Could all three children have been sedated by an intruder?

[Robittybob1]

I have no idea as it is garbled.

Sorry, I wasn't using that part of the quote in my thinking that bit just got tagged on at the end .

My thinking was that Almeida was a senior officer with the police and he would surely know what investigations the PJ were carrying out when the pharmacy story appeared in the media. If they were doing nothing of the sort then it could be concluded that it wasn't a police leak.  So that leaves a McCann story or a media fantasy.

Well would you go back to the section that you needed to quote and explain it bit by bit as to what you think each bit means please. 

To me you seem to jump to a conclusion real quick.

[Sunny]

Modified post for #715

From what I can see the media made up the drugging story themselves.

Let's see: the media forwarded the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents.

From
A report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida to the Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

Modified to say that if Almeida thought it was the media then as he was a senior officer in the case then it was not the police as IMO he would know if there was a possible leak particularly if they were not investigating pharmacies at that time.  There is a possibility that it could still be the McCanns giving the story to the media but I don't have any reason why they should do so. 

Hope this makes more sense Robittybob1

[Robittybob1]

OK I will modify the post Robittybob1

It would be better to do a new one so we can follow the conversation. Thanks.
Do you take all of what Tavares says as gospel?

"Let's see: the media forwarded the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents.

Distant in time Kate's father, the grandfather of the minor, Brian Healy, admits to the press that Kate could have administered some medication to the little girl, Calpol, to help the child (children'') to sleep, contrary to what his daughter Kate had stated.

Kate, through the PJ inspector that acted as 'liaison' with the family [NOTE: that is Ricardo Paiva], asked why samples weren't taken from the twins in order to test that hypothesis. She knew well enough at that time, more than 3 months later, that such exam would be inviable.

She went further and said that we ' the investigation ' should verify that the kidnapper had sedated Madeleine, to accomplish the action and he had also sedated the twins 'to consummate the act' however she didn't say that at the right moment.

And we know that the sedatives have timings to act and timings to be expelled, that varies between six and 200 hours."

First bit "the media forwarded the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents."   What does he mean by forwarded?  Is that like forwarding an email?  Or is he saying the media made it up?

[Sunny]

Hi, I have done so (original post is back to what it was) and I hope this is all OK now. 

[G-Unit]

That was not actual evidence but a misunderstanding whether it was a plea bargain or not.  Anything else involving evidence?

The McCanns leaked the story to the media.

[Robittybob1]

The McCanns leaked the story to the media.

What story? When?  It was a story given to the media, it wasn't leaked it was known full well where it came from.

[Sunny]

It would be better to do a new one so we can follow the conversation. Thanks.
Do you take all of what Tavares says as gospel?


First bit "the media forwarded the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents."   What does he mean by forwarded?  Is that like forwarding an email?  Or is he saying the media made it up?

I actually think he means they "put forward" the story of sedation as in there were articles about it. I don't think it is proof that the story was made up by the media.

I don't treat everything he says as gospel but I believe that he believed in everything he was saying at this time and he believed it was factual. Ie I don't think he was lying about anything. Why would he?

[Robittybob1]

Modified post for #715

From what I can see the media made up the drugging story themselves.

Let's see: the media forwarded the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents.

From
A report by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida to the Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

Modified to say that if Almeida thought it was the media then as he was a senior officer in the case then it was not the police as IMO he would know if there was a possible leak particularly if they were not investigating pharmacies at that time.  There is a possibility that it could still be the McCanns giving the story to the media but I don't have any reason why they should do so. 

Hope this makes more sense Robittybob1

OK in the sentence where it says "forwarded" could you put what you think "forwarded" means please.

For example:  The media forwarded [repeated what the PJ told them about] the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents.

another example: The media forwarded [made up their own story about] the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents.

But I want your version as to what you think he is saying please?

I see you have used the term "put forward" so it becomes The media forwarded [put forward] the hypothesis that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow some rest to the parents.

Does "put forward" in that sense just mean "publicised"?

[Robittybob1]

If we use the dictionary definition of Put forward:

"put sth/sb forward. US put sth/sb forth. — phrasal verb with put uk ​ /pʊt/ us ​ verb putting, put, put. to offer an idea or opinion, or suggest a plan or person, for other people to consider: The proposals that you have put forward deserve serious consideration.

That is making it sound as it was the paper's idea.  Was he right to blame the papers?

[Sunny]

If we use the dictionary definition of Put forward:

"put sth/sb forward. US put sth/sb forth. — phrasal verb with put uk ​ /pʊt/ us ​ verb putting, put, put. to offer an idea or opinion, or suggest a plan or person, for other people to consider: The proposals that you have put forward deserve serious consideration.

That is making it sound as it was the paper's idea.  Was he right to blame the papers?

Ah I see what you mean. I hadn't thought about the differences in the wording. My use of "put forward" was incorrect.

Almeida said "the media forwarded" but why would he say that?    If the police had given the media that information, there would be no reason to mention the media as this was a legal interim statement.  Perhaps he believed that the media "forwarded" the story as possibly given by the McCanns as his statement mentions this below:

Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.

He considered them to be lying anyway so why not a McCann originated leaked story.

All IMO.

[Robittybob1]

Ah I see what you mean. I hadn't thought about the differences in the wording. My use of "put forward" was incorrect.

Almeida said "the media forwarded" but why would he say that?    If the police had given the media that information, there would be no reason to mention the media as this was a legal interim statement.  Perhaps he believed that the media "forwarded" the story as possibly given by the McCanns as his statement mentions this below:

Where he concludes, after analyzing all the evidence gathered, that the child is dead and the parents were responsible for cadaver occultation, and the entire GROUP was lying since the first day of the investigation.

He considered them to be lying anyway so why not a McCann originated leaked story.

All IMO.

Considering that the PJ said they have no evidence against the McCanns I do wonder what evidence Tarvares spent time analysing.  Surely it is possible he came to an incorrect decision.

[Sunny]

Considering that the PJ said they have no evidence against the McCanns I do wonder what evidence Tarvares spent time analysing.  Surely it is possible he came to an incorrect decision.

Of course it is possible.  We could all be wrong on here at different times. Hopefully though he was at least looking at the evidence when reaching his conclusion. As john said the PJ would have more information available to them than we will ever have.

I don't think the PJ said they had no evidence against the McCanns though or the SC wouldn't have said what she did.

IMO of course.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Of course it is possible.  We could all be wrong on here at different times. Hopefully though he was at least looking at the evidence when reaching his conclusion. As john said the PJ would have more information available to them than we will ever have.

I don't think the PJ said they had no evidence against the McCanns though or the SC wouldn't have said what she did.

IMO of course.

Why would evidence pointing to the McCanns’ guilt not be included with all the other evidence in the files?  IMO it is nonsense to suggest that there is secret evidence against them, and is the sort of nonsense that allows for all sorts of conspiracy theories.

[Sunny]

Why would evidence pointing to the McCanns’ guilt not be included with all the other evidence in the files?  IMO it is nonsense to suggest that there is secret evidence against them, and is the sort of nonsense that allows for all sorts of conspiracy theories.

Vertigo Swirl I said "information" not "secret evidence" . There may be discussions etc that took place that weren't in the files. You weren't there and I wasn't there either but Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida was.

Again IMO.

[Robittybob1]

Why would evidence pointing to the McCanns’ guilt not be included with all the other evidence in the files?  IMO it is nonsense to suggest that there is secret evidence against them, and is the sort of nonsense that allows for all sorts of conspiracy theories.

Just a thought though.  If the PJ did have a file called secret evidence that they could use at some stage.  Once the case is archived and the  secret evidence is not included in the file, it could "lost".