Mark Harrison and the searches he recommended and took part in.

[Brietta]

The EAW was introduced in 2004. If you take the scuttlebutt on this here site as being pukkah gen then Portugal is a backwoodsy, third worldy, slow moving hicksville type of a place so I guess by 2007 the cleft stick runner bringing the news from Aix to Ghent the EU Directive was stuck up in the Serra da Estrela.

A EAW can only be issued for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution, not merely an investigation, or enforcing a custodial sentence. It can only be issued for offences carrying a maximum penalty of 12 months or more in prison. Where sentence has already been passed a EAW can only be issued if the prison term to be enforced is at least four months long.

Absolutely correct as far as {b} is concerned.  No impediment at all for the Policia judicairia to issue a request for an European Arrest Warrant should they have enough evidence to justify one.

I believe that their status as arguido and arguida obliged Gerry and and Kate McCann to return to Portugal should the PJ have made such a request.

So all the bases seem to have been more than adequately covered without a shred of evidence in justification thereof.

[G-Unit]

To return to the thread topic......I am of the opinion that Mark Harrison was complicit in and approved of all the searches undertaken between 31st July and 8th August 2007, as he says in his final report dated 22nd August 2007.

There is no evidence that he disagreed with any of the searches undertaken. Anyone saying he did is making unsupported allegations.

[Alfie]

To return to the thread topic......I am of the opinion that Mark Harrison was complicit in and approved of all the searches undertaken between 31st July and 8th August 2007, as he says in his final report dated 22nd August 2007.

There is no evidence that he disagreed with any of the searches undertaken. Anyone saying he did is making unsupported allegations.

Can I ask why any of this matters?

[ferryman]

Can I ask why any of this matters?

As the opening poster of this thread, it falls on me to answer that.

I think it matters because the subject matter illustrates that there was a dichotomy between 2 (prominent) English investigators in the (shelved) enquiry, Martin Grime and Mark Harrison.

(I suspect) that's as far as this board will allow me to take it ....

Hmph!

I see G-Unit opened the thread.

But I inspired it. (and I'm pleased I did).

[G-Unit]

Can I ask why any of this matters?

If it doesn't matter to you feel free to ignore it Alfie.

[G-Unit]

As the opening poster of this thread, it falls on me to answer that.

I think it matters because the subject matter illustrates that there was a dichotomy between 2 (prominent) English investigators in the (shelved) enquiry, Martin Grime and Mark Harrison.

(I suspect) that's as far as this board will allow me to take it ....

Your first statement is wrong. I started the thread to investigate the searches recommended and involving Mark Harrison.

In 18 pages of trying you have completely failed to demonstrate any dichotomy between the two British investigators involved.

[ferryman]

Your first statement is wrong. I started the thread to investigate the searches recommended and involving Mark Harrison.

In 18 pages of trying you have completely failed to demonstrate any dichotomy between the two British investigators involved.

My first statement is entirely accurate.

Attempts to refute all I have said have failed.

[Alfie]

If it doesn't matter to you feel free to ignore it Alfie.

That's not the question I asked.  I asked why it matters, perhaps you could explain for the benefit of dumb little old me?

[Angelo222]

Had it resulted in an admission of guilt even to the lesser charge (accidental death and disposing the body) they would have considered it worthwhile.

So do you believe the dog inspections were merely a ruse, a stick to beat a confession out of the McCanns? 
   

[G-Unit]

My first statement is entirely accurate.

Attempts to refute all I have said have failed.

You are suggesting that there was a dichotomy between Harrison and Grime. The word dichotomy suggests opposite ideas. If you are suggesting they disagreed about something the 'evidence' you have cobbled together shows no such thing. Why? Because other interpretations are just as valid as yours.

[Robittybob1]

So do you believe the dog inspections were merely a ruse, a stick to beat a confession out of the McCanns? 
   

The two bits where I could see actions which prove it were:
firstly the alert on Cuddlecat, where CC is put into the sideboard after Eddie had alerted to the sideboard earlier.
The other one is the so called "Madeleine's top" that is the last item to be placed on the floor, it doesn't come out of a cardboard box and it gets an alert. 

[ferryman]

You are suggesting that there was a dichotomy between Harrison and Grime. The word dichotomy suggests opposite ideas. If you are suggesting they disagreed about something the 'evidence' you have cobbled together shows no such thing. Why? Because other interpretations are just as valid as yours.

I've yet to spot an interpretation as valid as mine.

[slartibartfast]

I've yet to spot an interpretation as valid as mine.

You need to look harder.

[stephen25000]

I've yet to spot an interpretation as valid as mine.

 

That's a classic.

[ferryman]

You need to look harder.

No I don't