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

Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by aiyoyo on 16.11.14 19:41

@PeterMac wrote:He was Traced Interviewed and Eliminated in 2007.
He had an alibi, which placed him several miles from the locus

NEXT ! ! !

There the pertinent question has to be : why is he of interest to the OG to re-interview again?


That he normally works in the Ocean Club, from 14H00, for about 01H30 to 02H00, and leaves there about 15H30, 16H00.

He goes to work using his ex-companion's car, which is a Citroen C15, white in colour, and for which he does not remember the license plate.

He always parks in the area of block 4, and when it is possible, he parks next to the apartment from where the girl went missing, for no particular reason other than habit. 

States that the last time he was in the Ocean Club was on Wednesday, before the child went missing or on the 02/05/07. 

States that on Thursday, the 3rd of May, 2007, he was working in a garden in, Praia da Luz, for private clients, until 12H00 and after that ate some sandwiches and had a drink next to the ocean. He made the food himself. 

On this day around 14H00, he went to another garden situated in Praia da Luz. He left there around 16H00.

From his previous statement, he was in the vicinity of ocean club on 2nd and 3rd May.
Parked his car outside of 5A out of habit on every Wednesday when he works at the Ocean Club. On the 3rd May, althougt he wasnt working on Ocean he was parked next to Ocean Club between 12-2pm having his lunch possibly in his car.

That leaves open questions that OG needs to close.  
On the 3rd, he said he was next to Ocean - as in where exactly?
Was he by chance parked outside 5A as per his usual habit when he had his lunch between 12 noon to 2pm?

It's a case of what he, the gardener, saw on those two days (2nd and 3rd) that is of interest to Redwood.  It may be a case of OG needing him to recall in greater detail by posing him certain set of questions so that they can tie up loose ends.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Montclair on 16.11.14 20:29

IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

Montclair

Posts : 156
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-01-26
Age : 70
Location : Algarve

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by NickE on 16.11.14 20:38

@PeterMac wrote:He was Traced Interviewed and Eliminated in 2007.
He had an alibi, which placed him several miles from the locus

NEXT ! ! !
NEXT.......Hairy Germans in Speedo´s.

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".

NickE

Posts : 916
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 41

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by aiyoyo on 16.11.14 21:13

@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Guest on 16.11.14 22:12

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.
How can anyone be prosecuted for a crime committed in another country?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by aiyoyo on 16.11.14 23:22

WMD wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.
How can anyone be prosecuted for a crime committed in another country?

Right.  But this is an exceptional case where everything pertaining to it is unprecedented...so you never say never.........

After all there isn't another case where the MET Police is actively leading the review/ investigation of  a crime commited in a foreign jurisdiction....unprecedented by any standard......hence......

So long as both sides share common goal, I don't care in which of the two countries they are put in the dock.  Just saying don't be surprised if the unprecedented should happen.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by roy rovers on 17.11.14 0:12

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.


To eliminate them and see if they have anything to add that they have heard when a little bit of pressure is applied IMHO.

roy rovers

Posts : 465
Reputation : 39
Join date : 2012-03-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Joss on 17.11.14 2:50

I am wondering about these people that are being called "suspects/arguidos". That is implying that they are saying they have evidence for involvement of someone disappearing a child in Portugal, otherwise why would they call them suspects? They can't just do that on a whim can they, as that is a pretty strong accusation to make. Normally in cases i have followed when the police name a POI, (person of interest) or suspect it usually follows someone gets charged with the crime.

2sus·pect

noun \ˈsəs-ˌpekt\
: a person who is believed to be possibly guilty of committing a crime
: a thing that is thought of as a possible cause of something bad

Full Definition of SUSPECT

:  one that is suspected; especially :  a person suspected of a crime
] See suspect defined for English-language learners »

Examples of SUSPECT

[list="content collapsed-list"]
[*]One suspect has been arrested.
[*]She is a possible suspect in connection with the kidnapping.
[*]The prime suspect for the food poisoning is the potato salad.
[/list]

Joss

Posts : 1898
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by aiyoyo on 17.11.14 8:28

@roy rovers wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.


To eliminate them and see if they have anything to add that they have heard when a little bit of pressure is applied IMHO.


Ask them pre-determined leading questions..........

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by aiyoyo on 17.11.14 9:04

@Joss wrote:I am wondering about these people that are being called "suspects/arguidos". That is implying that they are saying they have evidence for involvement of someone disappearing a child in Portugal, otherwise why would they call them suspects? They can't just do that on a whim can they, as that is a pretty strong accusation to make. 

Arguido has the right to remain silent (notorious example St. Kate refusal to answer the 48 Q).  I believe it has got to do how (or if) their answer or silence can or cannot be used against them in a Court of law.

 Equivalent to UK "right to remain silent" - to protect a person during criminal proceedings from self incriminating answer coerced out of them under pressure/duress in the absence of legal representation and/or to protect them from adverse consequence of remaining silent.  

It's privilege against "self incrimination" in a nutshell.

As to how the OG determines which person to be interviewed should be given or not given the arguido status is a mystery.  It must be evidence-based as a basis one would think.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Mr Peabody on 17.11.14 9:12

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Joss wrote:I am wondering about these people that are being called "suspects/arguidos". That is implying that they are saying they have evidence for involvement of someone disappearing a child in Portugal, otherwise why would they call them suspects? They can't just do that on a whim can they, as that is a pretty strong accusation to make. 

Arguido has the right to remain silent (notorious example St. Kate refusal to answer the 48 Q).  I believe it has got to do how (or if) their answer or silence can or cannot be used against them in a Court of law.

 Equivalent to UK "right to remain silent" - to protect a person during criminal proceedings from self incriminating answer coerced out of them under pressure/duress in the absence of legal representation and/or to protect them from adverse consequence of remaining silent.  

It's privilege against "self incrimination" in a nutshell.

As to how the OG determines which person to be interviewed should be given or not given the arguido status is a mystery.  It must be evidence-based as a basis one would think.
Since the McCanns claim that there is no evidence against them it would seem anybody can be given arguido status or perhaps OG is trying to dilute the status by 'promoting' there were umpteen arguidos not just the Mc's.

Mr Peabody

Posts : 21
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-10-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Joss on 17.11.14 9:43

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Joss wrote:I am wondering about these people that are being called "suspects/arguidos". That is implying that they are saying they have evidence for involvement of someone disappearing a child in Portugal, otherwise why would they call them suspects? They can't just do that on a whim can they, as that is a pretty strong accusation to make. 

Arguido has the right to remain silent (notorious example St. Kate refusal to answer the 48 Q).  I believe it has got to do how (or if) their answer or silence can or cannot be used against them in a Court of law.

 Equivalent to UK "right to remain silent" - to protect a person during criminal proceedings from self incriminating answer coerced out of them under pressure/duress in the absence of legal representation and/or to protect them from adverse consequence of remaining silent.  

It's privilege against "self incrimination" in a nutshell.

As to how the OG determines which person to be interviewed should be given or not given the arguido status is a mystery.  It must be evidence-based as a basis one would think.
I guess the police in Portugal do read someone their Miranda rights but only after they arrest someone far as i know, that can then ask for a lawyer to be present? Although the McCann's to my knowledge were never arrested, so no need for the right to remain silent or a lawyer. They were called "Arguido" by the PJ, but that fizzled out to nothing, and after 7+ years it still looks like the McC's case won't be going to any Trial anytime soon.
As for the rest of the BS, with all the different suspicious looking characters to be questioned its just all pissing in the wind, IMO, and i guess they have to justify the investigation and all that taxpayer money spent somehow.

Joss

Posts : 1898
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Rogue-a-Tory on 17.11.14 10:17

WMD wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.
How can anyone be prosecuted for a crime committed in another country?
How possibly can there be a 'fair trial' in England? Who has never heard of the Madeleine case? Who doesn't have an opinion one way or the other about the Mcs? Impossible to find an unbiased jury therefore.

Rogue-a-Tory

Posts : 402
Reputation : 245
Join date : 2014-09-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by espeland on 17.11.14 10:28

Rogue-a-Tory wrote wrote:
How possibly can there be a 'fair trial' in England? Who has never heard of the Madeleine case? Who doesn't have an opinion one way or the other about the Mcs? Impossible to find an unbiased jury therefore.

Of course almost everyone must have heard about Madeleine, but the vast majority know only what they've seen on TV or in the MSM - they will have no doubt of the McCanns' innocence. When the case brings up what is to them new evidence, their eyes will be opened. I don't think there'd be a problem over bias.

____________________


espeland

Posts : 205
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Joss on 17.11.14 11:18

@Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
WMD wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.
How can anyone be prosecuted for a crime committed in another country?
How possibly can there be a 'fair trial' in England? Who has never heard of the Madeleine case? Who doesn't have an opinion one way or the other about the Mcs? Impossible to find an unbiased jury therefore.
It didn't stop them in the Casey Anthony case, a case that had worldwide attention. And the Jury was selected from Pinellas County approx. about an hour away from where CA lived. They said the same thing there about a fair trial as well. And also in the Trayvon Martin case, but they still went ahead with Jury selection in Florida and the ensuing Trial.

Joss

Posts : 1898
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by MRNOODLES on 17.11.14 11:20

Is it also a possibilty that SY are just reinterviewing witnesses that Murat translated?

I have no opininons on why atm just a thought that crossed my mind. thinking


MRNOODLES

Posts : 637
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2013-07-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Joss on 17.11.14 11:24

@espeland wrote:
Rogue-a-Tory wrote wrote:
How possibly can there be a 'fair trial' in England? Who has never heard of the Madeleine case? Who doesn't have an opinion one way or the other about the Mcs? Impossible to find an unbiased jury therefore.

Of course almost everyone must have heard about Madeleine, but the vast majority know only what they've seen on TV or in the MSM - they will have no doubt of the McCanns' innocence. When the case brings up what is to them new evidence, their eyes will be opened. I don't think there'd be a problem over bias.
Yes and not everyone in England follows the MM case closely,and others may only vaguely remember hearing about the case back when it first broke in MSM, so i don't think they would have too much of a problem with jury selection.
My personal view is this case will never go to any Trial though.

Joss

Posts : 1898
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Realist on 17.11.14 12:12

@Joss wrote:

It didn't stop them in the Casey Anthony case, a case that had worldwide attention. And the Jury was selected from Pinellas County approx. about an hour away from where CA lived. They said the same thing there about a fair trial as well. And also in the Trayvon Martin case, but they still went ahead with Jury selection in Florida and the ensuing Trial.

There are a number of perhaps not so subtle differences between the British and US justice systems. Firstly, the defence lawyers in the case of Casey Anthony were able to select a jury of their choice, whereas in the UK  there is no preremptory juror challenge. In fact, names are pulled out of a hat and a defendant isn't even allowed the luxury of knowing a juror's occupation/profession. In other words, its a lottery where one one pays yer money and takes yer chance. Secondly, in the state of Florida anyway, there has to be a unanimous verdict in the case of murder indictments, whereas here majority verdicts of 10-2 are acceptable which means a defendant has to have at least three sensible jurors who don't consider their sole reason d'etre for serving is to perform a public duty to convict, however weak the Crown's evidence may be.

Then there are other deviations such as the prosecution not being able to draw adverse inferences from a defendant not giving evidence and remaining mute during police interrogations in the US, whereby this no longer applies in the UK since the 2003 Criminal Justice Act. It rarely pays dividends to give evidence in one's own defence, recent classical  examples being the cases of Max Clifford and Rolf Harris, as opposed to Stuart Hall who declined to give evidence on his own behalf and was subsequently acquitted of 19 out of 20 indictments. .Judges in their summations are resticted to giving legal instructions in the US, whereas here here they are permitted to summarise all the evidence and cast their own invariably prosecutorial opinions to influence juries. Hence the proverbial adage, 'The last word.'

 Of course it doesn't help a defendant's cause to be segregated behind glass enclosed docks whilst flanked by security guards, as opposed to sitting next to one's defence counsel on the lawyers bench. This practice also inhibits one from actually participating in one's defence. There is also the matter of previous convictions and similar evidence being admissable in the British justice system despite  it bearing no direct correlation to the matter one is being tried for with the prejudicial value far outweighing the probative value. Any counsel will tell you that juries will inevitably convict if they even get a sniff of one's previous convictions.

Despite all the above, American cases appear to be decided by the amount of handkerchiefs dispensed with and the largest river of tears shed by the opposing victims and accused relatives who are segregated like football fans within the confines of the courtroom

Realist

Posts : 421
Reputation : 179
Join date : 2014-11-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by jeanmonroe on 17.11.14 12:33

"The dogs have found cadavar and blood in the McCanns apartment, guv"

The gardner said, "That's me in the clear then, I only plant flowers, you muppet, not 'evidence'!

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5132
Reputation : 884
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Brian Griffin on 17.11.14 12:48

@Mr Peabody wrote:Since the McCanns claim that there is no evidence against them it would seem anybody can be given arguido status or perhaps OG is trying to dilute the status by 'promoting' there were umpteen arguidos not just the Mc's.
Gerry fixates upon the word 'evidence', but does lack of evidence mean you are not guilty? Maybe I've watched too many cop dramas, but the way he does this, with that sneer reminds me of the cocky crook from the TV who knows the police can't hold him because they have no evidence. Not indignance or horror that the have been accused, just arrogance. In my opinion.

____________________
"Looking for Madeleine"? - Lying for the McCanns! (In my opinion)

Brian Griffin

Posts : 577
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2013-10-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Joss on 17.11.14 15:26

@Realist wrote:
@Joss wrote:

It didn't stop them in the Casey Anthony case, a case that had worldwide attention. And the Jury was selected from Pinellas County approx. about an hour away from where CA lived. They said the same thing there about a fair trial as well. And also in the Trayvon Martin case, but they still went ahead with Jury selection in Florida and the ensuing Trial.

There are a number of perhaps not so subtle differences between the British and US justice systems. Firstly, the defence lawyers in the case of Casey Anthony were able to select a jury of their choice, whereas in the UK  there is no preremptory juror challenge. In fact, names are pulled out of a hat and a defendant isn't even allowed the luxury of knowing a juror's occupation/profession. In other words, its a lottery where one one pays yer money and takes yer chance. Secondly, in the state of Florida anyway, there has to be a unanimous verdict in the case of murder indictments, whereas here majority verdicts of 10-2 are acceptable which means a defendant has to have at least three sensible jurors who don't consider their sole reason d'etre for serving is to perform a public duty to convict, however weak the Crown's evidence may be.

Then there are other deviations such as the prosecution not being able to draw adverse inferences from a defendant not giving evidence and remaining mute during police interrogations in the US, whereby this no longer applies in the UK since the 2003 Criminal Justice Act. It rarely pays dividends to give evidence in one's own defence, recent classical  examples being the cases of Max Clifford and Rolf Harris, as opposed to Stuart Hall who declined to give evidence on his own behalf and was subsequently acquitted of 19 out of 20 indictments. .Judges in their summations are resticted to giving legal instructions in the US, whereas here here they are permitted to summarise all the evidence and cast their own invariably prosecutorial opinions to influence juries. Hence the proverbial adage, 'The last word.'

 Of course it doesn't help a defendant's cause to be segregated behind glass enclosed docks whilst flanked by security guards, as opposed to sitting next to one's defence counsel on the lawyers bench. This practice also inhibits one from actually participating in one's defence. There is also the matter of previous convictions and similar evidence being admissable in the British justice system despite  it bearing no direct correlation to the matter one is being tried for with the prejudicial value far outweighing the probative value. Any counsel will tell you that juries will inevitably convict if they even get a sniff of one's previous convictions.

Despite all the above, American cases appear to be decided by the amount of handkerchiefs dispensed with and the largest river of tears shed by the opposing victims and accused relatives who are segregated like football fans within the confines of the courtroom
I definitely think that relatives of a murder victim in the Court would be shedding tears when discussing details of the crime, with at times graphic details.
Thanks for your clarification of the differences between the U.S. & U.K systems.

Joss

Posts : 1898
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Sceptic on 17.11.14 16:14

@Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
WMD wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Montclair wrote:IMHO, SY is interviewing these people in order to eliminate them from their own inquiry, even though they had already been eliminated by PJ. It could be that SY want to prosecute in the UK and with the adversarial system in the British courts, they must not give the accused any possibility of raising reasonable doubt with other possible suspects.

I would go with that, that SY want to prosecute in UK. It would be a whole lot less complicating on proviso the Portuguese can be receptive to this.

Some, if not all, of the people the MET Police want to interview were already covered and eliminated by the PJ.  The interest to re-interview them may be to go more in depth to find out what they saw or heard vs the PJ preliminary round of interviews aimed at elimination rather than info gathering.  All IMO.
How can anyone be prosecuted for a crime committed in another country?
How possibly can there be a 'fair trial' in England? Who has never heard of the Madeleine case? Who doesn't have an opinion one way or the other about the Mcs? Impossible to find an unbiased jury therefore.
IMHO that's what the high profile awareness  wider agenda has all been about - their lawyers will play this card should it ever be needed

Sceptic

Posts : 155
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Murat's translations...?

Post by missbeetle on 17.11.14 18:54

@MRNOODLES wrote:Is it also a possibilty that SY are just reinterviewing witnesses that Murat translated?  

I have no opininons on why atm just a thought that crossed my mind.  thinking


I have been wondering the validity of Murat's translations myself recently.

It would seem perhaps they are not as legally acceptable as they might at first appear :


(snipped from gazetadigitalarquivo.blogspot.co.nz)

____________________
'Tis strange, but true; for truth is always strange...
(from Lord Byron's 'Don Juan', 1823)

missbeetle

Posts : 985
Reputation : 19
Join date : 2014-02-28
Location : New Zealand

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by NickE on 17.11.14 20:01


Almost 300,000 likes. big grin

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".

NickE

Posts : 916
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 41

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine:Two British men declared arguidos and a British couple are witnesess

Post by Doug D on 17.11.14 20:08

NickE.
Not a facebooker so don't know, but is there any way we can get some of those 300k 'likes' or 31k 'commentors' on board with the petition? Does someone need to ask Deano to post again with a link?

...............................................................


Reading the ‘Dewani’ thread with one of the witnesses having died, brought to mind the ‘Memory for the Future’ evidence that was going to be taken:
 
Monday 14th May 2007
 
This week, starting today, the group are set to appear in court behind closed doors to record their evidence for any future trial before they go back to the UK. The procedure, known as "memory for the future", is similar to a mock trial in which the friends would give evidence as witnesses now against a future defendant.
 
Local lawyer Artur Rego said the procedure was used only in exceptional cases such as this where a large group of witnesses are foreign. He said: "It is recorded by video and kept sealed, then released during the hearing. If somebody is ever charged then this statement can then be unsealed and disclosed for the judge who is going to hear the case. It has the same value as witness statements delivered live in the trial."
 
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id9.html
 
Does anyone know whether this ever actually came about and whether the T7 were actually cross-examined behind closed doors on camera?

Doug D

Posts : 2146
Reputation : 635
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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