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

Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by lj on 16.05.15 15:21

@katkat wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@katkat wrote:



They don't even dare to publish the findings of the judge, who ruled in favor of the McCanns. 
But in the meantime she said: 

Facts proved:


6. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in the apartment 5A, Ocean Club [alínea AR) of the undisputed facts].

7. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in a vehicle rented by the claimants after the disappearance of MMC [alínea AS) of the undisputed facts].
Is the judge implying the blood and cadaverine were planted?
No, i don't think so. The judge as noted in the second paragraph mentions "undisputed facts". Which to me says from a legal point of view the facts of the dogs evidence has never been legally disputed because there has never been a Trial in this case with experts to hash it out in court to dispute the evidence, as in other criminal trials? I could be wrong but that is how i interpret that sentence. There are probably other undisputed facts in the case also?
If the case never goes to Trial then there will always be undisputed facts IMO.
Idk, Joss, to me the word 'proven' means there is no reasonable doubt that there was blood and cadaverine in the apartment and hire car. Given that, how could the judge rule against Dr Amaral unless she was implying that there is some other possible explanation other than the McCann' s involvement which cannot be ruled out?

The judge says somewhere that it is not illegal to say that Madeleine died in the app, and her body was hidden by her parents (paraphrased). It's somewhere here:
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v01.htm

What she rules is that, in spite of his retirement, Dr. Amaral is still bound by the rules of secrecy he had as PJ officer. She also rules that the right of a good name trumps the right of freedom of speech. If the latter is true, than one of Dr. Amaral's reasons for writing the book (clearing his name) should have been taken into consideration too, imo.

The other argument means that all those books written by ex-PJ officers should be taken of the market. That's a far reaching opinion. It is also more or less the ruling that was earlier overturned by a higher court.

I don't think here you will find many supporters of the judges ruling. 

It is however interesting that the judge rules: the dogs were right

and

the reason the McCanns claim to be behind this suit (the damage to the twins, and the damage to the search) are both NOT proven facts.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3274
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Joss on 16.05.15 15:39

I also don't know how Portugese treat criminal cases, but the normal process from what i know is to arrest and charge a perpetrator with a crime on evidence. They are then imprisoned and can employ a lawyer to represent them, and can also apply for bail until they get their day in court during the trial to either prove their case or have their case disproven. This is decided by a Jury whether as to guilt or innocence. If proven guilty they are imprisoned until the sentencing phase. If proven not guilty they are acquitted.
The McCann's have never been arrested or imprisoned on any charges of a crime in relation to their missing child.
They were only made formal suspects, or Arguido status in Portugal where the crime occurred, but not charged or arrested.
Unless this case goes to trial i don't believe any judge or anyone else for that matter can say definitely the McCann's are guilty or not of any crime. That is only determined by a jury on evidence presented for the prosecution or defense, as to formally call them criminals or not, depending on what is proven legally.
The general public though can have its own opinion on how they see it, as we discuss on these forums, and what the investigation in Portugal found that led them to believe as they did. But it looks as if the McCann's will never be formally charged by the court or a jury of their peers for reasons we can only speculate about, as to why they have been so protected by the establishment.

Joss

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Joss on 16.05.15 16:25

@lj wrote:
@katkat wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@katkat wrote:



They don't even dare to publish the findings of the judge, who ruled in favor of the McCanns. 
But in the meantime she said: 

Facts proved:


6. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in the apartment 5A, Ocean Club [alínea AR) of the undisputed facts].

7. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in a vehicle rented by the claimants after the disappearance of MMC [alínea AS) of the undisputed facts].
Is the judge implying the blood and cadaverine were planted?
No, i don't think so. The judge as noted in the second paragraph mentions "undisputed facts". Which to me says from a legal point of view the facts of the dogs evidence has never been legally disputed because there has never been a Trial in this case with experts to hash it out in court to dispute the evidence, as in other criminal trials? I could be wrong but that is how i interpret that sentence. There are probably other undisputed facts in the case also?
If the case never goes to Trial then there will always be undisputed facts IMO.
Idk, Joss, to me the word 'proven' means there is no reasonable doubt that there was blood and cadaverine in the apartment and hire car. Given that, how could the judge rule against Dr Amaral unless she was implying that there is some other possible explanation other than the McCann' s involvement which cannot be ruled out?

The judge says somewhere that it is not illegal to say that Madeleine died in the app, and her body was hidden by her parents (paraphrased). It's somewhere here:
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v01.htm

What she rules is that, in spite of his retirement, Dr. Amaral is still bound by the rules of secrecy he had as PJ officer. She also rules that the right of a good name trumps the right of freedom of speech. If the latter is true, than one of Dr. Amaral's reasons for writing the book (clearing his name) should have been taken into consideration too, imo.

The other argument means that all those books written by ex-PJ officers should be taken of the market. That's a far reaching opinion. It is also more or less the ruling that was earlier overturned by a higher court.

I don't think here you will find many supporters of the judges ruling. 

It is however interesting that the judge rules: the dogs were right

and

the reason the McCanns claim to be behind this suit (the damage to the twins, and the damage to the search) are both NOT proven facts.
I would of thought that as a retired PJ officer Goncalo Amaral would of checked if he was within his rights to write the book, perhaps with a lawyer? And what was so secret about what he wrote when the PJ files are in the public domain for all to read, upon which he bases his book. I wonder if the Judge was right to make such a determination legally, and to not uphold the previous court's determination that unbanned his book?
Her judgement seems very unfair IMO, to not take into consideration GA's rights as well. I guess we will see what happens with the Appeal.

Joss

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by lj on 16.05.15 17:02

I think most of us here don't think she was right. Also it seems the same argument as was used  in the beginning to get all the books seized, a decision that was later over turned on appeal. So we hope he has good chances an appeal again.

Dr. Amaral develops a theory in his book, based on the info of the PJ files. The conclusion of that theory is that Madeleine died in the apartment and her parents hid the body (all very much paraphrased). In a normal world nobody should be able to deny you the right to say, write or televise that theory. But this is the McCann world. 

As far as your other post about only being guilty, after being found guilty. Portugal does not have the jury system, so that would be by a judge. It might be interesting to mention here a part of the "archiving report"  from The Republic's Prosecutor - José de Magalhaes e Menezes and The Joint General Prosecutor - Joao Melchior Gomes: We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain not clarified."  This was about the refusal to do a reconstruction.
Also an interesting remark is from the Assistant Chief Constable Of Leicestershire Police a written quote he made in submission to a UK Court in 2008 regarding the McCann’s when they were seeking access to the UK held Police files relating to the case : “While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”
Both seem to indicate that, while everyone has the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty, it is very much necessary for the course of justice to consider the possibility of the parents to be guilty.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3274
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Joss on 16.05.15 17:37

@lj wrote:I think most of us here don't think she was right. Also it seems the same argument as was used  in the beginning to get all the books seized, a decision that was later over turned on appeal. So we hope he has good chances an appeal again.

Dr. Amaral develops a theory in his book, based on the info of the PJ files. The conclusion of that theory is that Madeleine died in the apartment and her parents hid the body (all very much paraphrased). In a normal world nobody should be able to deny you the right to say, write or televise that theory. But this is the McCann world. 

As far as your other post about only being guilty, after being found guilty. Portugal does not have the jury system, so that would be by a judge. It might be interesting to mention here a part of the "archiving report"  from The Republic's Prosecutor - José de Magalhaes e Menezes and The Joint General Prosecutor - Joao Melchior Gomes: We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain not clarified."  This was about the refusal to do a reconstruction.
Also an interesting remark is from the Assistant Chief Constable Of Leicestershire Police a written quote he made in submission to a UK Court in 2008 regarding the McCann’s when they were seeking access to the UK held Police files relating to the case : “While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”
Both seem to indicate that, while everyone has the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty, it is very much necessary for the course of justice to consider the possibility of the parents to be guilty.
Thanks for clarification that Portugal does not have a Trial by Jury system, i wasn't sure as i mentioned previously what their system is.
I guess from the statement While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”   IMO there is actually evidence to implicate them in Maddie's disappearance, but they won't arrest & charge because of the political interference, IMO, to absolve the McC's from any wrongdoing for reasons we will never know. I suppose if the public want to voice their dissaproval, it would be to stop any support to those people in any way. Then they might just quietly fade away into the background. I think the tide has already started to turn against them as people are starting to realize what they are actually all about. What a shame it has taken this long, but as they say, better late than never.

Joss

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by j.rob on 18.05.15 14:48

"They practiced a crime of exposing and abandoning defenceless children and they weren’t even accused of that fact."


So, according to Detective Amaral, it is a FACT that the McCanns abandoned their children which "exposed them to a thousand dangers."


He could not possibly have reached this conclusion without some very strong evidence. 


I know there are those who believe that it is not true that the children were left without a babysitter. Taking the view that perhaps members of TM took it in turns to babysit all the children in one of the apartments each evening. Or the view that maybe a nanny or member of Mark Warner babysat the McCann children (and other Tapas children?) each evening.


If this had been the case surely Amaral would not be stating that the McCann children were abandoned as a FACT?  

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 224
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Joss on 18.05.15 15:20

@j.rob wrote:"They practiced a crime of exposing and abandoning defenceless children and they weren’t even accused of that fact."


So, according to Detective Amaral, it is a FACT that the McCanns abandoned their children which "exposed them to a thousand dangers."


He could not possibly have reached this conclusion without some very strong evidence. 


I know there are those who believe that it is not true that the children were left without a babysitter. Taking the view that perhaps members of TM took it in turns to babysit all the children in one of the apartments each evening. Or the view that maybe a nanny or member of Mark Warner babysat the McCann children (and other Tapas children?) each evening.


If this had been the case surely Amaral would not be stating that the McCann children were abandoned as a FACT?  
I think GA states it as a Fact because that is what the McCann's and the tapas lot stated was a fact in the investigation into what happened leading up to Madeleine's disappearance. "Just like dining in your back garden", yeah i call BS.
Whatever really happened if that was in fact not the case, i guess they can't redact that information now.

Joss

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by j.rob on 18.05.15 16:11

Of relevance, perhaps, is that Kate ADMITS in her book that one night that week - allegedly Wednesday night - she and Gerry and their friends did go to a bar after finishing dinner at the Tapas restaurant. 

And Kate ADMITS that no-one bothered to check that the children were okay before heading into the bar.

According to Kate the bar they chose was "the enclosed bar area" of the Tapas. Which would mean that the children were even less out of eye-shot and hearing than they had been when eating outside. 

Which meant that, according to Kate, "the time between our last check of the children and our return was longer, closer to forty-five minutes."

The fact that Kate will actually admit to this, and will actually admit that they didn't check on the children after they finished dinner and before heading inside to drink at a bar, suggests to me that what they actually did was much worse.

And Kate even admits that, despite having left their children unattended for three quarters of an hour, the safety and well-being of their children is most definitely not at the forefront of their minds when they finally leave the bar at 11.50pm.

"At about 11.50pm, Gerry abruptly announced, 'Right, I'm off to bed, Goodnight."........"I must admit I was slightly hurt that Gerry should just go off without me, as if I was unimportant - irrelevant, even........"

This could of course possibly be a deliberate distraction to lead the reader away from being astonished  about the McCanns' negligence and instead focusing on something quite different.

 But the fact that Kate doesn't even pretend that one or both of them were feeling worried about having left the children so long is evidence, as far as I am concerned, that the couple were, indeed, utterly reckless in terms of their childrens' health, safety and welfare that holiday.


Some good photos of the resort showing Tapas and bar area from the booking.com plus Thomascook websites:

http://www.booking.com/hotel/pt/luz-ocean-club.en-gb.html

http://www.thomascook.com/destinations/portugal/algarve/praia-da-luz/ocean-club-and-waterside-village-apartments/

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 224
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by j.rob on 18.05.15 16:47

If this had been the case surely Amaral would not be stating that the McCann children were abandoned as a FACT?  
I think GA states it as a Fact because that is what the McCann's and the tapas lot stated was a fact in the investigation into what happened leading up to Madeleine's disappearance. "Just like dining in your back garden", yeah i call BS.
Whatever really happened if that was in fact not the case, i guess they can't redact that information now.
----

I'm not sure that GA has ever taken a single word that has sprung from TM lips as a 'fact'. I doubt that very much.

Perhaps the McCanns and their friends really did leave their children unattended in the evening (perhaps giving them a little 'something' to 'help' them sleep?) and they concocted the 'checking' system as a cover. 
Knowing that MW resorts have a baby-listening system whereby nannies patrol corridors and listen outside they knew that they could get away with (pretending?) they did their own. 


As - if they had been accused of neglect over their alleged 'checking' they could point the finger at the MW 'baby-listening' and say that what they were doing was no different. I think this is their 'get out' clause. Why they feel they cannot be accused of neglect. 

Kate: "Even if there had been a baby-listening service it would not have given our kids as much attention as our own visits did. We were going into the apartments and looking as well as listening."


Hmmmm........how Kate can get away with all this nonsense is just incredible. So she is claiming that their 'checks' were better than the MW baby listening yet, by her own admission, they left their children completely unattended out of sight and out of hearing while they sat inside the Tapas and ate and then went inside to the bar and drank for 45 MINUTES!!!


That's 45 minutes according to Kate with no checking, no listening and no going inside the apartment. While "the babysitters" drink inside a bar 120 meters away completely out of sight and sound! 


"Our own apartment was only thirty to forty-five seconds away......and largely visible from the Tapas restaurant. We were sitting outside and could just as easily have been eating ......in a friend's garden, with the kids asleep upstairs."


NO KATE!


The apartment was 120 meters away from the Tapas bar/restaurant. And at night the Tapas eating area is covered by plastic sheeting which is opaque. 


The route from apartment 5A to the Tapas, should one of the children wake up and try to find his or her parents - is not well lit and quite secluded and involves a steep flight of stone steps from the apartment; a 60 meter walk on a public road, and then a 60 meter walk from the pool entrance gate to the Tapas bar/restaurant. A walk that would take a child along a large un-fenced pool.

And this - according to Kate - is giving their kids "better" attention than the MW baby-listening service?

WOW, just incredible!

So what, according to Kate, constituted the MW baby-listening? Perhaps the nannies just took the whole evening off and went to an all-night rave 10 miles away.

As always with the Kate and Gerry show my mind is boggling. Just incredible.


spin



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-474428/In-pictures-120-metre-route-check-Madeleine.html

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 224
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Joss on 18.05.15 17:02

@j.rob wrote:
If this had been the case surely Amaral would not be stating that the McCann children were abandoned as a FACT?  
I think GA states it as a Fact because that is what the McCann's and the tapas lot stated was a fact in the investigation into what happened leading up to Madeleine's disappearance. "Just like dining in your back garden", yeah i call BS.
Whatever really happened if that was in fact not the case, i guess they can't redact that information now.
----

I'm not sure that GA has ever taken a single word that has sprung from TM lips as a 'fact'. I doubt that very much.

Perhaps the McCanns and their friends really did leave their children unattended in the evening (perhaps giving them a little 'something' to 'help' them sleep?) and they concocted the 'checking' system as a cover. 
Knowing that MW resorts have a baby-listening system whereby nannies patrol corridors and listen outside they knew that they could get away with (pretending?) they did their own. 


As - if they had been accused of neglect over their alleged 'checking' they could point the finger at the MW 'baby-listening' and say that what they were doing was no different. I think this is their 'get out' clause. Why they feel they cannot be accused of neglect. 

Kate: "Even if there had been a baby-listening service it would not have given our kids as much attention as our own visits did. We were going into the apartments and looking as well as listening."


Hmmmm........how Kate can get away with all this nonsense is just incredible. So she is claiming that their 'checks' were better than the MW baby listening yet, by her own admission, they left their children completely unattended out of sight and out of hearing while they sat inside the Tapas and ate and then went inside to the bar and drank for 45 MINUTES!!!


That's 45 minutes according to Kate with no checking, no listening and no going inside the apartment. While "the babysitters" drink inside a bar 120 meters away completely out of sight and sound! 


"Our own apartment was only thirty to forty-five seconds away......and largely visible from the Tapas restaurant. We were sitting outside and could just as easily have been eating ......in a friend's garden, with the kids asleep upstairs."


NO KATE!


The apartment was 120 meters away from the Tapas bar/restaurant. And at night the Tapas eating area is covered by plastic sheeting which is opaque. 


The route from apartment 5A to the Tapas, should one of the children wake up and try to find his or her parents - is not well lit and quite secluded and involves a steep flight of stone steps from the apartment; a 60 meter walk on a public road, and then a 60 meter walk from the pool entrance gate to the Tapas bar/restaurant. A walk that would take a child along a large un-fenced pool.

And this - according to Kate - is giving their kids "better" attention than the MW baby-listening service?

WOW, just incredible!

So what, according to Kate, constituted the MW baby-listening? Perhaps the nannies just took the whole evening off and went to an all-night rave 10 miles away.

As always with the Kate and Gerry show my mind is boggling. Just incredible.


spin



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-474428/In-pictures-120-metre-route-check-Madeleine.html
Yeah well, the whole case is really quite crazy IMO, and i think they must live in the twilight zone, or some other alternate universe,thing

Joss

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by j.rob on 18.05.15 19:18

Yeah well, the whole case is really quite crazy IMO, and i think they must live in the twilight zone, or some other alternate universe,

Indeed! 

I know that sometimes people say they cannot believe that a group of doctors could behave with such nonchalance in terms of health and safety.

I have to say that I find some doctors, in particular, can be astonishingly cavalier about other people's health and safety. Dismissing people's problems as 'nothing' when it later transpires that the patient was very right to be worried.

It is also a total myth that doctors as a group will necessarily be more careful about their own children in terms of health, safety and well-being. One of my parents was a doctor and I was probably the only child at school who never, ever, was allowed a day off however sick or ill I felt. Unless you had a limb hanging off or a half severed artery you were making a fuss and were fine.

And we were also the kids in the street who would be running around half feral, most definitely raising a few eyebrows among the more conservative parents in the neighbourhood.  

And my parents' doctor friends were often equally laissez-faire. And My God - could they drink!

So I am really not at all surprised that one of the McCanns' children came to grief. Although I do think there is more to this story than just an accident. Gerry McCann is one scary individual, imo.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 224
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by sonic72 on 18.05.15 20:25

@j.rob wrote:It is also a total myth that doctors as a group will necessarily be more careful about their own children in terms of health, safety and well-being.

Based on your own experience you're claiming that the majority of doctors wont "necessarily be more careful about their own children in terms of health, safety and well-being."

How can you claim it a myth based on one experience?

Dont forget, some of the kids were BABIES!

sonic72

Posts : 337
Reputation : 64
Join date : 2012-09-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Synes on 18.05.15 22:28

Unfortunately, intelligence isn't a precursor to common sense.
Many of the highly academically intellectual professionals I've worked with have a deficit in real life skills.

Synes

Posts : 15
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by j.rob on 18.05.15 22:46

Based on your own experience you're claiming that the majority of doctors wont "necessarily be more careful about their own children in terms of health, safety and well-being."


---


I didn't say that. You did. 

Comment deleted by admin

Please remember the forum rules, attacking a poster is not acceptable

Also, please stay on topic.  This thread is about the an interview with Goncalo amaral, please keep it that way.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 224
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Lands_end on 19.05.15 4:50

@j.rob wrote:Yeah well, the whole case is really quite crazy IMO, and i think they must live in the twilight zone, or some other alternate universe,

Indeed! 

I know that sometimes people say they cannot believe that a group of doctors could behave with such nonchalance in terms of health and safety.

I have to say that I find some doctors, in particular, can be astonishingly cavalier about other people's health and safety. Dismissing people's problems as 'nothing' when it later transpires that the patient was very right to be worried.

It is also a total myth that doctors as a group will necessarily be more careful about their own children in terms of health, safety and well-being. One of my parents was a doctor and I was probably the only child at school who never, ever, was allowed a day off however sick or ill I felt. Unless you had a limb hanging off or a half severed artery you were making a fuss and were fine.

And we were also the kids in the street who would be running around half feral, most definitely raising a few eyebrows among the more conservative parents in the neighbourhood.  

And my parents' doctor friends were often equally laissez-faire. And My God - could they drink!

So I am really not at all surprised that one of the McCanns' children came to grief. Although I do think there is more to this story than just an accident. Gerry McCann is one scary individual, imo.
J. Rob. You coined it in this post, well done. I wish a few more people in the world saw things for what they are. The only thing I would add to that is that if something ever were to go wrong then Doctors will stick to each other like superglue. Exactly the actions of the Tapas gang. I have seen this with my own eyes so please no pointless deletions admins.

Lands_end

Posts : 88
Reputation : 21
Join date : 2015-03-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by MrsC on 19.05.15 7:41

"At about 11.50pm, Gerry abruptly announced, 'Right, I'm off to bed, Goodnight."........"I must admit I was slightly hurt that Gerry should just go off without me, as if I was unimportant - irrelevant, even........"

Mrs McCann must be as thick as two short ones. Didn't see she the utter irony of her words?


Change the sentence to "I must admit that we were slightly hurt that mummy and daddy should just go off without us, as if we were unimportant - irrelevant, even..."

____________________
Sooner or later in life, we will all take our own turn being in the position we once had someone else in.

*

The measure of a man's real character is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out...

Thomas Babington Macaulay

MrsC

Posts : 244
Reputation : 30
Join date : 2011-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by Lands_end on 19.05.15 10:40

GA was quoted in yesterday's Mirror as expressing an opinion in a free country. Over the years has nobody of real substance come forward and commented upon the quality of parenting whereby children were left alone in an aprtment in a foreign country whilst the parents went out drinking? This after all is supposed to be a free country too.

Lands_end

Posts : 88
Reputation : 21
Join date : 2015-03-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview with Dr Goncalo Amaral

Post by j.rob on 19.05.15 14:08

@Lands_end wrote:
@j.rob wrote:Yeah well, the whole case is really quite crazy IMO, and i think they must live in the twilight zone, or some other alternate universe,

Indeed! 

I know that sometimes people say they cannot believe that a group of doctors could behave with such nonchalance in terms of health and safety.

I have to say that I find some doctors, in particular, can be astonishingly cavalier about other people's health and safety. Dismissing people's problems as 'nothing' when it later transpires that the patient was very right to be worried.

It is also a total myth that doctors as a group will necessarily be more careful about their own children in terms of health, safety and well-being. One of my parents was a doctor and I was probably the only child at school who never, ever, was allowed a day off however sick or ill I felt. Unless you had a limb hanging off or a half severed artery you were making a fuss and were fine.

And we were also the kids in the street who would be running around half feral, most definitely raising a few eyebrows among the more conservative parents in the neighbourhood.  

And my parents' doctor friends were often equally laissez-faire. And My God - could they drink!

So I am really not at all surprised that one of the McCanns' children came to grief. Although I do think there is more to this story than just an accident. Gerry McCann is one scary individual, imo.
J. Rob. You coined it in this post, well done. I wish a few more people in the world saw things for what they are. The only thing I would add to that is that if something ever were to go wrong then Doctors will stick to each other like superglue. Exactly the actions of the Tapas gang. I have seen this with my own eyes so please no pointless deletions admins.

I actually think this may be *one* of the keys to unraveling the mystery. TM were reckless in terms of their childcare. They have told us as much.

Detective Amaral states it is a FACT that the McCanns "abandoned" their children that week leaving them in danger. And it is a FACT that they lost Madeleine. Note the phraseology. Not that "Madeleine was taken" which is the mantra that Kate and Gerry repeat. 

Obviously, there are different meanings to the word "lost". It could literally mean she got lost due to being abandoned (and then came to grief - eg: the accident that Amaral speaks of). 

Or it could be a euphemism for 'loosing someone' - ie: experiencing the loss of someone who has died. 

And of course the McCann mantra 'was taken' can also have different meanings. Someone literally took Madeleine away which is what they want people to believe or it could also mean 'was taken' (away from us) by death. 

Yes to the bolded part above. IF Amaral is right and Madeleine had an accident that week and IF all the Tapas parents 'abandoned' their children in the manner that Amaral claims the McCanns did that week then the whole group may very well have adopted a "there but for the grace of God" mentality which caused them to stick together. Perhaps thinking that what happened to Madeleine could have equally well happened to one of the other Tapas children. And it was just really bad luck that it happened to the McCanns.

One might just about be able to buy that if the checking story was true (although I think leaving such young children in an unknown place without a babysitter or at least a child monitor is reckless) but when the detective who investigated the case unambiguously states that the it is a FACT that the McCann's abandoned their children to a thousand dangers then the whole TM 'baby-listening' arrangements story starts to unravel.

And in any event when the McCanns ADMIT that they left their children for 45 minutes out of ear-shot and out of sight to go to a bar after dinner. And don't even pretend that the reason they returned to the apartment was that they were worried about their children, then you know that their children's welfare was not at the forefront of their minds that week.

While I do believe there is more to this story than an abandoned child having an accident, even if this was the whole story I can still understand why there might have been a cover-up. 

Can you imagine the media storm? Doctors' daughter dies in accident in Mark Warner resort in the Algarve. The four year old was left alone each night in their holiday apartment with her two your old siblings while her doctor parents ate dinner in one of the hotel restaurants. They were holidaying with a group of mainly doctors who also left their children unsupervised each night. This was despite the fact that there was a night creche which was included or the option of paying for a babysitter. There was also the option of dining en famille in one of the hotel restaurants. Or getting a takeaway from one of the restaurants and eating in. 

The group claimed they were regularly checking of the children but a neighbour heard a child crying in distress in the family's apartment for an hour and a quarter earlier in the week. And the family admit that one night they left the children for as long as 45 minutes as after dinner they then went to the hotel bar. 

It is a story that would not have put a very good light on the medical profession. And of course if the McCanns could get away with claiming that what they did was not so very different to the baby-listening' as carried out by Mark Warner, then that would raise the ugly possibility that Mark Warner's childcare arrangements were woefully inadequate. And children were being endangered. 

And perhaps also noteworthy that only a year previously - 2006 - there had been that truly dreadful accident at a Thomas Cook resort when two children died in a Thomas Cook holiday apartment due to a faulty boiler. 

Thomas Cook sent out a 'grief counsellor' or similar to the resort but the family claimed and continue to claim that Thomas Cook was always covering its back from the outset. The holiday company even sent the children's two coffins back on the same flight as the parents and other holidaymakers.

So the parents quite literally flew back from that Thomas Cook holiday with their two children in coffins. Somehow Thomas Cook kept that out of the media, didn't they???? Would have made a somewhat spectacularly terrible photo for the front pages. (So just how much money did Thomas Cook throw at this cast to avoid negative publicity??)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-32771355

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 224
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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