Will the appointment of Luis Neves have any impact on the Madeleine McCann case?

[Mr Gray]

Well that you don't know do you.

I could say - his opinion hasn't changed after 10 years imo

You have just quoted almeida... Not Neves
I woyld think he now realises that his initial understanding of the alerts was wrong... Have a look at grimes rogs

[Angelo222]

He may well realise it was a mistake now.... If you read his testimony at amarals trial it seems he believed the dogs evidence was highly significant and that they had been instrumental in solving many cases... He was probably convinced maddies body had been in the apartment which would make the abduction thesis impossible.... Obviously things have now moved on IMO

He was right, dogs are an important tool for the police and I have no doubt those canines who were involved in the Maddie case will eventually be vindicated.

[Brietta]

Members are respectfully reminded:
The thread topic is Luis Neves' appointment and any impact that may have on Madeleine's case.

[Snowgirl]

Neves said that the parents were already suspected before the dog’s findings ? Imo I don’t think anything will have changed his mind .

[Brietta]

Bloggers don't always get it right and sometimes they get it wrong and Paulo Reis is no exception to that rule.

Wrong
Wednesday, 3 October 2007
Madeleine's case: Luis Neves will replace Gonçalo Amaral
The man that was the second-in-command of the investigation lead by Gonçalo Amaral, Criminal Coordinator Luis Neves, will replace him. The national director of PJ has considered the possibility of sending somebody from Lisbon, but he was warned of a “strong reaction” from the dozens of detectives involved in the investigation. P Reis

Right
Tuesday, 9 October 2007
Paulo Rebelo is the new man in charge of Madeleine's case
A national deputy-director of Polícia Judiciária was appointed to replace Gonçalo Amaral in the investigation of Madeleine's disappearance. P Reis

Was he also wrong in his assertion that Amaral was Neves' boss?  If not, would that not put a different perspective on whose thesis of events might be the more persuasive?

[Brietta]

Neves said that the parents were already suspected before the dog’s findings ? Imo I don’t think anything will have changed his mind .

Was that his opinion or was that the opinion that he knew had been the driving force of the investigation personified by the headline about 'a badly told story' in the Portuguese press hours into Madeleine's disappearance?

Neves stayed in the PJ and prospered.

Amaral left the PJ and prospered.  Wonder who made the better choice?

[Snowgirl]

Was that his opinion or was that the opinion that he knew had been the driving force of the investigation personified by the headline about 'a badly told story' in the Portuguese press hours into Madeleine's disappearance?

Neves stayed in the PJ and prospered.

Amaral left the PJ and prospered.  Wonder who made the better choice?

I wouldn’t say it was his opinion that he knew had been the driving force of the investigation ,more that it was his  certain knowledge of that fact .
Whatever,  his predecessor has stated the position is in  [ Neves] good hands ?

[Mr Gray]

I wouldn’t say it was his opinion that he knew had been the driving force of the investigation ,more that it was his  certain knowledge of that fact .
Whatever,  his predecessor has stated the position is in  [ Neves] good hands ?

I would say it will make no difference as the PJ dont seem to be much anyway and the evidence that was used to make them suspects was not confirmed... According to the final report.. So Neves may well have a completely different view on the mccanns than he did in 2007

[Snowgirl]

I would say it will make no difference as the PJ dont seem to be much anyway and the evidence that was used to make them suspects was not confirmed... According to the final report.. So Neves may well have a completely different view on the mccanns than he did in 2007

Supposition  and hope on your part that he may well have a completely different view of the McCanns than he did in 2007 because what has changed ? They havn’t done a thing to lift the cloud of suspicion that hangs over them .
Fingers have been pointed ,other suspects have been investigated  to no avail .

[Vertigo Swirl]

Supposition  and hope on your part that he may well have a completely different view of the McCanns than he did in 2007 because what has changed ? They havn’t done a thing to lift the cloud of suspicion that hangs over them .
Fingers have been pointed ,other suspects have been investigated  to no avail .

What has changedsince 2007 is that they are no longer arguidos and the archiving report acknowledged that there was a lack of any evidence against them.  Also, at least two police forces have made it clear that they are no longer suspects.

[Mr Gray]

Supposition  and hope on your part that he may well have a completely different view of the McCanns than he did in 2007 because what has changed ? They havn’t done a thing to lift the cloud of suspicion that hangs over them .
Fingers have been pointed ,other suspects have been investigated  to no avail .

If you read the archiving report you will see what has changed.... From when the mccanns were made suspects...

[Snowgirl]

What has changedsince 2007 is that they are no longer arguidos and the archiving report acknowledged that there was a lack of any evidence against them.  Also, at least two police forces have made it clear that they are no longer suspects.

If you refer to the Supreme Court’s decision  ,  you  will  find words  opposing what you say here .

[Robittybob1]

If you refer to the Supreme Court’s decision  ,  you  will  find words  opposing what you say here .

The Supreme Court was ruling on a civil case not a criminal case.  You would have trouble transferring the word "suspect" from one legal system to the other.

One of the famous examples was OJ Simpson found not guilty of murder in the criminal court but liable in the civil case against him. (From memory, so I stand to be corrected if you think I'm wrong.)

[Vertigo Swirl]

If you refer to the Supreme Court’s decision  ,  you  will  find words  opposing what you say here .

Really?  Please reproduce the cite from the decision which states that there was sufficient evidence to consider the McCanns may have had a hand in their child’s disappearance.

[Snowgirl]

Really?  Please reproduce the cite from the decision which states that there was sufficient evidence to consider the McCanns may have had a hand in their child’s disappearance.

Now that isn't what I said at all ?
    Portuguese Supreme Court judges   said the lifting of their status as 'arguidos', or formal suspects, and the archiving of the criminal case into Maddie's disappearance did not mean they were innocent.
They   stated "It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case"