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

MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Page 2 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by ShuBob on 30.08.12 17:35

@anne49 wrote:
@ShuBob wrote:Anne, the fact is that it should have been in Madeleine and well as in Kate's best interest to answer all questions as truthfully as she could to help recover Maddie as quickly as possible if she really was abducted. This wasn't a situation where someone was suspected of committing a crime against, say, a stranger or even a friend. This was her young daughter whom she claimed had been forcibly snatched from her bed as she slept. I do however take your point about innocent people being sent to jail after answering questions but was there any such risk to Kate? She had her expensive and influential lawyer sat next to her during the interview. There was no risk of misinterpretation or mistranslation as far as I can make out.

ShuBob, I agree with you that Kate should have answered the questions put to her, if you care to read my post properly you will see that I was answering Jean's questions. I was generalising on the "no comment" issue and at no point in my post was I McCann specific.

I did indeed get the point you were making and expanded on it given the original issue being debated i.e. Kate's refusal to answer questions. The link provided by Candyfloss has now clarified the "no comment" issue as far as UK courts are concerned.

ShuBob

Posts : 1893
Reputation : 57
Join date : 2012-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

.

Post by aniandr on 30.08.12 22:23

@tigger wrote:
@aniandr wrote:Absolutely. But in a investigation its actually not legal to let arguidos incriminate themself - therefor you have a lawyer.

And even when your Child are missing, if you are made arguidos, that is a basic rule in criminal courts.

Im not convinced they want All them Stones to be turned. But even if they did, what closer to finding Madeleine would the question above bring them?

And yes - they could anwser them now by not beeing arguidos anymore. But A's far A's there is no hard evidence, no questions of the 48 Will imo solve the mysteri of what happend to Madeleine. I just dont see what Stone they will turn? They would create Many headlines - but not solve the case imho

In some medical circles the term ' we let her/him down' means letting them die. As Kate is a medical person, the question was totally relevant.

In some medical terms. Even doctors are people to. I just think thats putting something into the words thats far from reasonable. Its a good headline in the tabloids, but i think again its about looking at hard facts in this case. Insinuating "we let her down" equals "we killed her" deffo wont prove ore solve anything

aniandr

Posts : 162
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-06-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by PeterMac on 30.08.12 23:34

You are with your doctor.
The doctor asks you some questions about yourself, your general routine, your general health and your habits, focussing on your consumption of tobacco, and alcohol and / or other addictive and dangerous substances.
This is in order that the professional involved may build up a fuller picture of the person with whom he is now expected to deal.
The doctor expects that you will give more or less accurate answers, and will interpret your responses according to what he also sees.
Signs - v - symptoms.
Clearly you may under-state things with which you have a personal problem, be this sexual practices, tobacco, alcohol or other substances, but eventually you and your physician will reach an accord, and the diagnosis can be made, the prescription given, and the treatment commence.

How many people seeing treatment from a Consultant Cardiologist would refuse to answer questions

"What is your normal heart rate "
"I do not have to answer this question"
Have you had this problem for long ?"
"No comment"
What is the exact problem"
My lawyer has told me I do not have to answer any questions, you f******* T******** !!!!!


____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

So

Post by aniandr on 31.08.12 0:20

So you think km was screaming out her diagnose in the tapas bar? :-)

Its hard to say if thats what she did. But sentenses like that and the "if she hurt herself in the apartment - why would that be our fault" - and this one is interpretated like it is rather to be a wanting to misunderstand than what it realy - mayve actually - means.

Im always up for a debate, as far as its based on facts. I think one in this case has to ve very thoughtful as there is so many rumors, press, spin etc intefering with the actual facts.


aniandr

Posts : 162
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-06-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Miraflores on 31.08.12 7:07

I agree with aniandr. Medical Drs might say 'we let her down' when a patient dies when their
treatment fails, and perhaps they realise they didn't do enough for the
patient, but I don't think that is the normal meaning. I don't think 'we let her down' means 'we killed her' or 'we let her die'. I think it means 'we have failed her', which could be said to be the truth.

Miraflores

Posts : 845
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by tiny on 31.08.12 7:59

I think there will be another postponement,there is no way on earth that the mccanns want this case in a court,but me i cant wait, as after the last court case between the mccanns and Mr Amaral when quite a few things came out that the mccanns were not expecting,I say bring it on.

tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by ShuBob on 31.08.12 12:13

@tiny wrote:I think there will be another postponement,there is no way on earth that the mccanns want this case in a court,but me i cant wait, as after the last court case between the mccanns and Mr Amaral when quite a few things came out that the mccanns were not expecting,I say bring it on.

I sincerely hope that is not an option! How can they be allowed to put other people's lives on hold because they have the financial means to drag this out seemingly for eternity? Like you, I'm looking forward to more revelations of the Lee Rainbow and Kate's dream kind. Gerry was visibly shaken by these.

ShuBob

Posts : 1893
Reputation : 57
Join date : 2012-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Cristobell on 31.08.12 12:19

There are a couple of excellent new articles on the Joanna site, an analysis by Moita Flores which indicates the libel trial will indeed go ahead on 13th September.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Cristobell on 31.08.12 12:34

@aiyoyo wrote:
But he (Redwood) refused to say what evidence they had uncovered to suggest Madeleine was alive. “Evidence that she is alive stems from the forensic view of the timeline,” he said. “There were opportunities there for Madeleine McCann to have been taken as part of a criminal act.
“We are developing material we believe represents genuinely new information. “We would like the case to be reopened. We are working with the police to get ourselves to that position.”

“We do still believe, however, that
there are matters which need to be considered,
and therefore we are currently seeking a more formal way of addressing this.”
We have received a steady flow of calls following yesterday’s appeal and officers are now working through the information.



The above three statements cant be any clearer about the objective of the Review.
Developing new genuine materials, appealing for witnesseses, and working through the new information.
Does this look like typical work of a Review team? Remember they're not investigative team.
Did he have to qualify it with the word " genuine" --- implying what otherwise?
Anyway I read the leads he compiled were already looked at by the Portuguese.


We can’t compel the Portuguese to do anything but we will keep trying and we don’t think this is the end. We will keep lobbying.”
The underscored bits are just political statements.



Up until the moment the police physically sealed off the area surrounding the grandmother's house in the tragic case of Tia Sharp, their official spokesmen were still giving statements to the media about sightings and video footage.

Therefore what they were telling the public was obviously contrary to the real investigation that was going on behind the scenes.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Guest on 31.08.12 12:43

@ShuBob wrote:
@tiny wrote:I think there will be another postponement,there is no way on earth that the mccanns want this case in a court,but me i cant wait, as after the last court case between the mccanns and Mr Amaral when quite a few things came out that the mccanns were not expecting,I say bring it on.

I sincerely hope that is not an option! How can they be allowed to put other people's lives on hold because they have the financial means to drag this out seemingly for eternity? Like you, I'm looking forward to more revelations of the Lee Rainbow and Kate's dream kind. Gerry was visibly shaken by these.

Blacksmith had it spot on: they have been dragging their feet both in TBs and in GA's case, hoping for SY to come up with something, anything, timely enough to be spun in their favour, appearing to be exonerating them in any way, if at all.
That, they would have used as ammo against mr Bennett and dr Amaral.

And now the Met has called it a day, virtually telling all and sundry they, the Met, are through, that reading just part of the files sufficed to convince them, and that further plowing on would be a waste of even more public money.

In fact mr Howe has more or less ordered 'the Governement' to sell the results to the general unsuspecting public.

There must quite a lot of ruffled feathers flying about at Westminster, these days, with some people sorely regretting that SY's message wasn't buried by the Olympic conundrum.

It will be riveting to learn how this plays out, and who will pick up te gauntlet from mr Hogan-Howe. And when!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

:-)

Post by aniandr on 31.08.12 14:12

Spot on :-)

aniandr

Posts : 162
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-06-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Spaniel on 31.08.12 16:16

@Miraflores wrote:I agree with aniandr. Medical Drs might say 'we let her down' when a patient dies when their
treatment fails, and perhaps they realise they didn't do enough for the
patient, but I don't think that is the normal meaning. I don't think 'we let her down' means 'we killed her' or 'we let her die'. I think it means 'we have failed her', which could be said to be the truth.

Show one example where the phrase "Let down" relates to death in med terms.

Spaniel

Posts : 743
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-01-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Invinoveritas on 31.08.12 19:20

@Spaniel wrote:
@Miraflores wrote:I agree with aniandr. Medical Drs might say 'we let her down' when a patient dies when their
treatment fails, and perhaps they realise they didn't do enough for the
patient, but I don't think that is the normal meaning. I don't think 'we let her down' means 'we killed her' or 'we let her die'. I think it means 'we have failed her', which could be said to be the truth.

Show one example where the phrase "Let down" relates to death in med terms.

Now I don´t think I can, I´ve worked in A/E, Theatre and as a Paramedic on Ambulances, the phrase "Let down" is no more than what it says, if you have worked in any of these areas then you would know how you feel when you lose a persons´life after you have picked them up, started the operation or whatever, when they die after they were conscious when they were picked up or operated on then this feeling is a reality, for people who work in this area, the failure to save them is a feeling of "we´ve let them down"

____________________
"A voyage of discovery is not just seeing new sights - it is seeing familiar sights with new eyes." Proust

Invinoveritas

Posts : 374
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : Nowereland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Miraflores on 31.08.12 19:26

Well, I don't know of any - that's why I said 'We've let her down' means 'We've failed her'. Which they certainly did, or we wouldn't be on this thread now.

Miraflores

Posts : 845
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Cristobell on 31.08.12 19:41

@Invinoveritas wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@Miraflores wrote:I agree with aniandr. Medical Drs might say 'we let her down' when a patient dies when their
treatment fails, and perhaps they realise they didn't do enough for the
patient, but I don't think that is the normal meaning. I don't think 'we let her down' means 'we killed her' or 'we let her die'. I think it means 'we have failed her', which could be said to be the truth.

Show one example where the phrase "Let down" relates to death in med terms.

Now I don´t think I can, I´ve worked in A/E, Theatre and as a Paramedic on Ambulances, the phrase "Let down" is no more than what it says, if you have worked in any of these areas then you would know how you feel when you lose a persons´life after you have picked them up, started the operation or whatever, when they die after they were conscious when they were picked up or operated on then this feeling is a reality, for people who work in this area, the failure to save them is a feeling of "we´ve let them down"


Interesting and does make sense. Digressing slightly, I have always been curious about the bruising to Kate's wrists. I can understand self harm in cases of extreme distress, bereavement perhaps, but Madeleine was missing and possibly still findable. I would have thought the most constructive thing a distraught parent could do, would be to physically search.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Guest on 31.08.12 19:50

@Cristobell wrote:
@Invinoveritas wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@Miraflores wrote:I agree with aniandr. Medical Drs might say 'we let her down' when a patient dies when their
treatment fails, and perhaps they realise they didn't do enough for the
patient, but I don't think that is the normal meaning. I don't think 'we let her down' means 'we killed her' or 'we let her die'. I think it means 'we have failed her', which could be said to be the truth.

Show one example where the phrase "Let down" relates to death in med terms.

Now I don´t think I can, I´ve worked in A/E, Theatre and as a Paramedic on Ambulances, the phrase "Let down" is no more than what it says, if you have worked in any of these areas then you would know how you feel when you lose a persons´life after you have picked them up, started the operation or whatever, when they die after they were conscious when they were picked up or operated on then this feeling is a reality, for people who work in this area, the failure to save them is a feeling of "we´ve let them down"


Interesting and does make sense. Digressing slightly, I have always been curious about the bruising to Kate's wrists. I can understand self harm in cases of extreme distress, bereavement perhaps, but Madeleine was missing and possibly still findable. I would have thought the most constructive thing a distraught parent could do, would be to physically search.

Bruises on wrists indicate restrainment, rather than flailing about. That, you do with your hands. You hit something with your palms, not with your wrists.
Bruises on little childrens arms point to them having been dragged along.
Bags under childrens eyes point to malnourishment/dehydration or Downs Syndrome.
Arms forever covered in long sleeves point to bruised arms needing to be hidden.

Fingers always curled up indicate what? Just look at te pictures of Maddies fingers, they always are like little claws, as, e.g. on the Donegal picture where she supposedly holds an icecream cone between two fingertips.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Invinoveritas on 31.08.12 20:19

@Portia wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@Invinoveritas wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@Miraflores wrote:I agree with aniandr. Medical Drs might say 'we let her down' when a patient dies when their
treatment fails, and perhaps they realise they didn't do enough for the
patient, but I don't think that is the normal meaning. I don't think 'we let her down' means 'we killed her' or 'we let her die'. I think it means 'we have failed her', which could be said to be the truth.

Show one example where the phrase "Let down" relates to death in med terms.

Now I don´t think I can, I´ve worked in A/E, Theatre and as a Paramedic on Ambulances, the phrase "Let down" is no more than what it says, if you have worked in any of these areas then you would know how you feel when you lose a persons´life after you have picked them up, started the operation or whatever, when they die after they were conscious when they were picked up or operated on then this feeling is a reality, for people who work in this area, the failure to save them is a feeling of "we´ve let them down"


Interesting and does make sense. Digressing slightly, I have always been curious about the bruising to Kate's wrists. I can understand self harm in cases of extreme distress, bereavement perhaps, but Madeleine was missing and possibly still findable. I would have thought the most constructive thing a distraught parent could do, would be to physically search.

Bruises on wrists indicate restrainment, rather than flailing about. That, you do with your hands. You hit something with your palms, not with your wrists.
Bruises on little childrens arms point to them having been dragged along.
Bags under childrens eyes point to malnourishment/dehydration or Downs Syndrome.
Arms forever covered in long sleeves point to bruised arms needing to be hidden.

Fingers always curled up indicate what? Just look at te pictures of Maddies fingers, they always are like little claws, as, e.g. on the Donegal picture where she supposedly holds an icecream cone between two fingertips.

?? I was of the opinion that this about Mccanns versus Amaral, please explain what this has to do with bruises, I hate to go off-topic

____________________
"A voyage of discovery is not just seeing new sights - it is seeing familiar sights with new eyes." Proust

Invinoveritas

Posts : 374
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : Nowereland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Cristobell on 31.08.12 20:35

I apologised for going off topic, but you had just given us the benefit of your previous medical experience in interpreting a phrase used by KG. That phrase was unrelated to the subject matter of this thread but you didn't have a problem with it.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

I

Post by aniandr on 01.09.12 5:52

I dont know if its a medical term. Imo it just doesnt make a lot of sence that it would have another meaning than the normal "we let her down", not saying that it outvof context seems like an odd thing to say but i dont know the context

Also "if she had an accident in the apartment - why would that be our fault" (cant remember excact words) seems totallly chynical and mean out of context, but even if she had an accident i dont think they would put it that way. But in a context like
- your daughter had an accident in the apartment, because the cadaverdogs marked the floor
- if she had an accident in the apartment - why would that be our fault? (that the cadaver dogs marked the floor.) that would seem much more likely in that context. Remember they sit at the station with a lawyer. And they simply discredit the connection between the bloodscent and the cadaver smell. No person in their right mind would say that out of context

aniandr

Posts : 162
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-06-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Invinoveritas on 01.09.12 20:53

@Cristobell wrote:I apologised for going off topic, but you had just given us the benefit of your previous medical experience in interpreting a phrase used by KG. That phrase was unrelated to the subject matter of this thread but you didn't have a problem with it.

my apologies to you, I was reacting to Spaniel´s question : Show one example where the phrase "Let down" relates to death in med terms.

I was trying to explain it and after I had done that I noticed that the original thread was going off-topic, this is why I got a little bit irate, mea culpa

____________________
"A voyage of discovery is not just seeing new sights - it is seeing familiar sights with new eyes." Proust

Invinoveritas

Posts : 374
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-13
Location : Nowereland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by aiyoyo on 02.09.12 3:08

O/T
Picking up from where people left off.

What time has lapsed when Kate said "we let her down"
Did she say "we let her down" or we let them down".
She left 3 children alone not just one.
How did she already know Maddie couldn't have walked out?

It's very telling the whole thing was staged.
One would have thought anyone in her shoes would have screamed "Maddie is GONE, but twins are there. OMG Where is Maddie"
Or the friends to have asked frantically : OMG, What about the twins - are they OK?
Not one word about the twins, as if they didn't exist or weren't part of the scene - strange NO?

Only during interview Fiona mentioned twins couldn't be roused despite mayhem and lights.

Even in the mockcumentary no one mentions the twins at all; not even by kate when she said she 'peeped' into the room in the dark, and saw what she believed was Maddie's form.
It's obvious the twins were left in friend's apt and brought back into the room later
They were sedated during preparation for the charade and to save them the trauma of the aftermath of alert.



aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by PeterMac on 02.09.12 7:51

And to repeat a telling comment from a few days ago
Kate said words to the effect "They've taken her."
And everyone knew immediately it was Madeleine, not Amelie.
Why ?
How ?

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by Guest on 02.09.12 9:51

@PeterMac wrote:And to repeat a telling comment from a few days ago
Kate said words to the effect "They've taken her."
And everyone knew immediately it was Madeleine, not Amelie.
Why ?
How ?
***
The devil is in the detail, especially when you're lying ...

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by russiandoll on 02.09.12 9:55

quote aiyoyo :

What time has lapsed when Kate said "we let her down"
Did she say "we let her down" or we let them down".
She left 3 children alone not just one.
How did she already know Maddie couldn't have walked out?

Yes, there were 3 children left unattended. I have always read this "let her down " as a ref to Maddie but as she is not named..... could Kate be ref to an adult female having been let down because certain people had forgotten their lines and /or stage directions? Leaving one of their adult helpers in the drama in a difficult position?

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MCCANNS v AMARAL: The final trial...Will it start in 3 weeks - or will there be another postponement? UPDATE NOW DELAYED UNTIL JANUARY

Post by aiyoyo on 04.09.12 5:25

Not possible to refer to an female adult.
In that dire circumstances it could only be referring to the missing child who was let down.
Although how she and rest of the Tapas knew immediately it was Maddie and not Amelie is an enigma.

"Let down" in what sense she meant is something only she know and possibly it has double meaning.
One befitting medical term as in "patient dying under your charge while you're helpless to do anymore" and another one meant for the public consumption as: "not being there for Maddie".


aiyoyo

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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