Author Topic: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)  (Read 725460 times)

0 Members and 19 Guests are viewing this topic.

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2670 on: April 30, 2017, 10:33:20 PM »
They would do what their superiors told them to do.

Meanwhile they would have had no trouble donating to Amaral's fund.
OK, why would their superiors tell them to ignore their suspicions then?  That sounds like a cover-up / conspiracy to me..,

Offline G-Unit

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2671 on: April 30, 2017, 10:44:00 PM »
Do you think most of Op Grange's team don't have the ability to think for themselves, or have enquiring minds, do you think if an one of them had voiced suspicions about the parents they'd be told to keep quiet?

Do you understand hierarchical organisations? Do you understand how tasks are allocated and carried out? You can think what you like but you do what you're told.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2672 on: April 30, 2017, 11:27:08 PM »
Do you understand hierarchical organisations? Do you understand how tasks are allocated and carried out? You can think what you like but you do what you're told.
There is nothing quite like being patronized by G-Unit, it's such a pleasure and a privilege.  Perhaps you could explain why those at the top of the heirarchy in this case would instruct those below them to ignore or keep silent about any suspicions or evidence of guilt concerning the parents, and don't just say "remit" please.  You have previously claimed that the Met only bothered to read the archiving report which they misunderstod according to you and thought the Portuguese had cleared the parents so decided to put any suspicions they may have had out of their minds.  Have you any idea how ridiculous that claim is?  It would mean the Met are lying to us about the amount of work they put in to Operation Grange, and are also incredibly lazy and incredibly stupid.  Is this your opinion of them or not?

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2673 on: April 30, 2017, 11:51:04 PM »
Amaral on Portuguese TV tonight:

He said: “We had information three figures went into the church via a side door at night. They had a box and there was to be a cremation of a British woman. It is possible the child’s remains were in this box and cremated as well. The parents had the key to the church.”

What a tw...

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2674 on: April 30, 2017, 11:52:40 PM »
Amaral on Portuguese TV tonight:

He said: “We had information three figures went into the church via a side door at night. They had a box and there was to be a cremation of a British woman. It is possible the child’s remains were in this box and cremated as well. The parents had the key to the church.”

What a tw...
Cite.
What's up, old man?

Offline misty

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2675 on: April 30, 2017, 11:53:15 PM »
Amaral on Portuguese TV tonight:

He said: “We had information three figures went into the church via a side door at night. They had a box and there was to be a cremation of a British woman. It is possible the child’s remains were in this box and cremated as well. The parents had the key to the church.”

What a tw...

Here's a report in the Sun.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3450890/shamed-ex-portuguese-top-cop-goncalo-amaral-claims-madeleines-body-was-hidden-in-coffin-then-burned/

He's well & truly lost the plot.

Offline ShiningInLuz

What's up, old man?

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2677 on: May 01, 2017, 12:10:58 AM »
3 main channels checked.  Nothing.
What's up, old man?

Offline misty

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2678 on: May 01, 2017, 12:12:17 AM »

Offline Robittybob1

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2679 on: May 01, 2017, 03:20:35 AM »
48 questions Madeleine McCann's mother refused to answer reemerge as father slams 'fake news'

Gerry McCann hits out at hurt that speculation and conspiracy theories have caused family



By Rachel Roberts
30 April 2017

A list of police questions which Madeleine McCann’s mother Kate refused to answer three months after her daughter disappeared has re-emerged in the media as the 10 year anniversary of her disappearance approaches.

In an interview with Fiona Bruce, Madeleine’s father, Gerry McCann, hit out at “fake news” and the hurt that speculation and conspiracy theories have caused to the family.

But the list of 48 questions Mrs McCann refused to answer has made headlines again a decade after the four-year-old vanished from the family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/48-questions-kate-mccann-refused-to-answer-madeleine-disappearance-portugal-a7710111.html
It would be really great if they sat down with some interviewer (even Goncalo) and answered them.
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 Brietta

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2680 on: May 01, 2017, 03:46:46 AM »
It would be really great if they sat down with some interviewer (even Goncalo) and answered them.

43 In the case files, you were shown canine forensic testing films. After watching them, did you say you couldn't explain any more than you already had?

44 When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45 When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46 When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47 When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, carried out in a British lab, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/48-questions-kate-mccann-refused-to-answer-madeleine-disappearance-portugal-a7710111.html

Kate McCann already had answered all these questions.
At the time of the above re-interrogation when she had been constituted arguida ... she exercised her legal right to remain silent.
Gerry McCann did not exercise his legal right and did answer questions put to him.
"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 G-Unit

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2681 on: May 01, 2017, 06:32:46 AM »
43 In the case files, you were shown canine forensic testing films. After watching them, did you say you couldn't explain any more than you already had?

44 When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45 When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46 When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47 When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, carried out in a British lab, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/48-questions-kate-mccann-refused-to-answer-madeleine-disappearance-portugal-a7710111.html

Kate McCann already had answered all these questions.
At the time of the above re-interrogation when she had been constituted arguida ... she exercised her legal right to remain silent.
Gerry McCann did not exercise his legal right and did answer questions put to him.

When did Kate previously answer the questions?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Brietta

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2682 on: May 01, 2017, 09:04:07 AM »
When did Kate previously answer the questions?

Do you think the Policia Judiciaria are lying when they conclude those questions with ... "did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?"

You are the file 'expert' ~ you know precisely when and for how long Kate was interviewed prior to being constituted arguida ~ you won't know what the questioning consisted of but it is known that she had already provided answers to questions 43 ~ 44 ~ 45 ~ 46 and 47.
Unless you have your doubts about the veracity of the PJ?
"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 G-Unit

Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2683 on: May 01, 2017, 10:14:52 AM »
Do you think the Policia Judiciaria are lying when they conclude those questions with ... "did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?"

You are the file 'expert' ~ you know precisely when and for how long Kate was interviewed prior to being constituted arguida ~ you won't know what the questioning consisted of but it is known that she had already provided answers to questions 43 ~ 44 ~ 45 ~ 46 and 47.
Unless you have your doubts about the veracity of the PJ?

I don't know where those quotes come from. What was actually reported in the files was;

she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_07-09-07.htm

That seems to be Kate saying she has mentioned and explained everything she knew and has nothing to add.

There was an alleged interview with Encarnacao and Neves but it was not recorded so neither I nor the PJ would know what was said that day. If incriminating questions were asked with no lawyer or interpreter present that was a clear breach of the process and the McCanns should have immediately launched an official complaint.

Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: General discussion about the latest news (not search related)
« Reply #2684 on: May 01, 2017, 10:38:57 AM »
I don't know where those quotes come from. What was actually reported in the files was;

she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_07-09-07.htm

That seems to be Kate saying she has mentioned and explained everything she knew and has nothing to add.

There was an alleged interview with Encarnacao and Neves but it was not recorded so neither I nor the PJ would know what was said that day. If incriminating questions were asked with no lawyer or interpreter present that was a clear breach of the process and the McCanns should have immediately launched an official complaint.
It's good to see you admit that those may have been incriminating questions and that there may have been a breach of process, which explains why Kate McCann refused to answer their questions as an arguido.