Portuguese contradict SY statements: Daily Mail - what is this all about?

by suzyjohnson 06.07.13 0:44

Why SHOULD we help find Maddie, ask Portugal's police chiefs as they ridicule Scotland Yard claims of new leads on missing girl
Met Police made upbeat announcement about new leads on Thursday
Attorney General has since poured scorn on Met investigation
David Cameron welcomed the inquiry as the case 'still shocks the nation'

By [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
PUBLISHED: 23:36, 5 July 2013 | UPDATED: 23:59, 5 July 2013

Portugal's top [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] yesterday poured scorn on Scotland Yard’s investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Attorney General Joana Marques Vidal said officers from London had no right to operate in Portugal and cannot question, interview or arrest anyone.
Her comments are in stark contrast to the Metropolitan Police’s upbeat announcement on Thursday of ‘genuinely new’ leads in the six-year-old case and that arrests could be made within weeks.
Detectives say they are preparing to swoop on 38 suspects – including 12 Britons – in Portugal and other parts of Europe.
Scotland Yard says it has asked the Crown Prosecution Service to submit an International Letter of Request to enable a team of officers to pursue inquiries in Portugal.
But Mrs Marques Vidal said she has received no British request for mutual [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] in an inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine – meaning the Met has no right to pursue inquiries.
Her spokesman said: ‘We have not received any request for mutual assistance with regard to the Madeleine McCann case.
He added that even if British police are allowed to travel to Portugal to ‘help the sovereign authorities’ carry out the ‘request for mutual assistance’, Met officers ‘cannot conduct any interviews or any other action in Portugal’.

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

by Nereid 06.07.13 1:16

I'm as confused as anyone.

Maybe SY and PJ are taking a leaf out of GM's book?: Confusion is good.

by lj 06.07.13 1:52

No, the SY has after all this time and money nothing, nop, nada. They know their 38 plus or minus is one big red herring. They continuously let it seem as if they do everything in their power to solve the case, especially as far as their cooperation with the PJ is concerned. Their ultimate goal is something like: we could have found him/them, but the PJ did not want to solve the case.

It is a repeat of 2007: when the Brits refused to give any medical and financial information, keep the parents under suspicion updated of the investigation, screwed up the DNA evidence, lost some material in that process, sabotaged further interrogation of the tapas friends by first not reacting, later declaring the International Letter of Request was not correct and so on and so forth.

Anyone who still believe SY is doing a proper investigation is rather naive imo. It's wagging the dog done by a LE group who has experience in screwing up investigations.

by jd 06.07.13 1:56

"........Meanwhile Portugal’s detective unit, the Policia Judiciaria, said its officers would assist the British inquiry, but added they would effectively work to rule – only carrying out their duties to the letter of the law.
Pedro do Carmo, deputy national director of the unit, told the Daily Mail: ‘We are available to co-operate with the British authorities but only under terms of Portuguese law and within the time period allowed under Portuguese law.’

Portuguese detectives have condemned any deal between London and Lisbon as ‘political b*******’.
One said: ‘British police may be allowed to sit in on the interviews, with the prosecutor’s agreement, but they must not interfere or ask questions themselves. And if this deal does exist politics should not be allowed to interfere with justice. That is b*******.’"

by **tigger** 06.07.13 6:23

All smoke and mirrors as usual - seen in the larger context of the activities so far this year.
McCann news is also a very useful tool to bury bad news of quite a different kind. Especially as the 'news' can be manufactured at will.

See also the Morais topic which I posted yesterday. (Mods if you want to merge/change? I didn't name that topic well and this one could get lost under the heading it now has - could we have one e.g. Portuguese contradict SY statements? something like that? We won't be able to find it under Morais or What is this all about).

I think this might get very interesting.

by **tigger** 06.07.13 7:34

I'll try and use more braincells next time!

As to JD's post: looks as if the British police will be there on sufferance, I get the feeling they're feeling rather insulted and for a good reason too. They don't want to be part of the new fairy tale - might it be that there is a sense of honour involved too? I sincerely hope so.

by plebgate 06.07.13 8:04

If anybody is ever charged with the abduction of Maddie - the parents and crew would have to be questioned under oath re. the statements given.

that will be very interesting.

by Guest 06.07.13 8:15

plebgate wrote:If anybody is ever charged with the abduction of Maddie - the parents and crew would have to be questioned under oath re. the statements given.

that will be very interesting.

Good point plebgate, to avoid that woulld SY have to name someone who is dead?

by pennylane 06.07.13 8:25

lj wrote:No, the SY has after all this time and money nothing, nop, nada. They know their 38 plus or minus is one big red herring. They continuously let it seem as if they do everything in their power to solve the case, especially as far as their cooperation with the PJ is concerned. Their ultimate goal is something like: we could have found him/them, but the PJ did not want to solve the case.

It is a repeat of 2007: when the Brits refused to give any medical and financial information, keep the parents under suspicion updated of the investigation, screwed up the DNA evidence, lost some material in that process, sabotaged further interrogation of the tapas friends by first not reacting, later declaring the International Letter of Request was not correct and so on and so forth.

Anyone who still believe SY is doing a proper investigation is rather naive imo. It's wagging the dog done by a LE group who has experience in screwing up investigations.

Absolutely spot on, lj. thumbup

The Home Office has attempted to bully and intimidate the Portuguese Judiciary into classifying Madeleine's neglect and sad demise in Apt 5A as "a stranger abduction" since 2007, in spite of glaring evidence to the contrary. They have applied vast efforts towards getting the McCanns off the hook, and giving them an air of respectability, but the stench surrounding their story keeps rising to the top.

The Metropolitan Police will rue the day they took this McCann of worms on, and Andy Redwood may as well have "Whitewash" tattooed across his forehead!.

by suzyjohnson 06.07.13 8:40

Portuguese contradict SY statements, yes that's a better title, thank you

You don't suppose the money for the review / investigation isn't actually there? Just a couple of police saying, you see we've made all this effort, sorry, can't be found .......

Really this from the PJ doesn't bode too well for those who believe that SY are on the right path and will get there eventually, in fact, it looks as though SY and the PJ are poles apart. It's good to see the Portuguese are giving their opinion loud and clear though.

by pennylane 06.07.13 9:00

suzyjohnson wrote:Portuguese contradict SY statements, yes that's a better title, thank you

You don't suppose the money for the review / investigation isn't actually there? Just a couple of police saying, you see we've made all this effort, sorry, can't be found .......

Really this from the PJ doesn't bode too well for those who believe that SY are on the right path and will get there eventually, in fact, it looks as though SY and the PJ are poles apart. It's good to see the Portuguese are giving their opinion loud and clear though.

Yes it is really good isn't it!. Well done Daily Mail for (finally) reporting relevant McCann news that hasn't had Mitchell's dirty paws all over it. This most certainly would not have been covered in the past. I guess we have the McCann's mega narcissism to thank after they so savagely bit the hand that fed them!

by morse 06.07.13 9:06

It is about time the PJ really tell us what is not happening. The Met, especially Redwood, seem to be living in LaLa- Land. Where has that so-called £5 million been spent? I am extremely confused now,
aaagh

The Met are going to be the laughing stock round the world. I would love to know what Peter Mac has to say on these latest developments.

by Pershing36 06.07.13 9:14

lj wrote:No, the SY has after all this time and money nothing, nop, nada. They know their 38 plus or minus is one big red herring. They continuously let it seem as if they do everything in their power to solve the case, especially as far as their cooperation with the PJ is concerned. Their ultimate goal is something like: we could have found him/them, but the PJ did not want to solve the case.

It is a repeat of 2007: when the Brits refused to give any medical and financial information, keep the parents under suspicion updated of the investigation, screwed up the DNA evidence, lost some material in that process, sabotaged further interrogation of the tapas friends by first not reacting, later declaring the International Letter of Request was not correct and so on and so forth.

Anyone who still believe SY is doing a proper investigation is rather naive imo. It's wagging the dog done by a LE group who has experience in screwing up investigations.

Agreed 100%

What is really behind all this? Why did they even commission this review?

by Woofer 06.07.13 9:28

So was the press report about the two head honchos from the CPS flying to Portugual in April all a load of B******* ?

by Google.Gaspar.Statements 06.07.13 9:33

There is only one reason why the death of a child would be covered up and that's because her body must never give the game away of what some effing lowlife did to her.

Oh, and if it was really an abductor then there would be no need for a cover up would there DCI Redwood?

by Angelique 06.07.13 9:43

IMO it sounds all too much as though Deadwood has had to justify the huge boost to keep the farce going.

It could also be useful to keep appearing and making announcements to try and have a detrimental affect on people on forums like this one and MM to throw in the towel.

It seems nothing has changed, just more of the same.

Whoever it was who was present in PdL is just more powerful than our Government and is still throwing their weight around.

by Pershing36 06.07.13 9:47

Angelique wrote:

Whoever it was who was present in PdL is just more powerful than our Government and is still throwing their weight around.

Until that person is identified or exposed, this whole thing will continue to go round in circles.

by Lance De Boils 06.07.13 10:07

I'm repeating a post I just made on the other thread, as it could equally apply to this one.

Maybe they're trying to smoke them out. This could be just the Met's tactics. The guilty parties must surely be panicking. They don't know who these "38 people of interest are" and they don't know if they're on the list. They don't know what NEW evidence the Met have and they don't know who's said what.
Who's not sleeping at night?
Who's lights are still on at 3 or 4 in the morning?

by Dr What 06.07.13 10:18

Like many people of a certain age, I was bought up hearing and believing that the British police force was the best in the world! Several events over the past 10 years or so have revealed the opposite.Corruption, falsifying reports,institutional racist attitudes, bungled investigations, have all come to light....and only after some brave and tenacious individuals have fought long and hard for the truth to emerge.

It has been said so many times before here and elsewhere......what on earth are the Police doing in this case, and why the need to be seen to be sensitive and adopting a kid's glove approach to a group of people who neglected a child in the first place, and then decided not to co-operate with the investigating police force in order to eliminate themselves from the investigation?

The court of public opinion just knows something is very wrong with this family and the group who were with them.Now, it might be difficult to get the truth as to what exactly happened that holiday, but start with that group.Clear them from the suspicion that hangs over them, then if need be look for the 38 other people, or whatever the number was.

And most importantly of all, work properly with their Portuguese counterparts.

Whilst I'm at it, it seems quite clear that, whatever the merits or not of it, GCHQ have been shown to be listening very well or have access to, individuals communications.The records of communications on the Algarve should not prove too difficult for them.

by MaryB 06.07.13 10:34

If a lowly DJ could get away with hundreds and hundreds of crimes it makes you wonder what a person of real importance could get away with.

by lufc50337 06.07.13 12:06

MaryB wrote:If a lowly DJ could get away with hundreds and hundreds of crimes it makes you wonder what a person of real importance could get away with.

Exactly

by **PeterMac** 06.07.13 12:20

plebgate wrote:If anybody is ever charged with the abduction of Maddie - the parents and crew would have to be questioned under oath re. the statements given.
that will be very interesting.

This is a very important point.
Assume that an Abductor is found and arrested.
The prosecution has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the offence was committed and then that the accused committed it.
To set the scene they would undoubtedly have to get GM and KM to describe how they left the apartment.
And at that point the defence would have a field day. From his very first words under oath GM would have to admit he had been lying, and had taken a week to 'correct' his statement.
And he would have to explain why he did that.

In fact, the 'evidence' in the statements and in the public domain is so messed up that the CPS might ultimately decide not to prosecute, on the grounds that there was little chance of a conviction.
Other than a full and frank confession and the discovery of MBM, in whatever state she may be, what evidence would the prosecution be able to adduce ?
Point of entry - NO
Point of exit - NO
Time frame - NO
Means - NO
Motive - Unclear
Opportunity - NO
Forensic evidence - NO
Reliable eye witnesses - NO
Unreliable eye witnesses - still NO, (since even if JT had seen bundleman there is no proof that he was carrying MBM, and lots to show that he could not possibly have been so doing.)
Documentary evidence - NO

and so on.
There is in fact little prospect of a prosecution of an abductor, even if one could be found.
A dead one is still a possibility, but that could have been wound up some time ago.

by Lance De Boils 06.07.13 12:27

Indeed, PeterMac.

The defence team would have so much to throw in with regards to the lies, discrepencies, changing statements and so on.

Unless there is a damned good explanation, which has not been made public (or told to the PJ), I think it will be very hard to get a SAFE conviction of A.N. Other.

It will ALL have to come out during a trial.

UNLESS of course, there is a confession and no trial.

by Cristobell 06.07.13 12:43

Interesting points Petermac, I always look out for your posts.

I have been thinking on similar lines - the facts and the evidence remain the same, the Portuguese investigation file is online, and the McCanns have given hundreds of interviews telling their story worldwide. I can't see any way in which a whitewash would stand up in Court.

However, sadly, I suppose there is always the chance that no charges can be brought, but surely they would already be aware of that? If they are, why have they opened a full investigation. If there is no chance of a successful prosecution, they will have some backtracking to do, to justify the extra money and the recent fanfare announcements.

Just when we think there will be a conclusion, it becomes curiouser and curiouser.

by deafoldbat 06.07.13 12:59

Joana Morais is back posting on her site! Great!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 06.07.13 13:03

deafoldbat wrote:Joana Morais is back posting on her site! Great!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

See thread here and has already posted on this thread deafoldbat, it's good she's back. Mrs

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

by sallypelt 06.07.13 13:27

PeterMac wrote:
plebgate wrote:If anybody is ever charged with the abduction of Maddie - the parents and crew would have to be questioned under oath re. the statements given.
that will be very interesting.
This is a very important point.
Assume that an Abductor is found and arrested.
The prosecution has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the offence was committed and then that the accused committed it.
To set the scene they would undoubtedly have to get GM and KM to describe how they left the apartment.
And at that point the defence would have a field day. From his very first words under oath GM would have to admit he had been lying, and had taken a week to 'correct' his statement.
And he would have to explain why he did that.

In fact, the 'evidence' in the statements and in the public domain is so messed up that the CPS might ultimately decide not to prosecute, on the grounds that there was little chance of a conviction.
Other than a full and frank confession and the discovery of MBM, in whatever state she may be, what evidence would the prosecution be able to adduce ?
Point of entry - NO
Point of exit - NO
Time frame - NO
Means - NO
Motive - Unclear
Opportunity - NO
Forensic evidence - NO
Reliable eye witnesses - NO
Unreliable eye witnesses - still NO, (since even if JT had seen bundleman there is no proof that he was carrying MBM, and lots to show that he could not possibly have been so doing.)
Documentary evidence - NO

and so on.
There is in fact little prospect of a prosecution of an abductor, even if one could be found.
A dead one is still a possibility, but that could have been wound up some time ago.

but Petermac, hasn't it already been decided by the CPS that there IS a case to answer? Otherwise, why are we at this stage? The CPS have been in Portugal since April, so they must have said that there is a case to answer

by bobbin 06.07.13 13:54

sallypelt wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
plebgate wrote:If anybody is ever charged with the abduction of Maddie - the parents and crew would have to be questioned under oath re. the statements given.
that will be very interesting.
This is a very important point.
Assume that an Abductor is found and arrested.
The prosecution has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the offence was committed and then that the accused committed it.
To set the scene they would undoubtedly have to get GM and KM to describe how they left the apartment.
And at that point the defence would have a field day. From his very first words under oath GM would have to admit he had been lying, and had taken a week to 'correct' his statement.
And he would have to explain why he did that.

In fact, the 'evidence' in the statements and in the public domain is so messed up that the CPS might ultimately decide not to prosecute, on the grounds that there was little chance of a conviction.
Other than a full and frank confession and the discovery of MBM, in whatever state she may be, what evidence would the prosecution be able to adduce ?
Point of entry - NO
Point of exit - NO
Time frame - NO
Means - NO
Motive - Unclear
Opportunity - NO
Forensic evidence - NO
Reliable eye witnesses - NO
Unreliable eye witnesses - still NO, (since even if JT had seen bundleman there is no proof that he was carrying MBM, and lots to show that he could not possibly have been so doing.)
Documentary evidence - NO

and so on.
There is in fact little prospect of a prosecution of an abductor, even if one could be found.
A dead one is still a possibility, but that could have been wound up some time ago.

but Petermac, hasn't it already been decided by the CPS that there IS a case to answer? Otherwise, why are we at this stage? The CPS have been in Portugal since April, so they must have said that there is a case to answer

This seems to be going round and round ad infinitum. Nothing tallying, Portugal says one thing, UK says another, yet no resolution.
Why do I sometimes think this is a real-life version of the Truman Show, the film with Jim Carrey.
Is the camera aimed at watching people's reactions to a 'convincingly set-up fictitious event'.
Is it aimed at keeping our eyes off the 'bigger/global political agenda' or
Is it an exercise in 'wide-sweeping-market-information-gathering by the authorities' as to who will respond to what, in order to see what they (the puppet masters) can and can't get away with. splat

by Seek truth 06.07.13 13:59

lj wrote:No, the SY has after all this time and money nothing, nop, nada. They know their 38 plus or minus is one big red herring. They continuously let it seem as if they do everything in their power to solve the case, especially as far as their cooperation with the PJ is concerned. Their ultimate goal is something like: we could have found him/them, but the PJ did not want to solve the case.

It is a repeat of 2007: when the Brits refused to give any medical and financial information, keep the parents under suspicion updated of the investigation, screwed up the DNA evidence, lost some material in that process, sabotaged further interrogation of the tapas friends by first not reacting, later declaring the International Letter of Request was not correct and so on and so forth.

Anyone who still believe SY is doing a proper investigation is rather naive imo. It's wagging the dog done by a LE group who has experience in screwing up investigations.

YOU SAID IT ALL !!

thanks

Lets not forget SY have actually been involved since 2007.

by sallypelt 06.07.13 14:04

Seek truth wrote:
lj wrote:No, the SY has after all this time and money nothing, nop, nada. They know their 38 plus or minus is one big red herring. They continuously let it seem as if they do everything in their power to solve the case, especially as far as their cooperation with the PJ is concerned. Their ultimate goal is something like: we could have found him/them, but the PJ did not want to solve the case.

It is a repeat of 2007: when the Brits refused to give any medical and financial information, keep the parents under suspicion updated of the investigation, screwed up the DNA evidence, lost some material in that process, sabotaged further interrogation of the tapas friends by first not reacting, later declaring the International Letter of Request was not correct and so on and so forth.

Anyone who still believe SY is doing a proper investigation is rather naive imo. It's wagging the dog done by a LE group who has experience in screwing up investigations.

YOU SAID IT ALL !!

Lets not forget SY have actually been involved since 2007.

Well, I have to question why some people are here, if all they are seeing is a "whitewash" from SY. I would like for you to explain, what is it you want, if you don't want the police to investigate? I am at a loss of what your motive is