British Police hiding evidence in Maddie case.

daffodil wrote:They are a very explosive couple of sentences at the end of that article.   Never heard this referred to previously, even about a funeral in the church a month

later.

Is CMJornal a respected news source ?

Snifferdog wrote:This post adds new depth and meaning to Gerry's challenge: "Find the body, and prove we killed her".

galena wrote:How would this fit in with the cadaver evidence on the hire car though?  If the body was in church all along?

j.rob wrote:I was starting to think along these sort of lines. Even thinking that she may be buried in a church graveyard somewhere. If there had been a recent burial, then it wouldn't look suspicious as the earth would already have been disturbed. And remember that extremely odd comment from one of the Tapas about walking down 'Cemetery Road' on the night Madeleine disappeared. Imagine actually saying that when you are supposedly looking for a kidnapped child?! Talk about giving the game away! 

But cremation would obviously be much less risky in terms of 'find the body and prove we killed her'. 

Perhaps there was an initial hiding place, then the body was simply stored in the boot until the time of the next funeral,  and as Amaral suggests placed there in the coffin at the last minute. But that would imply a serious  level of co operation and collusion from the priests of that church. There's no way the macs could do all that without local help. They'd have to be asking around about when the next funeral was.



This seems feasible - or something along those lines. It's possible that a few people were prepared to 'turn a blind eye' to certain things. Especially if there are certain incentives. 


The key to the church - yes, that would have been handy.



Madeleine may have had her own coffin and this was placed in the crematorium at the same time, or something like that.


Maybe when they went to Sagres they were scattering ashes?


They'd have to be asking around about when the next funeral was.



Indeed. Although in actual fact they would have known that there was a need for a funeral in the very near future, wouldn't they? 


Perhaps, Godfather like, someone arranged for someone else to 'sadly pass away' so a funeral could take place as soon as possible. Maybe Harold Shipman paid a visit to some of the elderly folk in Luz at an opportune moment?!


How would this fit in with the cadaver evidence on the hire car though?  If the body was in church all along?



Unlikely to have been in the church for much time, I would have thought. Unless the church had a morgue? 

I wonder if any of the group had contacts with any of the local hospitals/morgues etc? Doctors do tend to look after their own. Sometimes to an extraordinary extent, imo.


I wonder whose funeral it was a month after Madeleine 'disappeared'? 


This is becoming more and more like some kind of cross between The Godfather and James Bond.


They really are such a repulsive pair. I can't bear to even look at their psychotic faces any more. And it irritates me that the press are still quoting their gormless lying platitudes.


IMO





http://mygoodbye.com.au/funeral-information

SallyVern wrote:I trust Dr Amaral and considering the length of time it took to move Madeleine's body then his theory makes sense. I recall (a rumour?) he said evidence had been found suggesting Madelene's body was frozen prior to being moved in the hire car. Maybe frozen while waiting for the first available funeral? but it's a huge gamble to take. What if someone looked in the coffin prior to the cremation.

I can't remember the guy's name, the one that stored the hire car for the McCanns. Maybe his freezer should undergo forensic examination just to make sure.

nglfi wrote:

galena wrote:How would this fit in with the cadaver evidence on the hire car though?  If the body was in church all along?

It says the funeral took place a month after the disappearance and I believe the scenic was hired 3 weeks after. Perhaps there was an initial hiding place, then the body was simply stored in the boot until the time of the next funeral,  and as Amaral suggests placed there in the coffin at the last minute. But that would imply a serious  level of co operation and collusion from the priests of that church. There's no way the macs could do all that without local help. They'd have to be asking around about when the next funeral was. I'm not sure why Amaral is doing this now. If he's reporting facts from the investigation,  he's damaging it and surely the Portuguese police will be angry to say the least. I hope for the best for him today and pray that justice will be served.

SallyVern wrote:I trust Dr Amaral and considering the length of time it took to move Madeleine's body then his theory makes sense. I recall (a rumour?) he said evidence had been found suggesting Madelene's body was frozen prior to being moved in the hire car. Maybe frozen while waiting for the first available funeral? but it's a huge gamble to take. What if someone looked in the coffin prior to the cremation.

I can't remember the guy's name, the one that stored the hire car for the McCanns. Maybe his freezer should undergo forensic examination just to make sure.

New revelations as McCanns go all-out for €1 million in damages

As Gerry McCann was due to testify today (on Monday) in the long-running civil action for defamation that he and wife Kate have taken out against former detective Gonçalo Amaral,
damning new claims about his behaviour on the night three-year-old Madeleine disappeared have appeared in the Portuguese press.

On Sunday, the headline of a story carried by Correio da Manhã proclaimed “Gerry searched for Maddie drunk”, while in the evening the policeman whose inconvenient theory the couple is demanding over a million euros in damages for went on television to describe how a key witness had placed Gerry McCann on Luz beach on the night Madeleine went missing - but how that witness’ testimony has since been “wiped from police records”.

The first story hinged on an account from farmer and former fisherman Cândido Furtado who lives a short walk from Luz church overlooking the beach.
Furtado told journalists how he had seen Gerry McCann “totally drunk” calling Madeleine’s name in the street in the early hours of the morning after she reportedly vanished.
“The father was walking at 1am with a bottle of wine in his hand”, Furtado told CM.
“He was calling the child’s name outside my door, and I asked him “what kind of noise is this? He said: “Menina, menina, embora, embora”.
Father and grandfather Furtado said he told Gerry McCann to call the police, and “then went fishing”.
But as CM adds, “he had no doubts that Gerry McCann was drunk”.
“You could see it instantly, by the way he was walking”, he told the paper.

Intriguingly, hours later, former police inspector Gonçalo Amaral went on air on CMTV to say Gerry McCann had also been seen on the beach on the night Madeleine went missing - but that the witness who placed him there (a British tourist) had her testimony wiped from police records.
“We have tried to recover the testimony and the documents that related to it. They simply disappeared. Still today we don’t know who this person is, or where she is”, he told the news channel.
Even more intriguing perhaps is a letter received in the Resident offices today claiming that Madeleine’s body is indeed buried in Praia da Luz, but not in any of the places searched so far.
Madeleine will be found under a nearby driveway to a private house, “very possibly inside a missing carry all tennis bag", wrote South African investigator Martin Van Wyk, who maintains the truth lies with the Tapas 13 - not the Tapas 7 “as everybody was made to believe”.
Adding that he knows his email, sent to a number of news sources and investigating police, “will be pushed to one side”, Wyk advises recipients “do not delete it, as you will later refer back to it and be calling me”.

As we wrote up these developments, Sky News reported that Gerry and Kate McCann had not yet been able to give their “victim impact assessments” to the Lisbon court. There has been a “delay in the proceedings”. Whatever happens today however will not lead to any instant verdict.
The case, which was brought out against Amaral in 2009, will need “a few weeks” consideration before the judge contacts the legal teams on both sides with her final decision.
ENDS