Author Topic: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?  (Read 94613 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #105 on: March 22, 2017, 05:02:14 PM »
So just the one cite required
Will post tomorrow when I'm on my laptop
The idea that innocent people cannot incriminate themselves is extremely naive

One would be a start.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #106 on: March 22, 2017, 05:07:05 PM »
One would be a start.

I'm not in the uk and in a hotel with poor internet
So you think the right to silence is to protect the guilty and not to protect the innocent

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #107 on: March 22, 2017, 05:11:14 PM »
So just the one cite required
Will post tomorrow when I'm on my laptop
The idea that innocent people cannot incriminate themselves is extremely naive
Could be hard to prove.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #108 on: March 22, 2017, 05:13:57 PM »
Could be hard to prove.

It's not hard to prove at all
Tell me why you think there is a right to silence
There's your proof

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #109 on: March 22, 2017, 05:29:30 PM »
It's not hard to prove at all
Tell me why you think there is a right to silence
There's your proof

The right to silence is there so people don't have to incriminate themselves. The question of innocence doesn't come into it.

It is impossible for an innocent person telling the whole truth to incriminate themselves.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #110 on: March 22, 2017, 05:35:34 PM »
The right to silence is there so people don't have to incriminate themselves. The question of innocence doesn't come into it.

It is impossible for an innocent person telling the whole truth to incriminate themselves.

So innocent people cannot incriminate themselves if they tell the whole truth
What about if they have a slight lapse in memory
Are pressurised by sophisticated interrogation techniques into making a mistake
Could they incriminate themselves then
Of course they could

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #111 on: March 22, 2017, 05:41:58 PM »
So innocent people cannot incriminate themselves if they tell the whole truth
What about if they have a slight lapse in memory
Are pressurised by sophisticated interrogation techniques into making a mistake
Could they incriminate themselves then
Of course they could
Are you now alleging that the PJ were using sophisticated interrogation techniques, in order to pressurise Kate into making a mistake?
What's up, old man?

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #112 on: March 22, 2017, 05:45:42 PM »
I can say without hesitation that if one of my children or grandchildren here disappeared, and I was given arguido status, I would be happy to dispense with a lawyer and I would answer every question put to me, given that updating the police accurately would optimise the chances of finding my child.

I cannot be incriminated if I am innocent, regardless of what the video purports.

Anything less than full disclosure was sub-optimal for Madeleine.  It might have ticked the box for Kate, but that is not good enough.  Madeleine got raw deal #2.
I'm till waiting to hear which of the 48 questions would have elicited answers that would have helped find Madeleine,, presuming Kate is telling the truth and she had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance.

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #113 on: March 22, 2017, 05:51:15 PM »
Innocent people incriminating themselves, let us exclude those with mental issues.
Here's one just off the top of my head

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Evans

Offline Brietta

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #114 on: March 22, 2017, 05:53:20 PM »
I can say without hesitation that if one of my children or grandchildren here disappeared, and I was given arguido status, I would be happy to dispense with a lawyer and I would answer every question put to me, given that updating the police accurately would optimise the chances of finding my child.

I cannot be incriminated if I am innocent, regardless of what the video purports.

Anything less than full disclosure was sub-optimal for Madeleine.  It might have ticked the box for Kate, but that is not good enough.  Madeleine got raw deal #2.

The McCanns had bared their souls ... " ... why didn't you come when we were crying last night?".  Why would you assume they would do less for their flesh and blood than you?

Have you given any consideration as to exactly how you would go about assisting your children or grandchildren while incarcerated as their murderer in a Portuguese jail?
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #115 on: March 23, 2017, 12:05:29 AM »
Are you now alleging that the PJ were using sophisticated interrogation techniques, in order to pressurise Kate into making a mistake?

You really are naive
That is exactly what every police force does
Ask questions over and over
Tire the suspect out looking for a mistake
Kate had already been answering questions for hours
She was now not answering questions as a witness but as an arguidos
If I remember correctly she was expecting to be arrested
She needed her freedom to help maddie

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #116 on: March 23, 2017, 06:40:56 AM »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #117 on: March 23, 2017, 09:39:12 AM »
The right to silence is there so people don't have to incriminate themselves. The question of innocence doesn't come into it.

It is impossible for an innocent person telling the whole truth to incriminate themselves.
Truthful statements by an innocent person[edit]

An incriminating statement includes any statement that tends to increase the danger that the person making the statement will be accused, charged or prosecuted – even if the statement is true, and even if the person is innocent of any crime. Thus, even a person who is innocent of any crime who testifies truthfully can be incriminated by that testimony. The United States Supreme Court has stated that the Fifth Amendment privilege:
protects the innocent as well as the guilty.... one of the Fifth Amendment’s basic functions . . . is to protect innocent men . . . who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances..... truthful responses of an innocent witness, as well as those of a wrongdoer, may provide the government with incriminating evidence from the speaker’s own mouth.[12]
The U.S. Supreme Court has also stated:
Too many, even those who should be better advised, view this privilege as a shelter for wrongdoers. They too readily assume that those who invoke it are either guilty of crime or commit perjury in claiming the privilege.[13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-incrimination

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #118 on: March 23, 2017, 01:40:51 PM »
it is absolutely ridiculous for posters to claim that the innocent cannot incriminate themselves...it shows how poorly they understand the mccanns situation

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
« Reply #119 on: March 23, 2017, 03:02:10 PM »
it is absolutely ridiculous for posters to claim that the innocent cannot incriminate themselves...it shows how poorly they understand the mccanns situation

I think I understand the McCann's situation.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.