine's body anywhere.

It should be for Amaral to prove that they did. 

By English law it would be.

And if he coudld (in either country) the McCanns would be in jail.

What's very hard to understand is how someone could defend a person's right to make outrageous and unevidenced public accusations about Kate but at the same time claim that Kate "had no right whatsoever to suggest that people were scared to speak against Amaral".    Bizarro.

[Robittybob1]

So provide the cite that shows an investigating police officer said these things.

Amaral was out of the PJ when his book came out, so he was not an investigating police officer at the time you claim he said this.  You claim it without providing a supporting cite, so that forum members can check what was actually said and in what context.

You are 1) into libel territory again and 2) seriously off-topic.  Does this have anything whatsoever to do with a line from Kate's book?

Page 414 of Madeleine by Kate McCann:
"Isabel suggested that first of all we should apply for an injunction against Amaral's book and the DVD of his documentary with the aim of preventing the distribution and further repetition of his damaging theories.

[faithlilly]

Not exactly about Kate's book but is the campaign shop still active?

[Alfie]

Here is part of an interview with Amaral which is full of his crappy speculations



Q - What is your opinion?

A - To me, Gerry hid Madeleine's body on the beach. And after a few days he moved her with his car. We work following this lead. Trying to find out the date of the switch, some details, but we were on the way. The Irish [witness] was about to arrive in Portugal, but everything was delayed too much, he even received external pressures. In the end, he didn't testify for the Police.

Q – They [McCanns] have appeared in all the media to announce the disappearance of their daughter and if it ends up that they have done it, what are they, psychopaths?

A – No, they are human. If the McCanns admit that their daughter is dead, they can no longer collect money from the Maddie fund, and that's a lot of money, over one million pounds. That's why they say that the girl was abducted.

Q - What if they do not want to lose hope? It all seems very morbid.

A - It is. If they admit that she is dead they will lose their style of life. They are human, not psychopaths.

Q - You said that the girl was frozen.

A - For there to be vestiges in the boot of the car rented 23 days later, they must have preserved the corpse in some way. I believe that when they put it in the boot, with the heat of those days in the Algarve, a similar situation happened with that of shopping bags, which melt, and then the water is transferred to the car.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html

[ShiningInLuz]

Page 414 of Madeleine by Kate McCann:
"Isabel suggested that first of all we should apply for an injunction against Amaral's book and the DVD of his documentary with the aim of preventing the distribution and further repetition of his damaging theories.

That rather interests me because it suggests Team McCann was unaware of the documentary in the pipeline i.e. that no one in Team McCann was monitoring Portuguese media developments.

Before anyone gets their nose out of joint on my comment, I simply thought that Team McCann extended to monitoring all major developments.  Yet it would appear, judging by this, that Portuguese media was not on the agenda, at least until they (Portuguese media) had already acted.

That implies that the Team McCann effort in Portugal was re-active rather than pro-active.  Perhaps there will be more clarification in future posts.