The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Another question

Page 4 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 26.12.09 22:27

A reconstruction won't change the outcome of the police investigation, certainly not after 2,5 years.
Kate did the right thing not to answer the 40 questions. It has nothing to do with the disappereance of Madeleine.
It was a set up to make her confess to a crime she did not commit.

Forget it, it will never happen.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Slartibartfast on 26.12.09 22:31

Aristocrat wrote:A reconstruction won't change the outcome of the police investigation, certainly not after 2,5 years.
Kate did the right thing not to answer the 40 questions. It has nothing to do with the disappereance of Madeleine.
It was a set up to make her confess to a crime she did not commit.

Forget it, it will never happen.

I wonder how many members of this forum would answer the questions knowing the PJ's history in "questioning" and on the advice of their lawyer not to answer any questions.

Slartibartfast

Posts : 135
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 26.12.09 23:55

PJ, no matter what police whatsoever, if I committed no crime, and I am completely innocent, I refuse to answer any question to accuse myself. That would be really stupid.

That is what Kate did and right she was.
This is another false argument and is used only to kick or throw mud on the McCanns.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Autumn on 27.12.09 0:16

Aristocrat wrote:A reconstruction won't change the outcome of the police investigation, certainly not after 2,5 years.
Kate did the right thing not to answer the 40 questions. It has nothing to do with the disappereance of Madeleine.
It was a set up to make her confess to a crime she did not commit.

Forget it, it will never happen.

We know it will never happen because the McCanns and chums are determined it will not. Who are you to say that a reconstruction would not have changed the outcome of the police investigation - the PJ would not have requested a reconstruction if they did not feel it could be helpful. Aristocrat, read up on the files, Kate refused to answer all but one of 48 questions, not 40 as you have stated in your post. The McCanns did nothing to help the police investigation, infact, I would go as far as to say that they have been downright obstructive from the outset.

Autumn

Posts : 2603
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by twinkle on 27.12.09 1:06

I fail to see how the answering of 48 or no questions is an indication of guilt.
How is this a stick to beat them with?
Was anyone actually here present at the questioning? No, they weren't.
Who can comment on such a situation unless they have been there themselves.

twinkle

Posts : 452
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Autumn on 27.12.09 1:14

@twinkle wrote:I fail to see how the answering of 48 or no questions is an indication of guilt.
How is this a stick to beat them with?
Was anyone actually here present at the questioning? No, they weren't.
Who can comment on such a situation unless they have been there themselves.

The one question Kate answered was ' Do you realize that by not answering the questions, you are jeopardising the search for your daughter'? Kate replied 'Yes'.
According to Justine McGuiness, who was there, both her and Kate behaved 'like naughty schoolgirls' texting back and forth from the police station.

Autumn

Posts : 2603
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 1:29

[quote="Autumn

We know it will never happen because the McCanns and chums are determined it will not. Who are you to say that a reconstruction would not have changed the outcome of the police investigation - the PJ would not have requested a reconstruction if they did not feel it could be helpful. Aristocrat, read up on the files, Kate refused to answer all but one of 48 questions, not 40 as you have stated in your post. The McCanns did nothing to help the police investigation, infact, I would go as far as to say that they have been downright obstructive from the outset.[/quote]

Did I write 40 questions? Kate refused to answer 48 questions and she was damn right.
Now, you leave the reading of the PJ files to me, I can do that without you, but I suggest you start reading Amaral's book, because it is obvious you did not read it. Because if you did read his book, you would have know that the McCanns did everything to help the police investigation. Amaral praises them for their help! So you can go as far as you like, but you are completely wrong to suggest that they have been downright obstructive from the outset. It seems you are blind of hating the McCanns, but that won't change the facts.

Now about the reconstruction.

A reconstruction at the beginning of the police investigation could have been useful and I am sure that McCanns and their friends would have coöperate. But oh well....Amaral doing a poor job...
After the rogatory interviews the timeline, where everybody was, the event, everything was already extended in April 2008 on paper. Without a reconstruction it was clear there was no evidence of the involvement of the parents in the disappereance of Madeleine. A reconstruction can't change that fact because there is nothing around that reconstruction to be examined as useful evidence. There is just nothing left. Can't you see that?

I believe there is excess value attributed to a reconstruction, while IMO it was a last attempt to save faces, to save something from a damaged police investigation conducted by Amaral. Nothing more.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by marigold on 27.12.09 2:13

She didn't answer the questions because she knew they would incriminate her IMO. Any normal, innocent parent would happily answer ANY question as they would be so desperate to find their child. Not answering the questions has made her look very suspicious to many people. All this c**p about being framed! It's always the old corny mantra isn't it? This is said by so many when they are about to be arrested..I'm being framed by the police they cry! I suppose it's a last desperate attempt to try to evade justice. Why on earth would the Portugese police have any interest in framing the Mccanns? They were policemen trying to do a job and the parents had to be eliminated first because in the vast majority of cases the parents are responsible for a child's disappearance. However, the 'parents' wanted to be as obstructive as humanly possible. To hinder the search it would appear. Yet now, peversely, they bleat on about why nobody is searching for their daughter!

marigold

Posts : 234
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 2:57

@marigold wrote:She didn't answer the questions because she knew they would incriminate her IMO.

Well there you are. Would you answer questions to incriminate yourself???

Any normal, innocent parent would happily answer ANY question as they would be so desperate to find their child.

There is not one question to be answered that would lead to find Madeleine.

Not answering the questions has made her look very suspicious to many people.

Not to me. Totally not. If I was in her shoes I would have done the same. You seem to forget that it is not the McCanns that committed a crime. They are not the suspects here. There is an perpetrator, walking free, a great risk for other children, but not one word about his or her crime?? It is only throwing mud to the McCanns, that's all. Something is not right here.

All this c**p about being framed! It's always the old corny mantra isn't it? This is said by so many when they are about to be arrested..I'm being framed by the police they cry!

Maybe you should have a word with Leonor Cipriano and look at her image after 'an interview with the PJ conducted by Amaral'

I suppose it's a last desperate attempt to try to evade justice.

Nonsense
Why on earth would the Portugese police have any interest in framing the Mccanns?

Why on earth is the disgraced ex-cop Amaral still trying to frame the McCanns while he knows there is no evidence?

They were policemen trying to do a job and the parents had to be eliminated first because in the vast majority of cases the parents are responsible for a child's disappearance.

You do that in the first days of the investigation not after 4 months.

However, the 'parents' wanted to be as obstructive as humanly possible. To hinder the search it would appear.

I would like to see some evidence to proof your point

Yet now, peversely, they bleat on about why nobody is searching for their daughter!

I can understand that the McCanns have lost trust in the PJ. I can't understand that no British police force is not searching for Madeleine.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Autumn on 27.12.09 3:15

The McCanns refuse to ask the official police force, either in Portugal or Britain, to re-open the investigation.

Autumn

Posts : 2603
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 3:21

No, you've tried that one before, but the answer is the same. Nothing to do with refuse....that is your interpretation.
Not the McCanns, not Amaral, not the Queen, not even the Pope can get that case reopened unless they come up with new EVIDENCE!!!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 12:10

@Autumn wrote:
Raffle wrote:Please bring Madeleine home. What more is there to say?

Kate and Gerry, please co-operate with the police - return for a reconstruction, as requested, and answer the simple questions.

And you seriously think that will move the invetigation on? There is just the small matter of getting the authorities there to take the case off the shelf and re-open it first.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by MaryB on 27.12.09 13:57

Madeleine couldn't have been checked at 9.30 as she wasn't even in the apartment at that time.

MaryB

Posts : 204
Reputation : 45
Join date : 2009-11-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Was Madeleine in the apartment at 9.05pm?

Post by Tony Bennett on 27.12.09 16:11

@MaryB wrote:Madeleine couldn't have been checked at 9.30 as she wasn't even in the apartment at that time.
We only have the word of Dr Gerald McCann that she was there at 9.05pm

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13954
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 17:02

Only Mr McCann's word says Mr Bennett...

So when will the campaigning begin for a new law saying that children must be in the presence of at least 2 people at any time in case one of them is later accused of lying that the child was there?

I feel a leaflet coming on






never mind

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 19:50

Aristocrat wrote:
@marigold wrote:She didn't answer the questions because she knew they would incriminate her IMO.

Well there you are. Would you answer questions to incriminate yourself???

Any normal, innocent parent would happily answer ANY question as they would be so desperate to find their child.

There is not one question to be answered that would lead to find Madeleine.

Not answering the questions has made her look very suspicious to many people.

Not to me. Totally not. If I was in her shoes I would have done the same. You seem to forget that it is not the McCanns that committed a crime. They are not the suspects here. There is an perpetrator, walking free, a great risk for other children, but not one word about his or her crime?? It is only throwing mud to the McCanns, that's all. Something is not right here.

All this c**p about being framed! It's always the old corny mantra isn't it? This is said by so many when they are about to be arrested..I'm being framed by the police they cry!

Maybe you should have a word with Leonor Cipriano and look at her image after 'an interview with the PJ conducted by Amaral'

I suppose it's a last desperate attempt to try to evade justice.

Nonsense
Why on earth would the Portugese police have any interest in framing the Mccanns?

Why on earth is the disgraced ex-cop Amaral still trying to frame the McCanns while he knows there is no evidence?

They were policemen trying to do a job and the parents had to be eliminated first because in the vast majority of cases the parents are responsible for a child's disappearance.

You do that in the first days of the investigation not after 4 months.

However, the 'parents' wanted to be as obstructive as humanly possible. To hinder the search it would appear.

I would like to see some evidence to proof your point

Yet now, peversely, they bleat on about why nobody is searching for their daughter!

I can understand that the McCanns have lost trust in the PJ. I can't understand that no British police force is not searching for Madeleine.


Just a small point, but when a crime occurs, everyone connected with that crime are treated as suspects, until they can be eliminated. Now how can you eliminate people from an investigation, if they don't answer questions they are asked. Most of the questions where for background information, which all police forces research on people. Now the PJ were hindered with the research such as credit cards, medical records etc., so they had to ask direct questions re this. Why did KM not answer these simple questions.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 20:17

candyfloss wrote:


Just a small point, but when a crime occurs, everyone connected with that crime are treated as suspects, until they can be eliminated.

Yes, ofcourse, first thing in the early hours after the alarm was raised.
How can you start an investigation otherwise? That is one of the reason this investigation got damaged.


Now how can you eliminate people from an investigation, if they don't answer questions they are asked. Most of the questions where for background information, which all police forces research on people.

If these questions put on Kate were asked in the first days after Madeleine disappeared we all would know the answers to all the questions. At least, that is what I think. I am not Kate ofcourse.
The questions were put to Kate after she was made an arguida.
That makes the whole situation completely different. At that moment she was a suspect.


Now the PJ were hindered with the research such as credit cards, medical records etc., so they had to ask direct questions re this.

You've got a point there. IMO this has everything to do with the Rachel Charles/Cook affair. And in June 2007 the Leonor Cipriano case was already known as Amaral, the coordinator of the Madeleine investigation was charged in june 2007.
British embassy, british police did not want to give the PJ any munition, right or wrong, I guess. It was not a discission made by the McCanns neither had they any influence on that discission.


Why did KM not answer these simple questions

Because the answers wouldn't lead to the finding of Madeleine.
The questions leads to more questions and before you know you have
incriminate yourself. That's how it works when you are questioned as a suspect: the police are after evidence to nail you.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Slartibartfast on 27.12.09 20:18

candyfloss wrote:
Aristocrat wrote:
@marigold wrote:She didn't answer the questions because she knew they would incriminate her IMO.

Well there you are. Would you answer questions to incriminate yourself???

Any normal, innocent parent would happily answer ANY question as they would be so desperate to find their child.

There is not one question to be answered that would lead to find Madeleine.

Not answering the questions has made her look very suspicious to many people.

Not to me. Totally not. If I was in her shoes I would have done the same. You seem to forget that it is not the McCanns that committed a crime. They are not the suspects here. There is an perpetrator, walking free, a great risk for other children, but not one word about his or her crime?? It is only throwing mud to the McCanns, that's all. Something is not right here.

All this c**p about being framed! It's always the old corny mantra isn't it? This is said by so many when they are about to be arrested..I'm being framed by the police they cry!

Maybe you should have a word with Leonor Cipriano and look at her image after 'an interview with the PJ conducted by Amaral'

I suppose it's a last desperate attempt to try to evade justice.

Nonsense
Why on earth would the Portugese police have any interest in framing the Mccanns?

Why on earth is the disgraced ex-cop Amaral still trying to frame the McCanns while he knows there is no evidence?

They were policemen trying to do a job and the parents had to be eliminated first because in the vast majority of cases the parents are responsible for a child's disappearance.

You do that in the first days of the investigation not after 4 months.

However, the 'parents' wanted to be as obstructive as humanly possible. To hinder the search it would appear.

I would like to see some evidence to proof your point

Yet now, peversely, they bleat on about why nobody is searching for their daughter!

I can understand that the McCanns have lost trust in the PJ. I can't understand that no British police force is not searching for Madeleine.


Just a small point, but when a crime occurs, everyone connected with that crime are treated as suspects, until they can be eliminated. Now how can you eliminate people from an investigation, if they don't answer questions they are asked. Most of the questions where for background information, which all police forces research on people. Now the PJ were hindered with the research such as credit cards, medical records etc., so they had to ask direct questions re this. Why did KM not answer these simple questions.

You use things like investigation techniques, evidence gathering and not supposition or asking people to incriminate themselves.
What is it about the right to silence that bothers so many people?

Slartibartfast

Posts : 135
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 20:35

Don't forget, the Cipriano case had already taken place. As well as Rachel Charles. The UK gov would have been well aware of how "suspects" there would be "questioned", so no wonder they sent the ambasaddor toot sweet as del boy would say.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 20:54

And don't forget they had a Portuguese lawyer who probably knows best how some elements of the PJ do the "questioning" of suspects.
It was on his advice Kate didn't answer the questions, questions that in no way were intended to help finding her daughter.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 20:56

Molly wrote:And don't forget they had a Portuguese lawyer who probably knows best how some elements of the PJ do the "questioning" of suspects.
It was on his advice Kate didn't answer the questions, questions that in no way were intended to help finding her daughter.

And what questions should they have asked that might help them find their daughter?? Can you name a few??

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 21:08

That is not interesting anymore

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Another question

Post by Guest on 27.12.09 21:27

Yes, September is a bit late to start asking questions that might have helped finding Madeleine.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum