Diário de Notícias - FORMER GENERAL PROSECUTOR -CASE ARCHIVAL DUE TO LACK OF SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE WAS MARKING

FORMER GENERAL PROSECUTOR -CASE ARCHIVAL DUE TO LACK OF SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE WAS MARKING

in Diário de Notícias , 29 April ,2017
Ex-PGR:
"The big obstacle " to solve Maddie's case was the fact that "there were no clues ," says Pinto Monteiro
Former Attorney General Pinto Monteiro highlighted the day of the child's disappearance and the filing of the case due to a lack of "irrefutable evidence" to validate the indicia brought by the investigation .
The most striking events may have been the day on which Madeleine's disappearance was known and the day the case had to be filed because there was no irrefutable evidence to point to any of the indicia revealed by the investigation , "said Fernando Pinto Monteiro , In a written interview with the Lusa agency about the 10-year anniversary of Madeleine McCann, then three years old, in Praia da Luz, Algarve.
In the opinion of the former PGR, "the great obstacle" to solve the case was the fact that "there are no clues that would lead to the discovery of what happened to Madeleine, even though the steps that were then appropriate and necessary were carried out."
He argued, however, that "it is always possible to continue the investigation," noting that in his filing order (July 21, 2008) he stated that "the investigation would be reopened if new, credible and relevant facts arose."
"It is true that in this type of crime the early hours and even the first days are often decisive, but it is also true that complex cases have been solved over the years. It is essential that new elements emerge that clarify what it was not known then , "he said.
Although ten years later it is still unknown what happened to Maddie McCann, on May 03, 2007, Pinto Monteiro understands that this is not a "stone in the shoe" of Portuguese judicial authorities.
"Thousands of children and adolescents are disappearing every year around the world, and many of these disappearances are due to criminal activity and many of them are never solved." If each case created 'stones in the shoe', judicial authorities and police would be full of 'boulders', he argued.
Pinto Monteiro, who led the Public Prosecution Service from 2006 to 2012, acknowledged that the 'Maddie case' was the most media exposed of all cases that occurred during his tenure as Attorney General.
"And that's because it had an almost planetary dimension," he added.
The "excessive mediatism", in his opinion, "always undermines the investigations and sometimes creates among the citizens misconceptions and not conforming to reality".
Regarding the involvement of the British Government in the case and the presence of British police in the Algarve, Pinto Monteiro assured that "no diplomatic pressure was given to the Attorney General during the investigation" and that "collaboration and cooperation between Criminal police ".
The British girl disappeared while sleeping, along with the twin brothers (younger), in the room of a holiday apartment.
The PJ came to constitute as an arguido the British Robert Murat, who lived near the Ocean Club and who had participated in the searches and was interpreter of GNR and PJ.
In early August 2007, after many events , the British police, with the help of cadaver and csi dogs , went into action at the scene of the disappearance, looking for blood and odors from the girl's corpse.
In September of that year, Maddie's parents, both doctors, were questioned in the PJ of Portimão and constituted arguidos .
On July 21, 2008, the Public Prosecutor's Office decided to close the investigation and remove the arguido status from the McCanns, stating that the case could be reopened if "new evidence" arose.
Currently, the PJ is still investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, and the deputy director of the Judiciary Police has admitted that it is "a unique case in the history of the PJ and the country."
"The case is still open" and the investigation was handed over to a team from PJ do Porto, Pedro do Carmo said in an interview with Lusa.
Pinto Monteiro also considers it important "that there is hope for someday that the case will be solved for those to whom disappearance is most concerned."
"As a father and a magistrate I would be very happy that this happened," he confessed.

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

With thanks to a Portuguese researcher who kindly translated for us.

There were clues however, the blood and cadaver dogs reacting.
The items and places the dogs reacted to
The blood and body fluids found in the apartment and hire car.
The mccanns own statements and confessions (that Maddie is dead)
The lawyering up.
The refusal to cooperate.
The explanations as to what the body fluids were in the hire car.
The admission by clarrie that Maddie was dead.

Circumstantial evidence is still evidence

Hobs wrote:There were clues however, the blood and cadaver dogs reacting.
The items and places the dogs reacted to
The blood and body fluids found in the apartment and hire car.
The mccanns own statements and confessions (that Maddie is dead)
The lawyering up.
The refusal to cooperate.
The explanations as to what the body fluids were in the hire car.
The admission by clarrie that Maddie was dead.

Circumstantial evidence is still evidence

How right you are. It's amazing just how many people still think that the years old line of 'no body, no crime' which went out in the early 1900's with the Acid bath murders conviction of John George Haigh, still applies.

There are people in the UK who have been convicted of murder when there is no evidence whatsoever, apart from circumstantial, that the alleged victim is dead.

If the Portugese case is still open why aren't they re-interviewing the Tapas lot?  If SY haven't done so why shouldn't the Portugese?

plebgate wrote:If the Portugese case is still open why aren't they re-interviewing the Tapas lot?  If SY haven't done so why shouldn't the Portugese?

Because they are not in Portugal?

There is that Suzyj but they have been back and forth to Portugal whilst the SY investigation has been ongoing.  Nothing to stop the PJ asking to speak to them at that time but they didn't, the question is Why?

I understood there's a time limit set for an investigation before it has to be archived. Is that correct?