British police believe they spoke to her attacker

So, what happens if the police do try to pin this on the three suspected burglars? 

Either they will have to take them to court which should be very interesting without any evidence.

Or they will just have to drop the case against them.

And then it will just be assumed by the British that they were responsible but the police cannot prove it? Will the three have any legal redress against being falsely accused in the newspapers?

Estelle:
 
‘It is so ridiculous that it is outrageous.’
 
It also doesn’t fit with Duthie’s comments from last week about hoping to still find her alive, although he did talk about the burglars.
 
If this is the last thread that BHH was talking about, why has it taken OG ten months to get round to looking into it?
 
Must be too many pub lunches and sausage sandwiches.
 
Nothing like pulling out all the stops when you are looking for a potentially ‘still alive’ child! After all, it’s only been nine years now.
 
   
It’s all complete bollocks.

Doug D wrote:
It also doesn’t fit with Duthie’s comments from last week about hoping to still find her alive, although he did talk about the burglars.
 

Nuh, if MET haven't got intelligence on abductor, hoping to retrieve an alive Maddie within few months before earmarked fund runs out is pretty non existence.

So can't be last ditch attempt to catch abductor or recover her alive.

If they really have abductor within sight, would they have announced imminent closure? Nuh, don't think so......

Weird innit,  burglars they've known about for 9 years.  Who haven't been nicked for burgling for 9 years.  Plus burglars, who didn't nick anything anyway, just kidnap a child and make her vanish without a trace. Well I say without a trace,  they did leave the smell of a fish supper all over the belongings of their victim's family.

Estelle wrote:MORE FROM Heriberto Janosch González  (HUG): http://factorelblog.com/2016/03/31/caso-madeleine-1/ translated from Google.  The numbers in brackets refer to a map on this link.  


NOTES FOR POSSIBLE TIMELINE 

16:00 Two men (Ricardo and Jose Carlos?) Ask for money for a nonexistent orphanage ( "1" in the plane based on Google Maps ). 

17:26 Call from cell Jose Carlos and Ricardo.

21:05 Gerry, Madeleine's father leaves her sleeping with his brothers 2 years in the apartment 5A ( "2"), to continue the dinner with his wife and his group of friends at the Tapas Bar ( "3 "). 

21:25 Message SMS between cell Jose Carlos and Ricardo. 

21:35 Matthew Oldfield, who was dining with Madeleine's parents, through the 5A apartment, and sees nothing unusual.

21:38 Call between José Carlos cellular and Ricardo. 

21:50 ¿approximate time that Madeleine is kidnapped? 

21:51 Jose Carlos makes a call on his mobile phone, about 1 minute long, Ricardo.

22:00 Kate, the mother of Madeleine , arrives at the apartment 5A for children. The bedroom window is open, the blinds raised. Madeleine is no longer. 

22:05 The members of the Smith family, see a man carrying a child in her arms, the physical characteristics of Madeleine. The girl goes in pajamas and barefoot, despite the cool night ( "4"). 

23:00 Jose Carlos "take the air" on one of the balconies of the building where he lives ( "5"). On the street, almost in the same place and at about the same time, a person sees two men talking loudly. When they realize they are being watched, talking away quietly.

So based on three mobile calls and one SMS in the area at the time, Jose Carlos and Ricardo are being accused of kidnapping Madeleine McCann with no knowledge of the content of the mobile calls or SMS message. 

I call this COINCIDENCE rather than CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

Presumably the call at 21:38 went along the lines -

'I've killed a girl in the flat that could have witnessed my petty pilfering, you'd better turn up with your forensic deep cleansing kit'

Accomplice disappears into a cupboard & transforms from Penry mild mannered janitor/Ocean Club chauffeur into Hong Kong Phooey. He arrives at the scene in the Phooey mobile. It looks like the the case has been bungled but after a shake of the head, Spot the cat saves the day.

This is the first part of the interview with HJG:  The first part you can find on the previous page. 

http://factorelblog.com/2016/03/31/caso-madeleine-1/

I am interested in the background and experience of this man who has made such outrageous claims with no evidence! 



"- In your bilingual blog  Outer Space, you analyse the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Why did you become interested in the case?

Heriberto Janosch González (HJG) - Way back in 2011 I wanted to do a degree in criminology and a co-worker told me, "Look this case, the parents are involved." I was interested and I started searching all official documents, thousands of pages. Only the main file of the Polícia Portuguese Judiciary consists of 5,500 pages. The incident occurred in Portugal, and the English girl, of almost four years, was on holiday with her parents.

- Yes, we have talked a lot about. And the parents were involved?

HJG - Absolutely not. I realised that when I read the first 500 pages, it was physically impossible they were involved. It is true that they have committed a serious mistake, they thought they were in a safe place and left the children alone, asleep, a few dozen meters from where they were dining. Though they checked every half hour to see how they were, it was not enough. It was a mistake, yes, but the crime was committed by the kidnapper.

- Why did the Portuguese judicial police suspected the parents?

HJG - I do not know. The highlight was in September, four months after the abduction, when they were imputed. Until then they had only one suspect, an Englishman, Robert Murat , who lived near the apartment 5A, and proved to be innocent. And as the statistics say that in cases of missing children most often a family member is involved ... But each case is unique. You can not apply a statistic that is a result of many independent population level crimes each other, to a particular case. 

This matter has now been almost nine years and is not fully clear. Did you come to any conclusion based on everything that you read?

HJG - From reading and from my travels to the scene, in the Portuguese Algarve. I found it very important to know the physical and social environment where the event occurred. So I went four times, staying about a week on each trip. Luz, Praia da Luz is a village of white houses and few buildings, with a beach on the Atlantic, with four-star hotels and apartments for tourists. Inhabited mainly by English and Portuguese, and tourists, of course, they come from several countries, but mainly from England, Holland and Germany.

To know the environment is important ...


HJG - Yes, and I at that time was doing graduate studies in criminology and I was very interested, and was influenced by the theory of Situational Action of Per-Olof Wikström ... It is a criminological theory of two levels, the individual and the environment, and at the intersection of both levels is the criminal situation.

Estelle wrote:This is the first part of the interview with HJG:  The first part you can find on the previous page. 

http://factorelblog.com/2016/03/31/caso-madeleine-1/

I am interested in the background and experience of this man who has made such outrageous claims with no evidence! 



"- In your bilingual blog  Outer Space, you analyse the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Why did you become interested in the case?

Heriberto Janosch González (HJG) - Way back in 2011 I wanted to do a degree in criminology and a co-worker told me, "Look this case, the parents are involved." I was interested and I started searching all official documents, thousands of pages. Only the main file of the Polícia Portuguese Judiciary consists of 5,500 pages. The incident occurred in Portugal, and the English girl, of almost four years, was on holiday with her parents.

- Yes, we have talked a lot about. And the parents were involved?

HJG - Absolutely not. I realised that when I read the first 500 pages, it was physically impossible they were involved. It is true that they have committed a serious mistake, they thought they were in a safe place and left the children alone, asleep, a few dozen meters from where they were dining. Though they checked every half hour to see how they were, it was not enough. It was a mistake, yes, but the crime was committed by the kidnapper.

- Why did the Portuguese judicial police suspected the parents?

HJG - I do not know. The highlight was in September, four months after the abduction, when they were imputed. Until then they had only one suspect, an Englishman, Robert Murat , who lived near the apartment 5A, and proved to be innocent. And as the statistics say that in cases of missing children most often a family member is involved ... But each case is unique. You can not apply a statistic that is a result of many independent population level crimes each other, to a particular case. 

This matter has now been almost nine years and is not fully clear. Did you come to any conclusion based on everything that you read?

HJG - From reading and from my travels to the scene, in the Portuguese Algarve. I found it very important to know the physical and social environment where the event occurred. So I went four times, staying about a week on each trip. Luz, Praia da Luz is a village of white houses and few buildings, with a beach on the Atlantic, with four-star hotels and apartments for tourists. Inhabited mainly by English and Portuguese, and tourists, of course, they come from several countries, but mainly from England, Holland and Germany.

To know the environment is important ...


HJG - Yes, and I at that time was doing graduate studies in criminology and I was very interested, and was influenced by the theory of Situational Action of Per-Olof Wikström ... It is a criminological theory of two levels, the individual and the environment, and at the intersection of both levels is the criminal situation.

He absolutely knows the parents weren't involved but doesn't know why the GNR implicated them.

As my father would have said - if his brains were dynamite, they wouldn't blow a dew drop off the end of his nose.

Maddie case is SO high profile and extensively reported. 

Every breathing person in Portugal must have heard of her disappearance.

If Kate truly believes she is in Portugal, alive and findable, why doesn't she ask PJ to issue regular National Alerts to appeal to householders to keep a look out or to report suspicious person. She would even do it herself using Portugal broadcasting channels.
Who or what will stop her?

Could it be her leaking brain is telling us where Maddie's body is?

Why waste time saying it in the UK press?

MayMuse wrote:The man who views it not as a kidnapping but a theft which escalated?!? 
http://espacioexterior.blogspot.co.uk

Who was it who said nothing of importance was stolen or words to that effect? 
 
https://mobile.twitter.com/JanoschGonzalez?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

It was Trish who said it:  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddy-3-goes-missing-472340

MRNOODLES wrote:Weird innit,  burglars they've known about for 9 years.  Who haven't been nicked for burgling for 9 years.  Plus burglars, who didn't nick anything anyway, just kidnap a child and make her vanish without a trace. Well I say without a trace,  they did leave the smell of a fish supper all over the belongings of their victim's family.

It's not worth the brain power is it?

melisande wrote:

MayMuse wrote:The man who views it not as a kidnapping but a theft which escalated?!? 
http://espacioexterior.blogspot.co.uk

Who was it who said nothing of importance was stolen or words to that effect? 
 
https://mobile.twitter.com/JanoschGonzalez?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

It was Trish who said it:  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddy-3-goes-missing-472340

"going OT but interesting (to me anyway)*

The link above states how Gerry being one of the best in hearts.  And today Britain is amongst the best in Europe.

Where as a few short years before '07 it was like this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/898302.stm

Estelle wrote :-
I am interested in the background and experience of this man who has made such outrageous claims with no evidence!
His background seems not so good as is indicated in other posts. In addition just about all his so called investigation is pretty well undermined by Richard D Halls films and especially the "Dogs don't Lie" section.  All this evidence is ignored and I wonder how he would explain this. He says "I at that time was doing graduate studies in criminology" - no doubt run by Metodo 3.
If true SY have sunk even below Hillsborough standards (if thats possible) by putting out this rubbish. I thought the police did not disclose who they were going to arrest/investigate - especially in the press. Cliff Richard investigation excepted.
Imagined scenario -
SY detective on phone: "Is that suspect no 1?"   
Suspect No 1 on phone: "Yeah mate"
SY detective: "You read the Papers this mornin' sir?"
Suspect No 1 "Nah mate - only just learnt to read"
SY detective: "Right o sir I'll just fill you in - It says You and 2 of your mates are gonna be arrested by us as soon as Govt. coughs up the £95000 for plane ticket. Where you livin' now?
SY detective: "Oh bugger! he's rung off. You can't trust anyone these days"
As has been said in many posts - if SY were going to investigate - they should have investigated facts, not theories from McCanns or CM etc. and not had a pre-defined remit. Still, no chance of that now.
                                                                                                Dont forget :-     THE TRUTH IS STILL OUT THERE   (The X Files).

Rogue-a-Tory wrote:He absolutely knows the parents weren't involved but doesn't know why the GNR implicated them.

As my father would have said - if his brains were dynamite, they wouldn't blow a dew drop off the end of his nose.

Ya, and he has made not 1 but 4 trips to PDL just to verify that for himself.
Who ever heard of a student travelling multiple times to crime scene to argue a thesis?
Has he sent his travel expenses to Mc's Maddie Fund for claim?

Rogue-a-Tory wrote:

Estelle wrote:MORE FROM Heriberto Janosch González  (HUG): http://factorelblog.com/2016/03/31/caso-madeleine-1/ translated from Google.  The numbers in brackets refer to a map on this link.  


NOTES FOR POSSIBLE TIMELINE 

16:00 Two men (Ricardo and Jose Carlos?) Ask for money for a nonexistent orphanage ( "1" in the plane based on Google Maps ). 

17:26 Call from cell Jose Carlos and Ricardo.

21:05 Gerry, Madeleine's father leaves her sleeping with his brothers 2 years in the apartment 5A ( "2"), to continue the dinner with his wife and his group of friends at the Tapas Bar ( "3 "). 

21:25 Message SMS between cell Jose Carlos and Ricardo. 

21:35 Matthew Oldfield, who was dining with Madeleine's parents, through the 5A apartment, and sees nothing unusual.

21:38 Call between José Carlos cellular and Ricardo. 

21:50 ¿approximate time that Madeleine is kidnapped? 

21:51 Jose Carlos makes a call on his mobile phone, about 1 minute long, Ricardo.

22:00 Kate, the mother of Madeleine , arrives at the apartment 5A for children. The bedroom window is open, the blinds raised. Madeleine is no longer. 

22:05 The members of the Smith family, see a man carrying a child in her arms, the physical characteristics of Madeleine. The girl goes in pajamas and barefoot, despite the cool night ( "4"). 

23:00 Jose Carlos "take the air" on one of the balconies of the building where he lives ( "5"). On the street, almost in the same place and at about the same time, a person sees two men talking loudly. When they realize they are being watched, talking away quietly.

So based on three mobile calls and one SMS in the area at the time, Jose Carlos and Ricardo are being accused of kidnapping Madeleine McCann with no knowledge of the content of the mobile calls or SMS message. 

I call this COINCIDENCE rather than CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

Presumably the call at 21:38 went along the lines -

'I've killed a girl in the flat that could have witnessed my petty pilfering, you'd better turn up with your forensic deep cleansing kit'

Accomplice disappears into a cupboard & transforms from Penry mild mannered janitor/Ocean Club chauffeur into Hong Kong Phooey. He arrives at the scene in the Phooey mobile. It looks like the the case has been bungled but after a shake of the head, Spot the cat saves the day.

It wasn't me, I may have a bucket and a mop but I can't be accused of this clean up operation. Besides I've already spoken to the PJ and refused to answer their 48 questions. Hmmm or was that somebody else????

Haven't posted in quite a while, but wanted to say that there is no way any patsy (or patsies) will be presented in a court for trial. That would necessitate the McCanns and the Tapas 7 giving evidence. Any half decent advocate would tear them to pieces on their version of events for that night. If they chose not to appear, then the case would collapse. 

The prosecution would have to establish the "facts" of what happened not only that night but also on preceding days. It's not going to happen because if it were done in order to clear the McCanns, those behind it would be well aware that they and their friends would be cross examined "up hill and down dale" as barristers I have worked with used to say. 

Not going to happen - it's just spin.

By the way, congratulations to Snr Amaral.

aiyoyo wrote:Maddie case is SO high profile and extensively reported. 

Every breathing person in Portugal must have heard of her disappearance.

If Kate truly believes she is in Portugal, alive and findable, why doesn't she ask PJ to issue regular National Alerts to appeal to householders to keep a look out or to report suspicious person. She would even do it herself using Portugal broadcasting channels.
Who or what will stop her?

Could it be her leaking brain is telling us where Maddie's body is?

Why waste time saying it in the UK press?

Better still why not use the Find Madeleine Fund, go to Portugal and actually search for her!?

MayMuse wrote:There is not one direct quote from any authoritative figure .i.e the police!

It is 'a source said' .....again! 

And a 'deduction' from an expert in criminology? 

Wonder if he was paid for that bit of 'sherlocking' ?

And we know that 99% of the population will fall for it. All they need to get people to do is glance at the names such as BH Howe 'chief commisioner' and criminal psychologist 'expert' (or whatever they wrote) and see it next to the burglar theory and that is it....it's just an association with the names of the experts giving the story some credence. Pathetic slimy tactic that unfortunately works.
  It's funny they mention 3 aguidos and phone records though, why not spell it out, we can think of 3 other aguidos if they need some help.

suzyjohnson wrote:So, what happens if the police do try to pin this on the three suspected burglars? 

Either they will have to take them to court which should be very interesting without any evidence.

Or they will just have to drop the case against them.

And then it will just be assumed by the British that they were responsible but the police cannot prove it?

Will the three have any legal redress against being falsely accused in the newspapers?

I think you have hit the nail squarely on the head. That is exactly what will happen.

As for your question about legal redress. Assuming they stick with the 3 burglars, they have chosen 3 people who have no money and no way to sue in a foreign court. And provided the SY report and MSM stories are factual in terms of calls made / time of txts / criminal records, then there is no claim anyway.

THE HISTORY OF THIS CASE SINCE SCOTLAND YARD REOPENED THE CASE ON 4TH JULY, 2013

http://textusa.blogspot.com.au/2014/11/sy-movie.html?m=1


Scotland Yard have been on this same track that the three burglars did it for 2 years 7 months now!

How to Close a Case Without Really Proving Anything

"What can we expect with the Madeleine McCann case? 

We can expect closure, just not the closure most of us want. We can be happy Gonçalo Amaral has been vindicated in a court of law and that a tremendous amount of information about the case is available online and in printed books and DVDs, so that the facts of the case are not swept entirely under the rug, but we are not going to see an arrest and conviction of the people we think are likely responsible for what happened to Maddie.

What we can't expect, and what has been evident since the day Scotland Yard set foot on Portuguese soil with a remit to investigate an abduction as opposed to all the evidence in the case, is that one day there would be closure of a legitimate type.  Scotland Yard is finishing up its one line of investigation "worth pursuing" - and it is most likely the three burglars, not the McCanns. By the end of the year, we should have Scotland Yard explaining how they have thoroughly analyzed the case, followed every lead, and the most likely explanation for the disappearance of Maddie McCann was a botched burglary leading to her demise and removal from the apartment, and, unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to take anyone to court; this is known as solving the case "administratively." Of course, because they cannot 100% prove that this is what happened to Maddie, the door is open for the McCanns to say it is still possible for Madeleine to be alive and out there somewhere and, therefore, the fund can continue. 

And the winners are: Scotland Yard, who made the best effort possible to solve the crime, and the McCanns who remain free of being charged with said crime. The added bonus for the McCanns is that if Scotland Yard does indeed shut down the case with the botched burglary explanation, this also "proves" Gonçalo Amaral, the Portuguese police, the Portuguese courts, and anyone who has questioned the abduction theory to be incompetent and dead wrong.

The losers are: everyone else - British citizens, Portuguese citizens, truth seekers, and missing children and their families in every country across the world."

Martin Roberts said...
"Succinct and on the money.

It was back in 2010 that the McCanns started bleating about the need for a review of their case, by whichever agency was most equipped to do it, or words to that effect.

It doesn't take an Ivy League Scholar (or an Oxbridge don) to appreciate there is not a snowball's chance in hell the McCanns would have persistently invited Scotland Yard to 'take another look' if it were remotely possibility the investigation might follow a trail to their front door.

Operation Grange was never any more than perceptual wallpaper."

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com.au/2016/04/how-to-close-case-without-really.html

Estelle wrote:

How to Close a Case Without Really Proving Anything

"What can we expect with the Madeleine McCann case? 

We can expect closure, just not the closure most of us want. We can be happy Gonçalo Amaral has been vindicated in a court of law and that a tremendous amount of information about the case is available online and in printed books and DVDs, so that the facts of the case are not swept entirely under the rug, but we are not going to see an arrest and conviction of the people we think are likely responsible for what happened to Maddie.

What we can't expect, and what has been evident since the day Scotland Yard set foot on Portuguese soil with a remit to investigate an abduction as opposed to all the evidence in the case, is that one day there would be closure of a legitimate type.  Scotland Yard is finishing up its one line of investigation "worth pursuing" - and it is most likely the three burglars, not the McCanns. By the end of the year, we should have Scotland Yard explaining how they have thoroughly analyzed the case, followed every lead, and the most likely explanation for the disappearance of Maddie McCann was a botched burglary leading to her demise and removal from the apartment, and, unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to take anyone to court; this is known as solving the case "administratively." Of course, because they cannot 100% prove that this is what happened to Maddie, the door is open for the McCanns to say it is still possible for Madeleine to be alive and out there somewhere and, therefore, the fund can continue. 

And the winners are: Scotland Yard, who made the best effort possible to solve the crime, and the McCanns who remain free of being charged with said crime. The added bonus for the McCanns is that if Scotland Yard does indeed shut down the case with the botched burglary explanation, this also "proves" Gonçalo Amaral, the Portuguese police, the Portuguese courts, and anyone who has questioned the abduction theory to be incompetent and dead wrong.

The losers are: everyone else - British citizens, Portuguese citizens, truth seekers, and missing children and their families in every country across the world."

Martin Roberts said...
"Succinct and on the money.

It was back in 2010 that the McCanns started bleating about the need for a review of their case, by whichever agency was most equipped to do it, or words to that effect.

It doesn't take an Ivy League Scholar (or an Oxbridge don) to appreciate there is not a snowball's chance in hell the McCanns would have persistently invited Scotland Yard to 'take another look' if it were remotely possibility the investigation might follow a trail to their front door.

Operation Grange was never any more than perceptual wallpaper."

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com.au/2016/04/how-to-close-case-without-really.html

MOST LIKELY EXPLANATION? Just not good enough after 12M Plus! And still no justice for a little innocent girl! 
If she was mine, it would not 'wash', well, she would never have been 'lost' in the first place!
Show the evidence, the phone calls, any DNA, the relationship between the 3 and their motive? 
This is not a conclusion, this is monstrous & monumental 'story telling" at the most highest in my opinion!!!

millions spent ridiculous case and outcome