Re: The Portuguese Constitution

by Guest 17.12.09 14:49

candyfloss wrote:
JessicaPer wrote:
candyfloss wrote:No, I don't think they had been answered. Even if they had, any parent would answer them again, and again, and again, if it was to help find their missing child. Why do you find that so hard to believe?

Not one single question of those 48 was designed to "help" the search for the missing child (how could "Did you call Sky News" and "Did you ask for a preast" affect the search in any way, shape or form). They only had one purpose and that was for Kate McCann to implicate herself in the disappearance of her daughter. In her situation, you would have had to be a complete idiot to answer them and her lawyer rightfully advised her not to.

This about sums up the mentality

Quote JessicaPer

They only had one purpose and that was for Kate McCann to implicate herself in the disappearance of her daughter.

How could someone who is innocent and nothing to fear be implicated. How can you implicate yourself if you've done nothing wrong???

Never heard of miscarriage of justice before, are you on some other planet? How about Michael Cook and the murder of Rachel Charles, just as one example? http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1992-06-09/Debate-20.html

by Guest 17.12.09 14:53

Thanks DCB1 for the reminder. Nope can't see a problem with any of those. Even if some had been answered before, you would answer them again. What does it matter - your child is missing fgs.

by DCB1 17.12.09 14:57

Pretty cutting edge detective work wasn't it?

34 Concerning your professional life, in how many and in which hospitals have you worked

Ok you bugger you've got me - I confess!,

or

Oh - do you think Madeleine may be in one of them?

by Guest 17.12.09 14:57

JessicaPer wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
JessicaPer wrote:
candyfloss wrote:No, I don't think they had been answered. Even if they had, any parent would answer them again, and again, and again, if it was to help find their missing child. Why do you find that so hard to believe?

Not one single question of those 48 was designed to "help" the search for the missing child (how could "Did you call Sky News" and "Did you ask for a preast" affect the search in any way, shape or form). They only had one purpose and that was for Kate McCann to implicate herself in the disappearance of her daughter. In her situation, you would have had to be a complete idiot to answer them and her lawyer rightfully advised her not to.

This about sums up the mentality

Quote JessicaPer

They only had one purpose and that was for Kate McCann to implicate herself in the disappearance of her daughter.

How could someone who is innocent and nothing to fear be implicated. How can you implicate yourself if you've done nothing wrong???

Never heard of miscarriage of justice before, are you on some other planet? How about Michael Cook and the murder of Rachel Charles, just as one example? http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1992-06-09/Debate-20.html

Oh so that's it - just because there have been a few miscarriages of justice, innocent people shouldn't answer any questions. If the police had no evidence, as you all keep banging on about, then answering those questions solely wouldn't have incriminated them.

by Guest 17.12.09 15:00

DCB1 wrote:Pretty cutting edge detective work wasn't it?

34 Concerning your professional life, in how many and in which hospitals have you worked

Ok you bugger you've got me - I confess!

But that is just the sort of questions you are asked at a police interview. To give them background information. All police forces do it. Who do you think drew up the questions, a plumber big grin

by DCB1 17.12.09 15:03

candyfloss wrote:
DCB1 wrote:Pretty cutting edge detective work wasn't it?

34 Concerning your professional life, in how many and in which hospitals have you worked

Ok you bugger you've got me - I confess!

But that is just the sort of questions you are asked at a police interview. To give them background information. All police forces do it. Who do you think drew up the questions, a plumber

No - a forum.

Are you saying they had not investigated her background before that interview?
Were they trying to trick her on the number of hospitals?

by DCB1 17.12.09 15:10

Take note of what GA says:

"The decision to declare Kate and Gerald McCann arguidos was taken. Notification had already reached them. On September 6th, a little before 3pm, Kate arrives at the DIC in Portimão, accompanied by her press officer. Her lawyer has already arrived and the interview room is ready. The crowd has been building up outside for a while. Going through the door, Kate laughs as she says that this media scrum is good for tourism.

Her lawyer requests that she be heard as a witness and not interrogated as an arguida. We don't agree with what, to us, constitutes a backward step. Some officers involved in the investigation seem to be hoping for the miracle of a confession. We remain skeptical.

We finally decide to question her as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children. From that time on, everything she said could be held against her. According to the principle of non-incrimination, she would then have to be declared arguida since we have sufficient evidence to be able to do that."

"On September 7th at 11am, Kate Healy is declared an arguida on the basis of strong presumptions of the crime of concealing a body and simulating an abduction. She states her name and gives her address as her home in Great Britain. Taking advantage of the right accorded to her by her status, she remains silent and does not answer questions concerning the circumstances of her daughter's death, on May 3rd 2007, in the Ocean Club apartment."

by Guest 17.12.09 15:12

candyfloss wrote:
JessicaPer wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
JessicaPer wrote:
candyfloss wrote:No, I don't think they had been answered. Even if they had, any parent would answer them again, and again, and again, if it was to help find their missing child. Why do you find that so hard to believe?

Not one single question of those 48 was designed to "help" the search for the missing child (how could "Did you call Sky News" and "Did you ask for a preast" affect the search in any way, shape or form). They only had one purpose and that was for Kate McCann to implicate herself in the disappearance of her daughter. In her situation, you would have had to be a complete idiot to answer them and her lawyer rightfully advised her not to.

This about sums up the mentality

Quote JessicaPer

They only had one purpose and that was for Kate McCann to implicate herself in the disappearance of her daughter.

How could someone who is innocent and nothing to fear be implicated. How can you implicate yourself if you've done nothing wrong???

Never heard of miscarriage of justice before, are you on some other planet? How about Michael Cook and the murder of Rachel Charles, just as one example? http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199293/cmhansrd/1992-06-09/Debate-20.html

Oh so that's it - just because there have been a few miscarriages of justice, innocent people shouldn't answer any questions. If the police had no evidence, as you all keep banging on about, then answering those questions solely wouldn't have incriminated them.

What are you on about, who keeps banging on about no evidence? If I recall correctly, it was the public prosector who said there was no evidence, I trust he had the necessary information about the case to come to this conclusion. In this case it was clearly Kate McCann's lawyer's opinion that she should not answer the questions and she followed his advice. Being in a foreign country where you are unfamiliar with the laws and police procedures, you would have to be stupid not to follow legal advice.

by Autumn 17.12.09 15:16

And why didn't any of them agree to return to Portugal for a reconstrucion?

by Finally 17.12.09 15:18

Hi

Some of the questions are a tadge odd to be asking while others do seem fair and reasonable.

The one in particular that stands out for me as most odd is whether Mrs McCann asked the twins of Madeleine's whereabouts. They were sleeping and even if they had stirred whilst Madeleine's vanishing had occurred I would assume that they would still be sleepy and might not have properly understood what they saw to be able to relay it accurately.

The other thing that makes me wonder the purpose of that question is their ages at the time. Surely Mrs McCann would have needed to have taken any questioning of the younger children a lot slower than if she had been questioning an older child. Time she possibly felt she didn't have and once awake she has two young children and their needs to consider when in fairness that is probably the last thing she wanted at that time.

I don't think they are all unreasonable questions, however.

Take care

by Guest 17.12.09 15:24

Autumn wrote:And why didn't any of them agree to return to Portugal for a reconstrucion?

Who knows, maybe by the time they finally got around to suggesting one, they had already lost all faith in the Portuguese investigators' abilities?

by DCB1 17.12.09 15:26

JessicaPer wrote:
Autumn wrote:And why didn't any of them agree to return to Portugal for a reconstrucion?

Who knows, maybe by the time they finally got around to suggesting one, they had already lost all faith in the Portuguese investigators' abilities?

The lengthy correspondence about the matter, which is revealed in the files, explains why.

by Guest 17.12.09 17:37

The 40 questions again.

IT WAS KATE'S SOLICITOR THAT TOLD HER NOT TO ANSWER......

HE OBVIOUSLY KNOWS WHAT THE PJ ARE LIKE FOR FITTING UP AND BEATING CONFESSIONS OUT OF PEOPLE.

As for the Arguido status, it was done to give them rights as well.

Latest topics