A Simple Question.

[Vertigo Swirl]

They threatened to sue a Portuguese newspaper was stated just that. As far as I remember no British newspaper reported the McCanns were being investigated until it was clear they were going to be made arguidos

I think (from memory) that it was very clear in the media before the McCanns were made arguidos that they were under suspicion.  I don't recall them threatening any newspaper that simply stated the McCanns were being investigated by the police.  Do you have a cite for that?

[Vertigo Swirl]

If you're saying something for the first time you're not reiterating it. I do apologise if you mentioned 'proof' before, but I can't see it.

Can you tell me why this matters relevant to the subject under discussion?  I used the word "proved" once, so strictly speaking I did not reiterate the word "proved".  Therefore you are correct in your observation, but - so what?

[faithlilly]

I think (from memory) that it was very clear in the media before the McCanns were made arguidos that they were under suspicion.  I don't recall them threatening any newspaper that simply stated the McCanns were being investigated by the police.  Do you have a cite for that?

Here you go https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1561796/McCanns-sue-paper-to-defend-reputations.html

Now a cite from any British newspaper reporting that the McCanns were under suspicion before it was clear that they were going to be made arguidos please ?

[Alice Purjorick]

Lol. Do you disagree with what I said?

Not significantly.
I believe, however, the police will have an overall strategy for this sort of circumstance. Like: "we are going to give away nothing we do not want to".
The tactics for each interview will, in my opinion, be worked out on the hoof with the objective of reaching the end of the interview having not undermined the overall strategy. If the tactics used make them look daft to the uninformed layman I am sure they don't give the proverbial rat's wotsit provided the overall strategy has been preserved without compromise.
As for what the overall strategy is faites vos jeux.

edit: removed redundant word

[Vertigo Swirl]

Here you go https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1561796/McCanns-sue-paper-to-defend-reputations.html

Now a cite from any British newspaper reporting that the McCanns were under suspicion before it was clear that they were going to be made arguidos please ?

That contentious paper report goes quite some way beyond simply reporting that the McCanns were being investigated by the police, it right out claims they drugged and killed their child.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Here you go https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1561796/McCanns-sue-paper-to-defend-reputations.html

Now a cite from any British newspaper reporting that the McCanns were under suspicion before it was clear that they were going to be made arguidos please ?

Well here's one for a start
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-473408/Mystery-Madeleine-parents-secret-emails-intercepted-police.html

[Vertigo Swirl]

Here you go https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1561796/McCanns-sue-paper-to-defend-reputations.html

Now a cite from any British newspaper reporting that the McCanns were under suspicion before it was clear that they were going to be made arguidos please ?

And here's another
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-477801/Madeleine-Now-Portuguese-press-claims-scent-corpse-McCanns-keys.html

[slartibartfast]

And here's another
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-477801/Madeleine-Now-Portuguese-press-claims-scent-corpse-McCanns-keys.html

Fail, British newspaper reports on what the PT newspapers were saying.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Fail, British newspaper reports on what the PT newspapers were saying.

Why is that a fail?  The British reports that the portuguese media claim the McCanns are suspects. It makes banner headlines out of them and leaves the reader in Britain in little doubt that the McCanns are under suspicion by the police, before they are even made arguidos.   

[Vertigo Swirl]

On 7th August the Independent ran a headline "Madeleine's parents are suspects", link no longer works but is referred to at the bottom of this page
https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Reports:_Parents_of_missing_girl_Madeleine_McCann_are_suspects_in_her_disappearance

[faithlilly]

And here's another
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-477801/Madeleine-Now-Portuguese-press-claims-scent-corpse-McCanns-keys.html

By the time of this report Esther McVey was advising the McCanns to come home so it was obvious by then that they would be questioned again and, because these interviews would be accusatory in nature, that they would be made arguidos.

Was it after these reports that Olegario Sousa said the McCanns were not suspects ?

[slartibartfast]

Why is that a fail?  The British reports that the portuguese media claim the McCanns are suspects. It makes banner headlines out of them and leaves the reader in Britain in little doubt that the McCanns are under suspicion by the police, before they are even made arguidos.

Madeleine: Now Portuguese press claims scent of corpse was found on McCann's keys

Mystery of Madeleine parents' secret emails 'intercepted by police'

[Vertigo Swirl]

This is what I was asked for
"Now a cite from any British newspaper reporting that the McCanns were under suspicion before it was clear that they were going to be made arguidos please" ?

Are my links from British papers?  Yes.
Do they report that the McCanns were under suspicion?  Yes.
Was it before they were made arguidos?  Yes.

No fail.

[faithlilly]

This is what I was asked for
"Now a cite from any British newspaper reporting that the McCanns were under suspicion before it was clear that they were going to be made arguidos please" ?

Are my links from British papers?  Yes.
Do they report that the McCanns were under suspicion?  Yes.
Was it before they were made arguidos?  Yes.

No fail.

It was clear the McCanns were going to be questioned again. It had been from the beginning of August.

So what if the press know nothing ? Why do you think they keep asking the same question ?

[Vertigo Swirl]

By the time of this report Esther McVey was advising the McCanns to come home so it was obvious by then that they would be questioned again and, because these interviews would be accusatory in nature, that they would be made arguidos.

Was it after these reports that Olegario Sousa said the McCanns were not suspects ?

I fail to see the relevance of either of your points.  The fact of the matter is, somehow that information got transferred from police to the media (it would seem fairly obvious how that happened IMO) and it got reported by the world's media that the McCanns were suspects, long before it was officially confirmed.  I can so no reason why, if the McCanns were suspects again, that this information would not have been leaked out (and you have even suggested somewhere on this thread I think that maybe the media know more than they are letting on) and been used as the basis of some story in the papers strongly hinting at their renewed suspect status.  If it were true, then there would be no grounds for legal action anyway IMO,, provided the report did not stray into lurid detail of what they were actually suspected of doing.  IMO All it need say is (if it were true):  "It is understood that the Met are re-investigating the McCanns' and friends' versions of events, the Tapas 9 were re-interviewed under caution, no charges have been brought and there are no further details known at this time, a police spokesman refused to confirm or deny".   Such media focus would IMO bring immense pressure back onto the group and might elicit a confession from one of them, if they were indeed guilty of something, and so would IMO be a useful tool for the police to try, if indeed it were the case that they were suspects which as far as we know from everything that has been said and everything that has been done as part of the investigation, they are not.