Breaking News on Sky News - SY back in PDL suspects to be interviewed

I might be kicking in an open door but maybe al those still wondering why WLBTS  was banned read this thread:


https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9973-message-to-all-members

I've been trying to work out the best place to ask this question.  If this isn't the right place then I apologise.

If Goncalo Amaral wins the libel trial whilst SY are still out in PDL, what affect do you think it would have on their investigation?

inspirespirit wrote:I've been trying to work out the best place to ask this question.  If this isn't the right place then I apologise.

If Goncalo Amaral wins the libel trial whilst SY are still out in PDL, what affect do you think it would have on their investigation?

Would love to know that answer, but there'd be a standing applause from my home.... Whoa what a feeling!

Hopefully, they'll have to take a step back and acknowledge the great Eddie and Keela IMO

Sorry, minds running, but have the rest returned to uk yesterday?

inspirespirit wrote:I've been trying to work out the best place to ask this question.  If this isn't the right place then I apologise.

If Goncalo Amaral wins the libel trial whilst SY are still out in PDL, what affect do you think it would have on their investigation?

First, I don't think this will happen because I think there are two days of hearings to come in July - and then it has been said that the judge will reserve her decision, maybe not announcing it until September or October.

This would then mean that the libel trial had lasted five years and 3 or 4 months, creating AFAIK a new world record for the longest-running libel trial in history.

But supposing Amaral wins his libel trial (by no means a racing certainty IMO) - whether Scotland Yard are out there or not, I think it will make little difference.

The Court may decide, under the principles of Articles 8 & 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, by which all Council of Europe countries are bound these days, to find that Amaral has NOT committed libel, but instead has given his honest opinion based on the known facts (i.e. exactly what the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts said back in October 2010 and March 2011 respectively.

Scotland Yard will probably say something like this: "It is only a matter of Amaral's opinion, the McCanns were cleared by the Portuguese authorities in July 2008, our remit is 'to investigate the abduction as if it happened in Britain', and besides that, we have a number of suspects still to interview and a number of other promising leads to pursue".


A luta continua

Why/how can the judge reserve her opinion? 

It seems a bit unfair to prolong it all after all this time.

lj wrote:

plebgate wrote:

elasticandy wrote:

TheTruthWillOut wrote:The Telegraph article is from August 2008.......

This 'shop' that SY want to search, could it be LUZDOC? The 24hr doctors, I guess. Right near the Smith sighting.

always been in my mind - doctors have oath of confidentiality - who knows who the mccanns knew at the practice IMO - makes an interesting hypothesis

If a child needed urgent medical attention and it was subsequently reported that the same child had been abudcted and this had been reported by her parents,  doctors would be obliged to contact the police and let them know.  

Medical confidentiality about a pateint is completely different to withholding information from the police  about a serious crime that has been committed.

edited lst line as was not clear originally.

Indeed it is, another example: if a child needed urgent medical care because something had been done to her/him the doctor has to report this.

This is an interesting line of thought and one that I have at times considered. Especially in view of comments made by the Tapas group about resuscitating a child etc. As apparently there is/was a medical centre near where the man spotted by the Smiths was heading. 

Based on witness statements there were several men walking in/ around the resort that evening who are obviously key witnesses.

Jane Tanner says she saw a dark haired man carrying a child at 9.15pm.
Matt Oldfield says he went into the McCann apartment and saw the twins at 9.30pm.
Kate cries out 'they have taken her' at 10pm (or earlier - 9.20pm - 10pm).
Gerry says he sees Jez Wilkins outside apartment at 9.15pm.
Matt tells Jez at 1 pm in presence of OC resort manager that Gerry saw him outside the apartment at 9.15pm.
Jez Wilkins tells police on 5th May that he saw suspicious looking blonde 'Rastas-man' in/ near tapas 7.30- 8pm (later identified as Gerry's friend Mike Sperry).

David Payne makes a 100 second phone call to child protection authorities - evening of 3rd, or was it 4th?

I have often wondered about the possibility of medical negligence, among other possibilities.

As always purely theoretical.

Tony Bennett wrote:

inspirespirit wrote:I've been trying to work out the best place to ask this question.  If this isn't the right place then I apologise.

If Goncalo Amaral wins the libel trial whilst SY are still out in PDL, what affect do you think it would have on their investigation?

First, I don't think this will happen because I think there are two days of hearings to come in July - and then it has been said that the judge will reserve her decision, maybe not announcing it until September or October.

This would then mean that the libel trial had lasted five years and 3 or 4 months, creating AFAIK a new world record for the longest-running libel trial in history.

But supposing Amaral wins his libel trial (by no means a racing certainty IMO) - whether Scotland Yard are out there or not, I think it will make little difference.

The Court may decide, under the principles of Articles 8 & 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, by which all Council of Europe countries are bound these days, to find that Amaral has NOT committed libel, but instead has given his honest opinion based on the known facts (i.e. exactly what the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts said back in October 2010 and March 2011 respectively.

Scotland Yard will probably say something like this: "It is only a matter of Amaral's opinion, the McCanns were cleared by the Portuguese authorities in July 2008, our remit is 'to investigate the abduction as if it happened in Britain', and besides that, we have a number of suspects still to interview and a number of other promising leads to pursue".


A luta continua

But can anybody be said to be cleared when nobody has been tried for this particular crime? Surely it's not for police forces of either country to go around declaring people 'cleared' if no trial has taken place? I'd have thought the best the police could do is say that they have no evidence to connect certain individuals with the crime and to bring to trial those that they believe they do have the evidence to convict (if any such person exists).

Bellisa wrote:Any update on wlbts banning ? very very sad to see such a reasoned poster banned and for the sake of the forum I hope there was a genuine mistake.

stargazer can you please send him my regards. completely undeserved.

Hi Bellisa i have just done so , and he said to send his regards back to you

Tony Bennett wrote:

inspirespirit wrote:I've been trying to work out the best place to ask this question.  If this isn't the right place then I apologise.

If Goncalo Amaral wins the libel trial whilst SY are still out in PDL, what affect do you think it would have on their investigation?

First, I don't think this will happen because I think there are two days of hearings to come in July - and then it has been said that the judge will reserve her decision, maybe not announcing it until September or October.

This would then mean that the libel trial had lasted five years and 3 or 4 months, creating AFAIK a new world record for the longest-running libel trial in history.

But supposing Amaral wins his libel trial (by no means a racing certainty IMO) - whether Scotland Yard are out there or not, I think it will make little difference.

The Court may decide, under the principles of Articles 8 & 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, by which all Council of Europe countries are bound these days, to find that Amaral has NOT committed libel, but instead has given his honest opinion based on the known facts (i.e. exactly what the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts said back in October 2010 and March 2011 respectively.

Scotland Yard will probably say something like this: "It is only a matter of Amaral's opinion, the McCanns were cleared by the Portuguese authorities in July 2008, our remit is 'to investigate the abduction as if it happened in Britain', and besides that, we have a number of suspects still to interview and a number of other promising leads to pursue".


A luta continua

Thank you for replying.....  I have just realised who you are.  (These things take a while to sink in, lol... it's my age.   ).  I love your article 60 Reasons and send a link to all my friends, if they ever ask me about the Madeleine case (they see me posting on groups in facebook and I often get pm's asking me about it).  So thank you for a well written article that is easy to read and explains it all (imo) without me having to send them lots of different links.

This is definitely worth a read :many things relate to Operation Grange although this is based on Operation Fairbank and paedophilia in the 'establishment'.
Read it right through to see criticism of BHH  - REALLY interesting in light of op grange - well quite interesting anyway...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681117/Cameron-orders-probe-happened-missing-dossier-alleged-paedophile-activity-Westminster-1980s.html

As i, and any number of others, here on this and other forums, had once AGAIN successfully predicted, and forecasted an 'upsurge' in 'activity' by the MET Police, slavishly reported by the subserviant UK Madia, just days BEFORE an 'appearance' of the McCanns at their libel case claim 'hearing'.

DO the McCanns, and the MET Police really think the Judge, at the libel case, has NOT also seen all this pre 'appearance' er, PUBLICITY?

The Met and McCanns have now done 'this' (activity upsurge, before court 'appearances') at least 4 times, via media or 'boots on the ground'

How and WHY the Met Police and the McCanns think this 'upsurge activity' is helping their 'cause' is anybody's guess.

All it achieves, imo, is that it is drawing attention to the 'case' and gets more people 'informing' themselves about the 'disappearance' of a three years old child

I don't know how MANY  'un-informed' people took to looking up 'stuff' after KM's 'outburst' about having to make 'tedious' child care 'arrangements' for her, left in UK, two kids.

A LOT of 'comments' media, texts, tweets, were all about "well she never did THAT when she had THREE kids"

Anyway ,do the McCanns AND the 'elite' MET 'Maddie Cops', and that title alone, tells you all you need to know about THEIR er, um, supposedly 'INDEPENDENT investigation' really think EVERYONE in Portugal has not 'noticed' the co-ordinated 'activity'  upsurge when a court 'appearance' is imminent?

I have NEVER, in all my long years, EVER seen such 'co-operation' between an 'investigating police force' and their, er, 'clients' who could yet, still become, PRIME 'SUSPECTS' in the disappearance of a three years old child.

NEVER!
----------------------------------------------------------
Operation Grange detectives BELIEVE burglars KILLED Madeleine DURING a bungled break-in at her family’s holiday apartment and buried her body nearby.

July 3rd, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"there's no evidence that Madeleine is dead and there's no evidence to implicate US in HER DEATH"

DIRECT quote from GM, 23rd September, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"whether that involves re-opening the case, or NOT, it dosen't matter..."

DIRECT quote from KM, 23rd September, 2009.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'This investigation is ANYTHING but 'normal' and it has NEVER been 'normal' from the day Madeleine McCann 'disappeared'

BBC reporter in PDL.

June, 2014.

jeanmonroe wrote:As i, and any number of others, here on this and other forums, had once AGAIN successfully predicted, and forecasted an 'upsurge' in 'activity' by the MET Police, slavishly reported by the subserviant UK Madia, just days BEFORE an 'appearance' of the McCanns at their libel case claim 'hearing'.

DO the McCanns, and the MET Police really think the Judge, at the libel case, has NOT also seen all this pre 'appearance' er, PUBLICITY?

The Met and McCanns have now done 'this' (activity upsurge, before court 'appearances') at least 4 times, via media or 'boots on the ground'

How and WHY the Met Police and the McCanns think this 'upsurge activity' is helping their 'cause' is anybody's guess.

All it achieves, imo, is that it is drawing attention to the 'case' and gets more people 'informing' themselves about the 'disappearance' of a three years old child

...

It's hard to know exactly what effect all the recent SY activity (digs, arguidos, witnesses) will have on the trial. Hopefully none. Worth remembering however that Portugese get a very different view on all the activities - and indeed on the McCanns themselves. From what I can see the Portuguese coverage (TV and Print Media) has SY barking up the wrong tree and making fools of themselves. They point out that FINALLY SY have accepted that Maddie is dead, but are derisive about their 'bungled burglary' theory. GA has had plenty of airtime, and the PDL residents (nana and her band of followers?) have been graffiting their protest at the recent activity.

But yes - with cadaver dogs being very publicly and widely used now - and finding nothing... that only now leaves the positive hits in the McCanns car / clothes / apartment. That's got to sting when Gerry is busy writing his big speech.   

inspirespirit wrote:

Thank you for replying...I have just realised who you are.  (These things take a while to sink in, lol...it's my age.   ).  I love your article 60 Reasons and send a link to all my friends, if they ever ask me about the Madeleine case (they see me posting on groups in Facebook and I often get pm's asking me about it).  So thank you for a well written article that is easy to read and explains it all (imo) without me having to send them lots of different links.

That's very nice of you to say all that - thanks very much

lj wrote:I might be kicking in an open door but maybe al those still wondering why WLBTS  was banned read this thread:


https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9973-message-to-all-members

Well done mods - when you suspect something isn't quite right, as I thought with this person, you're usually right.

As i, and any number of others, here on this and other forums, had once AGAIN successfully predicted, and forecasted an 'upsurge' in 'activity' by the MET Police, slavishly reported by the subserviant UK Madia, just days BEFORE an 'appearance' of the McCanns at their libel case claim 'hearing'.

DO the McCanns, and the MET Police really think the Judge, at the libel case, has NOT also seen all this pre 'appearance' er, PUBLICITY?

The Met and McCanns have now done 'this' (activity upsurge, before court 'appearances') at least 4 times, via media or 'boots on the ground' What evidence is there that the MET and McCanns are acting together? It seems to me rather like the situation where you overhear a conversation and incorrectly assume its about you.

How and WHY the Met Police and the McCanns think this 'upsurge activity' is helping their 'cause' is anybody's guess. I don't think this upsurge is helping the McCanns at all - and I doubt if K&G think so either. Why the  Met are so publicly undertaking their activities is beyond me, but I'm not in their target audience (and I'm confident they DO have a target) - and neither are you or, indeed, the vast majority of this forum's members.

All it achieves, imo, is that it is drawing attention to the 'case' and gets more people 'informing' themselves about the 'disappearance' of a three years old child

I don't know how MANY  'un-informed' people took to looking up 'stuff' after KM's 'outburst' about having to make 'tedious' child care 'arrangements' for her, left in UK, two kids.

A LOT of 'comments' media, texts, tweets, were all about "well she never did THAT when she had THREE kids"

Anyway ,do the McCanns AND the 'elite' MET 'Maddie Cops', and that title alone, tells you all you need to know about THEIR er, um, supposedly 'INDEPENDENT investigation' really think EVERYONE in Portugal has not 'noticed' the co-ordinated 'activity'  upsurge when a court 'appearance' is imminent?

I have NEVER, in all my long years, EVER seen such 'co-operation' between an 'investigating police force' and their, er, 'clients' who could yet, still become, PRIME 'SUSPECTS' in the disappearance of a three years old child. Quite, perhaps because there is no such cooperation.

NEVER!
----------------------------------------------------------
Operation Grange detectives BELIEVE burglars KILLED Madeleine DURING a bungled break-in at her family’s holiday apartment and buried her body nearby. Didn't AR say on Crimewatch that they were looking at a number of possibilities?

July 3rd, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"there's no evidence that Madeleine is dead and there's no evidence to implicate US in HER DEATH"

DIRECT quote from GM, 23rd September, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"whether that involves re-opening the case, or NOT, it dosen't matter..."

DIRECT quote from KM, 23rd September, 2009.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'This investigation is ANYTHING but 'normal' and it has NEVER been 'normal' from the day Madeleine McCann 'disappeared' Agreed, but then there's never been a case as complex and involving so many.

BBC reporter in PDL.

June, 2014.

I may add that if this case isn't resolved it'll open the door for many criminal gangs to copy. SY will be well aware of this.

Do you honestly think SY are even remotely concerned about that?

It's not their primary objective of course, but that would be the likely penalty if they don't succeed

I saw a story (probably The Mirror, maybe The Express, but I can't find a link at the mo) online a few days ago, saying that sniffer dogs are being brought in to sniff these arguido's cars. But if they do get a whiff of corpse, what then? How does the whiff of corpse in the McCann's car fit in there?

aquila wrote:

espeland wrote:

Do you honestly think SY are even remotely concerned about that?

It's not their primary objective of course, but that would be the likely penalty if they don't succeed

It's not entirely clear to me what SY's primary objective is.

As for 'the likely penalty if they don't succeed' that's just too far out man.

Actually i AGREE with 'espeland' on this.

IF SY/MET do NOT 'solve' this case, what is to stop a criminal 'enterprise' STAGING an exact same 'crime'?

We've already had a 'copycat' haven't we?

Shannon Matthews 'case'

In which Karen Matthews constantly referred, and compared, Shannon's 'disappearance' to Madeleine's 'disappearance'

and a 'lot' of her 'relatives' tried to claim 'rewards on offer' didn't they?

BIG 'rewards' on offer for their 'mates' to claim?

"I found the kid wandering about our village, where's me £2.5million 'reward'?"

IF SY/MET do NOT solve this 'disappearance' then it WILL open the door to replica 'stagings' of 'abductions' of pretty three years old 'children' abroad, imo.

Ad Infinitum for SY/Met.

Possibly 'abducted' Canadian 'Maddie', Australian 'Maddie', South African 'Maddie', Cambodia 'Maddie' etc.,

The MET would have to investigate ALL of the above possible 'claims' wouldn't they?

Otherwise they might stand to be 'accused' of total bias towards 'investigating' ONLY one preferred 'missing' child who only the parents have said 'she (Madeleine) was abducted'

No, i'm afraid, the moment the MET say 'that's it, we give up' then, imo, there will be a huge spike, from UK 'criminal' families abroad, 'claiming' their kid was 'abducted'

They'd make a 'fortune' from media 'coverage' alone.

PAID 'interviews' PAID tv 'appearances' 'donations to 'search FUND' SELLING GQWB's and tat from online 'stores' etc.,

The MET have to 'solve' this case OR the likely 'penalty' they will 'pay' WILL be all of the above, FOREVER.

All, imo, obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------
"We're gonna need a bigger office, Andy"

jeanmonroe wrote:

aquila wrote:

espeland wrote:

Do you honestly think SY are even remotely concerned about that?

It's not their primary objective of course, but that would be the likely penalty if they don't succeed

It's not entirely clear to me what SY's primary objective is.

As for 'the likely penalty if they don't succeed' that's just too far out man.

Actually i AGREE with 'espeland' on this.

IF SY/MET do NOT 'solve' this case, what is to stop a criminal 'enterprise' STAGING an exact same 'crime'?

We've already had a 'copycat' haven't we?

Shannon Matthews 'case'

In which Karen Matthews constantly referred, and compared, Shannon's 'disappearance' to Madeleine's 'disappearance'

and a 'lot' of her 'relatives' tried to claim 'rewards on offer' didn't they?

BIG 'rewards' on offer for their 'mates' to claim?

"I found the kid wandering about our village, where's me £2.5million 'reward'?"

IF SY/MET do NOT solve this 'disappearance' then it WILL open the door to replica 'stagings' of 'abductions' of pretty three years old 'children' abroad, imo.

Ad Infinitum for SY/Met.

Possibly 'abducted' Canadian 'Maddie', Australian 'Maddie', South African 'Maddie', Cambodia 'Maddie' etc.,

The MET would have to investigate ALL of the above possible 'claims' wouldn't they?

Otherwise they might stand to be 'accused' of total bias towards 'investigating' ONLY one preferred 'missing' child who only the parents have said 'she (Madeleine) was abducted'

Could'nt somebody attempt to copy it, even if it is solved?

People have set scam funds up all the time.  Especially the terminally ill scam.

IMO it won't make any difference.

Could'nt somebody attempt to copy it, even if it is solved?

People have set scam funds up all the time.  Especially the terminally ill scam.

IMO it won't make any difference.

aquila wrote:It's my understanding that Scotland Yard were ordered by David Cameron (passing his instructions to Theresa May who had previously refused) to review Madeleine's case - this was after David Cameron was bullied persuaded by Rebekah Brooks to give a week of bad headlines to Theresa May. Please correct me if I have the details wrong.

This case has nothing to do with any other case imo. It's still not clear to me what SY's primary objective is.

The only precedent set is that a Prime Minister can be bullied by the media to instruct (without the authority to do so) the UK police to do his bidding.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's still not clear to me what SY's primary objective is."

To use UNLIMITED taxpayers money, whilst kiddies after school 'clubs' are closed, due to Government 'cuts',(we ain't got no money for THEM) to 'solve' the claimed 'abduction' of a SINGLE child in Portugal, 7 years ago.

A 'claim' which ONLY, i repeat ONLY, the TWO parents of  the 'abducted' child have made.

Naz_Nomad wrote:I saw a story (probably The Mirror, maybe The Express, but I can't find a link at the mo) online a few days ago, saying that sniffer dogs are being brought in to sniff these arguido's cars.  But if they do get a whiff of corpse, what then?  How does the whiff of corpse in the McCann's car fit in there?  

 I have an awful mental image of a Fawlty Towers - esque scenario where a body is being frantically moved from one car to the next just before the police turn the corner and see the perpetrators in th act!


  Yes they can't ignore one and aknowledge the other....wasn't there a report yesterday that Malinka's mothers car was searched by dogs and nothing was found? If that's correct we still only have one car alerted to by the dogs.