Re: Gonçalo Amaral New Book: General Discussion.

by Guest 22.10.21 16:28

Angel wrote:Would you dress your little one the way Madeleine was dressed on a not so nice day to wander around in relying on a 15 minute window to appear ? Would you let her sit with feet dangling in cold water ?

You'd be surprised.

The other day it was freezing here - I mean feeeeeezing. The tourists (you can tell them by the way they dress titter

) aimlessly wandering about half naked, man woman and child (and them in between) dipping in and out of the ocean/pools.

I used to be one of them yes

.

by **Cammerigal** 22.10.21 22:41

Chambers wrote:The pool picture; perhaps the weather wasn't 'like that' on the day, but are we saying that there was no sun whatsoever? No 15 minute window where the sun came out? Is that the only rationale for the picture not being genuine?
How can Amaral continue to rely on that, as a competent detective?

We here have utterly debunked the spurious McCann claim regarding the validity of the last photo time/date. False meta data, wrong sun azimuth and wrong shadow angle and lengths How can they rely on it, in a court of law??

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14726p225-photographs-revisited-general#439671

Do keep up.

by Chambers 27.10.21 20:55

crusader wrote:Paulo's doing a fantastic job translating G Amaral's book.

It's such a shame there is not much new info in it.

It all seems a bit talking in code and a bit non-commital, a far cry from the unequivocal stance in the first book.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Post moved to relevant thread along with replies.

Mod

by Guest 28.10.21 1:09

You have read the book - eh Chambers?

Clearly your have not read Dr Amaral's first book, or you wouldn't refer to it as 'the unequivocal stance'.

Paulo Alexandre's splendid work translating pertinent excerpts from Dr Amaral's latest book is far from your suggestion of Dr Amaral talking in code and a bit non-committal. Extraordinaire observation on your part.

Unless of course you are here with an agenda or talk for the sake of talking.

Do tell.

Preferably not here, this is a serious dedicated thread as you can see from the opening post.

If you wish to continue pondering please do so here..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t17184-goncalo-amaral-new-book-general-discussion

by Chambers 28.10.21 7:14

Verdi wrote:You have read the book - eh Chambers?

Clearly your have not read Dr Amaral's first book, or you wouldn't refer to it as 'the unequivocal stance'.

Paulo Alexandre's splendid work translating pertinent excerpts from Dr Amaral's latest book is far from your suggestion of Dr Amaral talking in code and a bit non-committal. Extraordinaire observation on your part.

Unless of course you are here with an agenda or talk for the sake of talking.

Do tell.

Preferably not here, this is a serious dedicated thread as you can see from the opening post.

If you wish to continue pondering please do so here..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t17184-goncalo-amaral-new-book-general-discussion

His first book was unequivocal - he laid out his theory very specifically. It might not quite jive with the prevailing forum theory that we all have to apparently blindly subscribe to, but it was certainly unequivocal. So unequivocal, in fact, that the McCann's saw it fit to chase him through the courts at great expense and get its distribution banned.
Yeh I've read it, it's freely available translated on another forum. Have you read it Verdi, eh?
I'm not doubting the quality of the translation, I'm talking for the sake of talking about the content - which is benign, non-committal and lacking in any new insight.

by Vera Krista 28.10.21 11:05

Chambers wrote:
Verdi wrote:You have read the book - eh Chambers?

Clearly your have not read Dr Amaral's first book, or you wouldn't refer to it as 'the unequivocal stance'.

Paulo Alexandre's splendid work translating pertinent excerpts from Dr Amaral's latest book is far from your suggestion of Dr Amaral talking in code and a bit non-committal. Extraordinaire observation on your part.

Unless of course you are here with an agenda or talk for the sake of talking.

Do tell.

Preferably not here, this is a serious dedicated thread as you can see from the opening post.

If you wish to continue pondering please do so here..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t17184-goncalo-amaral-new-book-general-discussion

His first book was unequivocal - he laid out his theory very specifically. It might not quite jive with the prevailing forum theory that we all have to apparently blindly subscribe to, but it was certainly unequivocal. So unequivocal, in fact, that the McCann's saw it fit to chase him through the courts at great expense and get its distribution banned.
Yeh I've read it, it's freely available translated on another forum. Have you read it Verdi, eh?
I'm not doubting the quality of the translation, I'm talking for the sake of talking about the content - which is benign, non-committal and lacking in any new insight.

His new book is not yet translated into English, His first book is freely available here https://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.com/
McCann's gave him to court because they didn't want public to learn the truth on what really happened to Maddie?

by **Jill Havern** 28.10.21 11:35

And his second book is NOT 'freely' available either - Snr Amaral has NOT given permission for his new book to be translated by anyone other than his publisher.

He has, however, been made aware of this pirated version.

by Guest 28.10.21 14:37

Chambers wrote:
Verdi wrote:You have read the book - eh Chambers?

Clearly your have not read Dr Amaral's first book, or you wouldn't refer to it as 'the unequivocal stance'.

Paulo Alexandre's splendid work translating pertinent excerpts from Dr Amaral's latest book is far from your suggestion of Dr Amaral talking in code and a bit non-committal. Extraordinaire observation on your part.

Unless of course you are here with an agenda or talk for the sake of talking.

Do tell.

Preferably not here, this is a serious dedicated thread as you can see from the opening post.

If you wish to continue pondering please do so here..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t17184-goncalo-amaral-new-book-general-discussion

His first book was unequivocal - he laid out his theory very specifically. It might not quite jive with the prevailing forum theory that we all have to apparently blindly subscribe to, but it was certainly unequivocal. So unequivocal, in fact, that the McCann's saw it fit to chase him through the courts at great expense and get its distribution banned.
Yeh I've read it, it's freely available translated on another forum. Have you read it Verdi, eh?
I'm not doubting the quality of the translation, I'm talking for the sake of talking about the content - which is benign, non-committal and lacking in any new insight.

Can you stop insulting this forum, MMRG and their research, please?

No one is forced or even asked to subscribe to any theory about this case. Everyone has the right to express what they think, provided that they also respect other people's arguments.

As Gonçalo Amaral rightly pointed out, the MMRG members are not a bunch of lunatics; they're genuine researchers trying to find out what happened to a missing 3-year old girl called Madeleine Beth McCann.

by **Jill Havern** 28.10.21 15:18

It makes you wonder why someone would even want to join a forum 2 weeks ago where they don't jive with a prevailing theory members are apparently to blindy subscribe to.

Bit of a mouthful if you don't mind my saying so.

Best go back from whence they came really.

by Guest 28.10.21 16:04

Joining a forum you don't agree with isn't the pinnacle of common sense, is it? These people are amusing though, in a pathetic way.

by Guest 28.10.21 16:06

No doubt whatsoever nor whomsoever in my mind why such individuals invade the forum well over 14 years down the line - especially long time lurkers!

wink

But here on CMOMM we like to play fair, so, for the time being ....

waiting

by **Mainline** 29.10.21 14:12

Hi Paulo, I wonder if you could help me with something small in Chapter 13, on page 99. From what I have interpreted and translation(s) I have seen, it appears that Russell's phone is said to have 'pinged' in Portimao at a strange time (when it was 'not true he was with PJ in Portimao'). There is no errant ping from his phone in the files that we have, he pings in the late evening a couple hours before his interview (his partner Jane having given her statement commencing 1130 in the morning, and there is a well known video clip of most the Tapas group leaving PdL in the early morning of the 4th*, so I doubt those pings are the one mentioned).

The suggestion I have been given therefore is that there are phone records from the early hours of the 4th which weren't released with the files, and hence the ping mentioned is 'new' to me.

Can you help me interpret the paragraph at all? hat

Gonçalo Amaral New Book: General Discussion. - Page 6 Oa_13_10

*I could not find the video link while writing this post, hopefully someone has it to hand..

by **Jill Havern** 29.10.21 14:38

scroll forwards to 2 mins

by **Mainline** 29.10.21 14:44

Thanks Jill, that's the one! Not to derail the thread with irrelevancies, but since Russ isn't in that footage maybe he stayed with the kids and went later - which makes me even more curious about when the mentioned Portimao ping was..

_________________________________________________________________________________

I have moved your posts over here from Paulo's thread @Mainline - it was going off-piste. Not so much the request for the translation but the rest of the content.

thumbsup

Verdi

by Guest 11.11.21 12:48

Howz Dr Amaral's book selling - anyone know?

An English version published through his auspices would be a distinct advantage to him and anyone interested in the case of missing Madeleine McCann. Madeleine was English after all, aside from our friends in Portugal it is the UK'ites most concerned with following the case to the end - if there ever is an end.

Today there are still hundreds, if not thousands, of interested folk - as reflected by the readership here on CMOMM alone.

Come on Gonçalo clapping

we're waiting, not very patiently I might add waiting

....

by Guest 20.11.21 16:00

Any movement on Dr Amaral's English version of his new book?

The book is not getting it's just deserts - it's very frustrating.

by Guest 30.11.21 12:05

What's happening here?

The subject matter seems to have dried up. Can't speak for anyone else but I'm still very interested to know Gonçalo's thoughts fourteen years after the event.

Is there anything new worthy of discussion?

by **crusader** 30.11.21 13:30

There can't be anything new in it or we would have been told by now.

by Guest 30.11.21 15:07

I did ask Paulo over on his thread if he could give me an idea of what was said about the McCanns relation Michael Wright. So far nothing.

Of course Paulo has a life to lead and he's busy with Richard D Hall's videos so I can't expect too much.

whistling

Guess I'll just have hold fire until Gonçalo publishes an English version. I'm not the most patient in the world.

waiting

by **Tony Bennett** 30.11.21 17:17

crusader wrote:There can't be anything new in it or we would have been told by now.

By and large I have to agree.

We know that Petermac here has tried to guide Goncalo as to the evidence that suggests that something serious must have happened to Madeleine soon after Sunday lunch-time. Goncalo appears to know that the Last Photo was taken Sunday, not Thursday, a fact which is HUGE in this case.

Moreover, Goncalo has said on the record that he has passed to the Attorney-General the conclusions of the MMRG and recommended that the PJ carry out a re-investigaton.

All well and good so far.

But, Goncalo, can you not see that the Last Photo evidence and much more besides means that YOU MUST now reject the conclusion of you and your team in September 2007 that Madeleine was alive and well and having a nice high tea with her Mum, Dad and Catriona Baker at 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007.

That is in black-and-white in Tavares de Almeida's interim report of 10 September 2007.

Unless and until you call that out as untrue, unless you realise that you were terribly misled about that event actually taking place, unfortunately you are not able to help us here in trying to determine what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

It is time that you had a thorough look at all the evidence we have accumulated here on CMOMM and in Petermac's ebook.

by Ross 11 02.12.21 11:03

@verdi I doubt it. 14 years later and a new book and on what exactly? He has not worked on anything for the police and if it is of real evidence he would be required by law to send that evidence to be examined, more fruitful ridiculous thinking to claim guilt

by Guest 02.12.21 12:00

Ross 11 wrote:@verdi I doubt it. 14 years later and a new book and on what exactly? He has not worked on anything for the police and if it is of real evidence he would be required by law to send that evidence to be examined, more fruitful ridiculous thinking to claim guilt

That's all very well but I like to read things for myself and form an opinion on that alone, I prefer to by-pass second hand information, it has a nasty habit of picking up debris on it's travels.

Whether Dr Amaral's new book reveals anything new or not, it's long awaited by many, including myself, we should never forget how badly he was treated by clan McCann - indeed still is being hounded. My support is with him no matter whether he is right or wrong. It would be considered an act of sheer arrogance to presume to know better than he.

Dr Amaral was the chief police officer assigned to the case of missing Madeleine McCann who was removed from the position very prematurely, not because of incompetence but because of outside interference. Anyone who has followed this case from the beginning will be aware of that simple fact, he was the case coordinator, the word speaks for itself.

Besides, I explained my interest in one particular chapter up-page. Dr Amaral's interest in the McCanns relation Michael Wright is interest to me.

From where I'm standing, the writings of Dr Amaral are more pertinent to discovering the truth about Madeleine McCann's disappearance, even if he wasn't able to to lead the force to a conclusion. I'm also interested to know what's ticking over in his mind. Former police officers who delight in parking their bums on studio sofas opining about a case they know little or nothing about are a nuisance - a diversion. Dr Amaral on the other hand has a vested interest in the case, all be it on the periphery.

Analysis of evidence and intelligence compiled by CMOMM and it's sister group MMRG, has been presented to the Portuguese authorities for consideration, it is for them alone to decide if the analysis has any merit - it's not the gospel etched in stone.

As I say, I wholeheartedly support Gonçalo Amaral, anything he can offer to fill the gaps and show the direction he was working is beneficial to understanding the case and his policing.

So please good people .... continue translating for the benefit of all committed to the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann.

Vive la CMOMM!

grouphug

by **crusader** 02.12.21 14:26

There may be not much of anything new in G Amaral's book, but he was in from the start, so whatever he has to say in his new book is very relevant.

If it is translated into English, I will definitely buy it.

To remove the lead investigator in a so called missing child abduction, is very suspicious in itself.

by Ross 11 03.12.21 14:08

@Verdi and @crusader Before i go further what purpose if he has nothing new to say after 14 years is a purpose of writing a book which is meant to have so called new revelations. How on earth has he been unable to uncover some new truth without perpetuating this to law enforcement. The words he cares what happened is as less to say the actual parents of a missing child care. Just one other thing, i am not sure if CB is the person responsible or had something to do with it, how did GA know for sure a german paedo would be blamed?

by Guest 03.12.21 15:02

Have you read the book Ross 11?

From my point of view it's difficult, if not impossible, to comment on something I've never read.

The very reason I'm anxious for Dr Amaral's book to be published by him in English!

If it's all the same with you I'll leave commentary until such times as an English version is available, or translated passages and commentary have been posted-up here on CMOMM by our resident translators.

bow3

by **crusader** 03.12.21 15:33

G Amaral has as much right as anyone else to write a book on Madeleine's disappearance, more actually as he was the lead investigator.

Maybe we will find out why he said a German paedophile would be blamed.

All will be revealed in time.

by Ross 11 04.12.21 9:58

@crusader @verdi

Nope I have not read the book, albeit the first one as it was wrote not long after the four or five months he had served? All info would be in the files which were finally translated in 2008 I think. So his first book, maybe I should read it, but coming from the perspective of it’s in the files why would anyone need to?

Was he not writing the book though whilst he was serving though?

by **crusader** 04.12.21 10:17

Why not read the first book? @Ross 11 it's here on this forum.

by Guest 04.12.21 11:44

@Ross 11

Hmmm .... I hope you didn't join this forum only two days ago to bash Dr Amaral.

If you haven't read Dr Amaral's first nor second book and say you think it not worth your while, this discussion is not going to lead anywhere is it.

I wish you well.

bow3

by **Cammerigal** 04.12.21 23:56

Ross 11 wrote:@verdi I doubt it. 14 years later and a new book and on what exactly? He has not worked on anything for the police and if it is of real evidence he would be required by law to send that evidence to be examined, more fruitful ridiculous thinking to claim guilt

We should consider why you didn't apply your undermining criticism in the context of the Jon Clarke's book 'My search for Madeleine'. There are plenty of opportunities on this forum, but no, lets take a weak shot against G Amaral.
But then, it doesn't fit the paid agenda of a white ant does it?

Toodle pip!