The Missing Paragraph - The Blacksmith Bureau

by Guest 05.10.12 14:52

Will put this in this section to keep the April thread on top in Latest News............

The Missing Paragraph The Blacksmith Bureau

Posted by John Blacksmith
Tuesday, 2 October 2012 at 16:11

[size=9]

In the last post we referred to what Goncalo Amaral calls "the interrupted investigation" and the famous archiving summary which preceded the official release of the McCanns from their arguido status by that sturdy survivor, the Attorney-General, Fernando José Pinto Monteiro. The most important finding in the summary is the absence of any evidence indicating the commission of a crime by the pair, a conclusion which prosecutor Menezes emphasises, in a somewhat rhetorical passage, by asking his readers to point to any of the known evidence and show him material that would convince "an average person" sufficiently to convict the pair. And clearly there wasn't any.

The problem, of course, lies with that little phrase "the known evidence" and its connection to the well-known reconstruction section in the summary, taken word-for-word from the final PJ report submitted to Menezes. The problem is simple: of the three arguidos one, Robert Murat, has been fully investigated, there are no grounds for further inquiry, and he is no longer a person of interest in the case. But that is not the situation with Kate and Gerry McCann, since there are still unresolved issues surrounding their behaviour on May 3 and their police statements about that night, as well as with those of their seven friends. The reconstruction section describes the precise steps to be taken to resolve the problems one way or the other and then notes that the reconstruction could not be carried out because the group did not make itself available.

[/size]é[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Attorney-General Fernando José Pinto Monteiro.

OK. All that's needed is a paragraph in the summary noting that the archiving (shelving) is taking place without completing the investigation into two of the three arguidos, together with the reason why. And it isn't there.

It is this omission which drove Goncalo Amaral absolutely nuts – you can't do it, you can't interrupt an investigation when it's waiting for crucial information – and which guaranteed that the summary would forever be surrounded by suspicion and a new question: why isn't the paragraph there?

[size=12][size=12][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[/size][/size]

by Lance De Boils 05.10.12 16:34

Indeed.
At least those 2 "persons of interest" have not been fully investigated - I would argue that several other people also fall into that category. In fact, I still don't understand why there weren't more arguidos, let alone why the investigation was dropped when there are blatant gaps in knowledge, so many discrepencies and unanswered questions. It absolutely stinks.

by jd 06.10.12 2:16

The mccanns were suspects...Why weren't they the first to be re-interviewed in the RI's?

Why did they not have any RI interview whatsoever?

Why were they allowed to ask the questions instead?

Talk about a cover up

by **tigger** 06.10.12 6:50

From the February timeline:
7/2
The letters rogatory for the purpose of re-questioning the McCanns and their seven friends who dined with them at a restaurant in the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Algarve, have now been forwarded for the second time to the British Home Office,

9/2
The couple’s status as arguidos will be lifted unless “screaming contradictions” are revealed in forthcoming police interviews, according to a Portuguese newspaper.

Police are to give Kate and Gerry McCann the chance to clear their names over daughter Maddie’s disappearance. The couple, who have been official suspects in the case for five months, will be asked by Portuguese detectives to respond to 40 questions. Sources say that unless there are “screaming contradictions” the couple will be cleared.

[....] why on earth didn't the McCanns take part or made to take part in the RIs, or rather how did they avoid answering the 40 questions.
Up to the end of March it was understood they would cooperate - end of March it is understood they will not be asked any questions.
Presumably those are the 40 questions posed by the PJ.

Whilst the RI's were taking place and the PJ was in the UK, both the McCanns were in Brussels to tell the MEP's something they already knew.
Amber Alert Europe.

unquote

by jd 06.10.12 8:54

I find it just incredible and hugely suspicious that the mccanns were never asked these 40 questions, nor were they re-interviewd for the RI's. It doesn't matter if you believe them or not this is irrelevant, the fact is they were made suspects, and to not be asked a single question shows deep corruption at the highest level. Made even worse that they were allowed to ask questions instead of answering them!!!...What more proof do you need of cover up!!

The Tapas 7 weren't actually suspects so why were they only interviewed and not the actual suspects!!

You said 3 words there which I believe is the main reason the mccanns accepted the abduction scam from the Symingtons/Government figures. Amber Alert Europe in Maddies name is what they were originally planning for them

by **tigger** 06.10.12 10:18

But a form of Amber Alert for Europe was already in place as early as 2006.

I honestly don't think the Symingtons had planned anything, I think they were cooperating with the cover up big time because it was in their interest.
An abduction doesn't look any better than an accidental death in the OC. imo.
The affair turns around the three central figures, McCann, Healy and Maddie.
A death could have been covered up in many ways - but a fake abduction isn't effective. Wether she'd wandered off or was abducted, the blame still falls squarely on the parents. The 'listening' service which wasn't there, is also ridiculous.

I'm more for looking at the template created by the death of JonBenet Ramsey.

by **PeterMac** 06.10.12 10:45

Rogatory interviews are for witnesses.
Only in extreme circumstance are they be used for suspects, and in any event they can then refuse to attend the interview, there being no power of arrest for an offence committed outside the jurisdiction (with one or two exceptions which allow the offence to be dealt with under English law) or if they did attend, they could invoke their right to silence.
Since that right had already been invoked in Portugal, there would have been little point in trying to speak to the McCanns.

The situation is very simple. The PJ will have to have enough evidence to charge and convict without a confession before they will move again.

Softly softly . . .
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Ribisl 06.10.12 10:56

tigger wrote:But a form of Amber Alert for Europe was already in place as early as 2006.

I honestly don't think the Symingtons had planned anything, I think they were cooperating with the cover up big time because it was in their interest.
An abduction doesn't look any better than an accidental death in the OC. imo.
The affair turns around the three central figures, McCann, Healy and Maddie.
A death could have been covered up in many ways - but a fake abduction isn't effective. Wether she'd wandered off or was abducted, the blame still falls squarely on the parents. The 'listening' service which wasn't there, is also ridiculous.

I'm more for looking at the template created by the death of JonBenet Ramsey.

I agree. I don't believe there was any hidden agenda involving Symingtons. It seems more plausible to me that they and MW got involved in the cover-up in an effort to save OC's reputation. Which makes me wonder if something did happen to Madeleine at the crèche and a nanny was responsible for the 'accident' of some kind (possibly on 30th when she was checked out after only 15 minutes) which contributed to her death?

I believe the McCanns chose abduction for the simple reason they did not want any autopsy carried out on Madeleine. Missing medical record, ward of court, disposal of medication, disposal of anything with M's DNA, all point to this. The question is why?

by jd 06.10.12 11:08

tigger wrote:But a form of Amber Alert for Europe was already in place as early as 2006.

I honestly don't think the Symingtons had planned anything, I think they were cooperating with the cover up big time because it was in their interest.
An abduction doesn't look any better than an accidental death in the OC. imo.
The affair turns around the three central figures, McCann, Healy and Maddie.
A death could have been covered up in many ways - but a fake abduction isn't effective. Wether she'd wandered off or was abducted, the blame still falls squarely on the parents. The 'listening' service which wasn't there, is also ridiculous.

I'm more for looking at the template created by the death of JonBenet Ramsey.

It would be in the Symingtons great interests if MW/OC could lose their license to operate if any of their nannies actions could bring the fault at their door. MW were already in trouble with their nannies, 3 counts and you're out. The Symingtons are the ones who had all the connections that were involved from the start. And imo the mccanns had to take their 'neglect' as this does not bring any attention to MW, which they succeeded because it never has. Its always been the parents neglect scrutinised

As well as the above, I wouldn't be surprised if there was other things that needed to be kept quiet about too

by jd 06.10.12 11:09

PeterMac wrote:Rogatory interviews are for witnesses.
Only in extreme circumstance are they be used for suspects, and in any event they can then refuse to attend the interview, there being no power of arrest for an offence committed outside the jurisdiction (with one or two exceptions which allow the offence to be dealt with under English law) or if they did attend, they could invoke their right to silence.
Since that right had already been invoked in Portugal, there would have been little point in trying to speak to the McCanns.

The situation is very simple. The PJ will have to have enough evidence to charge and convict without a confession before they will move again.

I never knew this, that Rogatory interviews are for witnesses only. You learn something every day!