Portugal DID take the initiative in 'Review'

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 7:34

m Joana Morais Blog;

Radio interview with National Deputy Director of the Judiciary Police Pedro do Carmo
Posted: 13 Mar 2012 02:05 PM PDT

The Judiciary Police (PJ) guarantees that there are no new evidence regarding the disappearance of Maddie McCann, to prompt the reopening of the case.The clarification was given to Antena 1 by the National Deputy Director of the PJ, Pedro do Carmo, who explained that the PJ team of investigators from Oporto was established one year ago, working in collaboration with the British police.The goal is to re-examine the elements of Investigation that began in 2007. Diligences will only be made if and when proven that they are necessary.Jornal de Notícias advanced this morning that the English and Portuguese police have not set aside a possible reopening of the process.Voice Over [VO]- At the moment, this is what the Judiciary Police guarantees: there are no new elements that may lead to the reopening of Madeleine McCann's process, said to Antena 1, Pedro do Carmo, National Deputy Director of the Judiciary Police.Pedro do Carmo [PC]- “So far, nothing new was conveyed to the National Directorate, regarding the appearance of new elements that could substantiate the reopening of the process.”VO - The investigative team of the Judiciary Police was constituted one year ago. The goal: To re-analyse all the elements of the investigation started in 2004 [sic], the work is mainly a ‘desk’ job where new diligences will only take place if proven necessary, stated Pedro do Carmo.PC - “We are taking a fresh look, that only distance in time allows for, and also with the physical distance of a team that is based in Oporto. A team that never had any previous contact with this investigation.”VO - Four years later, after the case was archived, the investigation data are being re-analysed with a fine toothed comb by the British and Portuguese authorities, the idea was initiated by the Judiciary Police.PC - “The constitution of this task team came from the National Directorate of the Judiciary Police, independently and actually preceding the creation of the Metropolitan Police team.”VO - On this fresh look to the McCann case and to the PJ itself, questioned if mistakes or if anything remained to be done, the National Directorate declined to make further comments.in Antena 1, March 9, 2012

I have edited this - AGAIN - this disappeared after I edited to add! I can't remember now what other comments I'd added (only just up) so I'll leave it how it is now!

by Me 14.03.12 8:11

It seems to me what is happening is that there is a very careful attempt to re-look at the case whilst managing the media, given the drubbing the McCann's gave the PJ in the press back in 2008.

Of course there is no new evidence to re-open the case right now. How could there be, they are simply re-looking at the files.

What is vitally important to understand though is that just because it hasn't been re-opened yet does not mean that it will not be re-opened at some point in the future.

So i expect (and hope) that these investigators, and SY will come to the same conclusion which is that out of the work done back in the initial investigation the one glaring area which needs examination is the events of the night and the statements given by T9 and the reconstruction which their version requires.

I hope that this process will conclude that the reconstruction needs to take place. Then watch the Team squirm because if it does take place and all the inconsistencies we know are in the statements come out, it will be at that point i expect, and i suspect the PJ expect as well, that the process will officially be re-opened.

by Guest 14.03.12 8:31

If that report is true, it means that the Oporto team has been in action since just before March 2011. It's no wonder so many things started to kick off in 2011. The plans to nail Tony Bennett. Increase the number of trolls on forums, to outway the numbers of supporters. It reminds me of the time when they had a forensic expert in place, just before the forensic reports were released.

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 8:34

Bingo, Me. I 100% agree.
I did also post on another thread that I am now believing that DC's 'submission' could've been a false assurance.
Also, I absolutely DO NOT BELIEVE that all journalists are idiots living in a parallel universe, unable to see what is staring us all in the face. Could their biased reporting be part of the plan? K+G would not be able to bleat about negative press and fair trials.
I'm also believing that K+G's appearance at Leveson could've been another attempt to lure them into making mistakes (which Kate did - brazenly lied on oath!) Milly Dowler's parents have gone through absolute hell, indeed if you believe K+G the very same situation! So why were they treated in such a fawning, sycophantic manner?
It was either to lure them into a mistake OR as part of an attempt to whitewash the McCanns.
Now, I know you don't like the whitewash theories Me, so if not to lure them out can you think of any other reason Me? Because I can't...

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 9:21

Stella wrote:If that report is true, it means that the Oporto team has been in action since just before March 2011. It's no wonder so many things started to kick off in 2011. The plans to nail Tony Bennett. Increase the number of trolls on forums, to outway the numbers of supporters. It reminds me of the time when they had a forensic expert in place, just before the forensic reports were released.

Agreed Stella. Oh how I hope they fall flat on their faces with their persecution of Tony.

by russiandoll 14.03.12 9:26

agree 100% with what has been said here, I posted an interview with Pedro do Carma yesterday in response to people posting it was a now a joint whitewash job by 2 police forces. Does not make sense to me why a shed load of money would be spent on whitewashing a case by the PJ when it can simply be left as status quo....no cost incurred to leave alone as would still be shelved which would be the whitewash result?

I am sure that the PJ are taking care that they will be allowed to work in peace and that a lot has been going on under the radar, just as a swan can glide gracefully along the water while the feet are working unseen beneath.

I do not see why 2 police forces would collude to cover up the misdeeds of a pair of non- entities like the McCanns, unless something much bigger was being covered up also involving the other country besides UK. And I really dont understand why the PJ would collude in the cover up of a big dirty British secret, especially after the way they were treated by the authorities they would be assisting in the cover-up; they would be only too happy to expose those who put pressure on them 5 years ago, hopefully.

by Me 14.03.12 9:28

rainbow-fairy wrote:Bingo, Me. I 100% agree.
I did also post on another thread that I am now believing that DC's 'submission' could've been a false assurance.
Also, I absolutely DO NOT BELIEVE that all journalists are idiots living in a parallel universe, unable to see what is staring us all in the face. Could their biased reporting be part of the plan? K+G would not be able to bleat about negative press and fair trials.
I'm also believing that K+G's appearance at Leveson could've been another attempt to lure them into making mistakes (which Kate did - brazenly lied on oath!) Milly Dowler's parents have gone through absolute hell, indeed if you believe K+G the very same situation! So why were they treated in such a fawning, sycophantic manner?
It was either to lure them into a mistake OR as part of an attempt to whitewash the McCanns.
Now, I know you don't like the whitewash theories Me, so if not to lure them out can you think of any other reason Me? Because I can't...

How about something far more simple than a large scale cover up amongst all the UK's media?

How about given the expensive libel defeat suffered by the Express and the payout by NoTW for the dairies the media are simply refusing to publish allegations (for fear of libel) until more conrete "libel proof" evidence is discovered?

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 9:52

Me wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:Bingo, Me. I 100% agree.
I did also post on another thread that I am now believing that DC's 'submission' could've been a false assurance.
Also, I absolutely DO NOT BELIEVE that all journalists are idiots living in a parallel universe, unable to see what is staring us all in the face. Could their biased reporting be part of the plan? K+G would not be able to bleat about negative press and fair trials.
I'm also believing that K+G's appearance at Leveson could've been another attempt to lure them into making mistakes (which Kate did - brazenly lied on oath!) Milly Dowler's parents have gone through absolute hell, indeed if you believe K+G the very same situation! So why were they treated in such a fawning, sycophantic manner?
It was either to lure them into a mistake OR as part of an attempt to whitewash the McCanns.
Now, I know you don't like the whitewash theories Me, so if not to lure them out can you think of any other reason Me? Because I can't...

How about something far more simple than a large scale cover up amongst all the UK's media?

How about given the expensive libel defeat suffered by the Express and the payout by NoTW for the dairies the media are simply refusing to publish allegations (for fear of libel) until more conrete "libel proof" evidence is discovered?

Yep, I can go with that. I certainly think that fear of libel action is a part of it.
BUT, bit in bold, I fear I wasn't very clear, else you've misunderstood me (or I you - work that out!). What I meant was the papers are keeping quiet not as a cover-up for the McCanns, rather as an aid to helping lure them out? If they believe they are home and dry they'll make more mistakes (like Katey did at Leveson). I refuse to believe that all this is slipping by the notice of PJ/SY...
Fingers crossed...

by Guest 14.03.12 9:57

russiandoll wrote:agree 100% with what has been said here, I posted an interview with Pedro do Carma yesterday in response to people posting it was a now a joint whitewash job by 2 police forces. Does not make sense to me why a shed load of money would be spent on whitewashing a case by the PJ when it can simply be left as status quo....no cost incurred to leave alone as would still be shelved which would be the whitewash result?

That is it, in one very tight nut shell.

by Me 14.03.12 9:58

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Me wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:Bingo, Me. I 100% agree.
I did also post on another thread that I am now believing that DC's 'submission' could've been a false assurance.
Also, I absolutely DO NOT BELIEVE that all journalists are idiots living in a parallel universe, unable to see what is staring us all in the face. Could their biased reporting be part of the plan? K+G would not be able to bleat about negative press and fair trials.
I'm also believing that K+G's appearance at Leveson could've been another attempt to lure them into making mistakes (which Kate did - brazenly lied on oath!) Milly Dowler's parents have gone through absolute hell, indeed if you believe K+G the very same situation! So why were they treated in such a fawning, sycophantic manner?
It was either to lure them into a mistake OR as part of an attempt to whitewash the McCanns.
Now, I know you don't like the whitewash theories Me, so if not to lure them out can you think of any other reason Me? Because I can't...

How about something far more simple than a large scale cover up amongst all the UK's media?

How about given the expensive libel defeat suffered by the Express and the payout by NoTW for the dairies the media are simply refusing to publish allegations (for fear of libel) until more conrete "libel proof" evidence is discovered?
Yep, I can go with that. I certainly think that fear of libel action is a part of it.
BUT, bit in bold, I fear I wasn't very clear, else you've misunderstood me (or I you - work that out!). What I meant was the papers are keeping quiet not as a cover-up for the McCanns, rather as an aid to helping lure them out? If they believe they are home and dry they'll make more mistakes (like Katey did at Leveson). I refuse to believe that all this is slipping by the notice of PJ/SY...
Fingers crossed...

Sorry for my misunderstanding! There may be an element of that, certainly amongst those media outlets who have had to pay out to the McCann's, but i don't believe that it has been an organised campaign, media wide.

by Guest 14.03.12 10:28

The post I made in another thread should go here too. The UK were invloved way back in 2010, a year before the book and the letter in the Sun in May 2011. How much did this scoping exercise cost and why was it so senstive??

So on top of the 3 million we have this scoping excercise completed a year before. Would they really be throwing all this money away on a whitewash, I don't think so somehow.

candyfloss wrote:Things were happening way before the McCanns letter in the papers to David Cameron..........

Former Home Secretary Alan Johnson commissioned a scoping exercise by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) centre to look at the feasibility of carrying out a review of the case.

This was completed in March 2010, but Mr McCann said current Home Secretary Theresa May refused to let him and his wife see it because it was "sensitive

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

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 10:49

Candyfloss, that is an awful lot of money. But, considering we have a government that seems to think nothing of paying £70 for a £2 box of photocopier paper, whilst trying to take disability payments from vulnerable kids, nothing would surprise me any more frankly.
BUT a joint whitewash? Hmmm. Doesn't seem likely.
What was it GA said? Something like "he has no doubt that one day both countries will find a solution that is both politically and diplomatically acceptable"
Anyone any idea what he could mean?

by aiyoyo 14.03.12 11:02

So it begs the question who invites who to the Review?
Understandably all cold cases get reviewed periodically. I wonder whether Portuguese review of it last year was because it was due under their normal procedures or some other reason?

No matter how one views it, it cant have been normal internal routine periodic review because for that they don't have to involve the Yard.

by ShuBob 14.03.12 13:02

Me wrote:It seems to me what is happening is that there is a very careful attempt to re-look at the case whilst managing the media, given the drubbing the McCann's gave the PJ in the press back in 2008.

Of course there is no new evidence to re-open the case right now. How could there be, they are simply re-looking at the files.

What is vitally important to understand though is that just because it hasn't been re-opened yet does not mean that it will not be re-opened at some point in the future.

So i expect (and hope) that these investigators, and SY will come to the same conclusion which is that out of the work done back in the initial investigation the one glaring area which needs examination is the events of the night and the statements given by T9 and the reconstruction which their version requires.

I hope that this process will conclude that the reconstruction needs to take place. Then watch the Team squirm because if it does take place and all the inconsistencies we know are in the statements come out, it will be at that point i expect, and i suspect the PJ expect as well, that the process will officially be re-opened.

Alas, someone whose views mirrors mine!

If there is to be a cover-up, let it happen first before people start crying foul.

PS: I thought for the reconstruction to happen, the case will have to be reopened and not the other way round?

by aiyoyo 14.03.12 17:14

ShuBob wrote:
Me wrote:It seems to me what is happening is that there is a very careful attempt to re-look at the case whilst managing the media, given the drubbing the McCann's gave the PJ in the press back in 2008.

Of course there is no new evidence to re-open the case right now. How could there be, they are simply re-looking at the files.

What is vitally important to understand though is that just because it hasn't been re-opened yet does not mean that it will not be re-opened at some point in the future.

So i expect (and hope) that these investigators, and SY will come to the same conclusion which is that out of the work done back in the initial investigation the one glaring area which needs examination is the events of the night and the statements given by T9 and the reconstruction which their version requires.

I hope that this process will conclude that the reconstruction needs to take place. Then watch the Team squirm because if it does take place and all the inconsistencies we know are in the statements come out, it will be at that point i expect, and i suspect the PJ expect as well, that the process will officially be re-opened.

Alas, someone whose views mirrors mine!

If there is to be a cover-up, let it happen first before people start crying foul.

PS: I thought for the reconstruction to happen, the case will have to be reopened and not the other way round?

Hey, I thought they are using virtual reconstitution! Depending on how that card falls then they will look at human reconstruction IMO because the latter cost is way higher.

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 18:53

ShuBob wrote:
Me wrote:It seems to me what is happening is that there is a very careful attempt to re-look at the case whilst managing the media, given the drubbing the McCann's gave the PJ in the press back in 2008.

Of course there is no new evidence to re-open the case right now. How could there be, they are simply re-looking at the files.

What is vitally important to understand though is that just because it hasn't been re-opened yet does not mean that it will not be re-opened at some point in the future.

So i expect (and hope) that these investigators, and SY will come to the same conclusion which is that out of the work done back in the initial investigation the one glaring area which needs examination is the events of the night and the statements given by T9 and the reconstruction which their version requires.

I hope that this process will conclude that the reconstruction needs to take place. Then watch the Team squirm because if it does take place and all the inconsistencies we know are in the statements come out, it will be at that point i expect, and i suspect the PJ expect as well, that the process will officially be re-opened.

Alas, someone whose views mirrors mine!

If there is to be a cover-up, let it happen first before people start crying foul.

PS: I thought for the reconstruction to happen, the case will have to be reopened and not the other way round?

Hey Shubob!
I'm pretty certain that the Process can only be re-opened with new evidence.
Goncalo has always maintained that if the T9 were to do the reconstruction, that would constitute 'new evidence', hence would re-open the case. Were this not true, we'd be left with almost a chicken/egg problem: No recon, no re-opening. No re-opening, no recon Wink

I'm 100% certain that K+G are within their rights to write to the Judiciary (as Amaral says, for the cost of a stamp) to offer to do the reconstruction resulting in full re-opening. In all this time, they haven't done so - I wonder why - not!

by Lioned 14.03.12 18:59

The trouble with a reconstruction is that it points the finger squarely at the mccans and their friends,i would not have thought after all this time that any 'passers by' would be expected to have their memories jogged.So i think it would be seen for what it is,an attempt to rubbish the so called timelines and incriminate the participants.
I would imagine the legal team would strongly advise against returning to Portugal to participate in that.I assume that they would not be compelled to return in any event unless an arrest warrent had been issued which would certainly put them back in the frame.

by Guest 14.03.12 19:12

Lioned wrote:The trouble with a reconstruction is that it points the finger squarely at the mccans and their friends,i would not have thought after all this time that any 'passers by' would be expected to have their memories jogged.So i think it would be seen for what it is,an attempt to rubbish the so called timelines and incriminate the participants.
I would imagine the legal team would strongly advise against returning to Portugal to participate in that.I assume that they would not be compelled to return in any event unless an arrest warrent had been issued which would certainly put them back in the frame.

Perhaps David Cameron could write an open letter to the Sun asking them to attend. big grin

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 19:32

Lioned wrote:The trouble with a reconstruction is that it points the finger squarely at the mccans and their friends,i would not have thought after all this time that any 'passers by' would be expected to have their memories jogged.So i think it would be seen for what it is,an attempt to rubbish the so called timelines and incriminate the participants.
I would imagine the legal team would strongly advise against returning to Portugal to participate in that.I assume that they would not be compelled to return in any event unless an arrest warrent had been issued which would certainly put them back in the frame.

Really sorry Lioned but that's not the case, is it?
It was clearly stated that the investigation could not progress without the reconstruction. The McCanns said that NOTHING was more important to them than 'finding their little girl'. Obviously, that is not true is it?
Please tell me, Lioned, how innocent people could possibly be 'incriminated'. If they have told the truth, and their statements are 100% true (considering they made two timelines, they should be!). It could be that the reconstruction would actually reveal a much wider 'window of opportunity' than previously thought. Then, the PJ could get on with the important task of hunting for eggmen.
The arrogance of this group is breathtaking. They are Drs, not Police, yet they 'are not convinced a reconstruction would help'. How could it not? They were clearly told the investigation would stall without it. They allowed that. What does that tell you?

Another thing. In EVERY missing persons/homicide, the LAST PERSON TO SEE THE VICTIM is ALWAYS first 'person of interest'. They and the rest of the family need to be eliminated first. The PJ wouldve been negligent not to do this. Why in God's name should the McCanns be exempt from this?
Innocent=Nothing to fear/hide. Imo

by Lioned 14.03.12 19:37

Yes maybe.Also if they did refuse to attend a reconstruction it would do their dwindling popularity no good at all.I suppose they could always send a couple of blow up dolls in their stead,chances are that would make more sense assuming they had their watches on offcourse.

by ShuBob 14.03.12 20:05

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Lioned wrote:The trouble with a reconstruction is that it points the finger squarely at the mccans and their friends,i would not have thought after all this time that any 'passers by' would be expected to have their memories jogged.So i think it would be seen for what it is,an attempt to rubbish the so called timelines and incriminate the participants.
I would imagine the legal team would strongly advise against returning to Portugal to participate in that.I assume that they would not be compelled to return in any event unless an arrest warrent had been issued which would certainly put them back in the frame.
Really sorry Lioned but that's not the case, is it?
It was clearly stated that the investigation could not progress without the reconstruction. The McCanns said that NOTHING was more important to them than 'finding their little girl'. Obviously, that is not true is it?
Please tell me, Lioned, how innocent people could possibly be 'incriminated'. If they have told the truth, and their statements are 100% true (considering they made two timelines, they should be!). It could be that the reconstruction would actually reveal a much wider 'window of opportunity' than previously thought. Then, the PJ could get on with the important task of hunting for eggmen.
The arrogance of this group is breathtaking. They are Drs, not Police, yet they 'are not convinced a reconstruction would help'. How could it not? They were clearly told the investigation would stall without it. They allowed that. What does that tell you?

Another thing. In EVERY missing persons/homicide, the LAST PERSON TO SEE THE VICTIM is ALWAYS first 'person of interest'. They and the rest of the family need to be eliminated first. The PJ wouldve been negligent not to do this. Why in God's name should the McCanns be exempt from this?
Innocent=Nothing to fear/hide. Imo

I believe Lioned is correct in that the tapas 9 would not willingly attend a reconstruction. Even if an EAW is issued and they are forced back to Portugal, their lawyers will argue that they have the right not to self-incriminate. This will probably lead to the lot of them being constituted arguidos (assuming they weren't already for the EAW application). I am of the view that they would rather go to jail than attend a reconstruction. Let's face it, when it gets to that point, it'll be difficult for them to spin it away from them being suspects.

by Cristobell 14.03.12 20:27

I think they will strenuously resist a reconstruction, as Lioned pointed out, it will open a whole nest of hornets. However, neither the review of SY or Oporto, can be completed without re-interviewing the key players and finding out exactly what happened on the night of the 3rd. They are caught in a trap. I do not see how there is any way out of it.

TM were hoping their Petition (does anyone remember it?) calling for a review, would reach 100,000 signatures and was connected to paypal. Perhaps they hoped it would run and run indefinitely, bumped up by several 'Madeleine Days' along the way - the last I recall, was that it had reached around 36,000. Of course, the petition became moot when DC generously offered SY's finest and sunk millions into a new investigation. Perhaps it was a case of 'be careful what you wish for, you might just get it'.

by rainbow-fairy 14.03.12 20:44

ShuBob wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:
Lioned wrote:The trouble with a reconstruction is that it points the finger squarely at the mccans and their friends,i would not have thought after all this time that any 'passers by' would be expected to have their memories jogged.So i think it would be seen for what it is,an attempt to rubbish the so called timelines and incriminate the participants.
I would imagine the legal team would strongly advise against returning to Portugal to participate in that.I assume that they would not be compelled to return in any event unless an arrest warrent had been issued which would certainly put them back in the frame.
Really sorry Lioned but that's not the case, is it?
It was clearly stated that the investigation could not progress without the reconstruction. The McCanns said that NOTHING was more important to them than 'finding their little girl'. Obviously, that is not true is it?
Please tell me, Lioned, how innocent people could possibly be 'incriminated'. If they have told the truth, and their statements are 100% true (considering they made two timelines, they should be!). It could be that the reconstruction would actually reveal a much wider 'window of opportunity' than previously thought. Then, the PJ could get on with the important task of hunting for eggmen.
The arrogance of this group is breathtaking. They are Drs, not Police, yet they 'are not convinced a reconstruction would help'. How could it not? They were clearly told the investigation would stall without it. They allowed that. What does that tell you?

Another thing. In EVERY missing persons/homicide, the LAST PERSON TO SEE THE VICTIM is ALWAYS first 'person of interest'. They and the rest of the family need to be eliminated first. The PJ wouldve been negligent not to do this. Why in God's name should the McCanns be exempt from this?
Innocent=Nothing to fear/hide. Imo

I believe Lioned is correct in that the tapas 9 would not willingly attend a reconstruction. Even if an EAW is issued and they are forced back to Portugal, their lawyers will argue that they have the right not to self-incriminate. This will probably lead to the lot of them being constituted arguidos (assuming they weren't already for the EAW application). I am of the view that they would rather go to jail than attend a reconstruction. Let's face it, when it gets to that point, it'll be difficult for them to spin it away from them being suspects.

The bit I've put in red is my whole point. They've repeatedly said 'nothing is more important to us than finding our little girl'. Obviously rubbish seeing as they wouldn't even rule themselves out so others could be ruled in! For that read they know Maddie is not findable.

Say a car registered to me is found wrapped around a tree. The police find me and want a breath/blood sample. I refuse. Now why would I do that if innocent? An inference will be made from my refusal.
IMO, an inference should be made by their refusal to reconstruct the events of May 3rd 07. Its not just a trinket that has been lost. Its a little girl, very likely dead. She felt, she thought, she dreamt and she had potential. That is all gone. Should that really be forgotten about?
If your child broke their leg, would you refuse to take them to A+E (of course not). Unless, of course, it wasn't an accident...

by aiyoyo 15.03.12 2:14

Reconstruction is at the very least their obligation to Madeleine. They cant spin that the Yard (too) is stitching them up surely?

If it comes to that - Court summons ordering them back for the reconstruction, their game is over.