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

by ShuBob 06.07.13 14:15

Well said, Sallypelt. I have felt the same for ages and have taken to skipping several posts. I can't be doing with naysayers day in, day out aaaah

by **tigger** 06.07.13 14:16

sallypelt wrote:
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

The CPS (who I presume work for the government being Crown Prosecution Service) may have found there is a case to answer. However, it seems a bit back-to-front to me.
Normally - correct me if I'm wrong - the police make up a case, present it to the CPS who decide whether there is a case to answer.
Here we see the CPS visiting Portugal, then the police announcing they are taking over, the Attorney General of Portugal saying they know nothing about this fantastic cooperation of the two countries in this matter.

I'm pessimistic about this, it has been government interference and protection that has got this six years down the line, if the normal sequence of actions is reversed by getting a government agency to set the police to work I hold no high hopes for the truth to come out.
I think SY is instructed to come up with a conclusion that will end the speculation, I doubt it will be anywhere near the truth.

by tasprin 06.07.13 14:28

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.

Yes, it's BS and the Mail is deliberately encouraging animosity toward Portugal - many comments are extremely xenophobic, 'I hate Portugal' etc. One stupid person wrote, 'Maybe if Scotland Yard had stepped in 2 years ago, the results would have been very different?'

Nowhere in the article can I see the headline quote "Why SHOULD we help find Maddie" - it's pure fabrication. The Portuguese simply say no request has been received from SY. And when you remember the months of trouble the PJ had trying to get the McCanns and tapas 7 back to Portugal, and all the problems mentioned by 'SeekTruth', it's understandable that they're angry. If the Portuguese decided to override UK protocol and arrived in the UK to question persons of interest here, there'd be diplomatic incident. I can see Portugal being set up again if SY don't solve this. Portugal will be falsely accused of being uncooperative and blamed for the unsatisfactory outcome. I get the feeling Portugal is being bulldozed at the moment - maybe SY want all the files and that's why the CPS were there in April.

by Pershing36 06.07.13 15:24

tigger wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
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

The CPS (who I presume work for the government being Crown Prosecution Service) may have found there is a case to answer. However, it seems a bit back-to-front to me.
Normally - correct me if I'm wrong - the police make up a case, present it to the CPS who decide whether there is a case to answer.
Here we see the CPS visiting Portugal, then the police announcing they are taking over, the Attorney General of Portugal saying they know nothing about this fantastic cooperation of the two countries in this matter.

I'm pessimistic about this, it has been government interference and protection that has got this six years down the line, if the normal sequence of actions is reversed by getting a government agency to set the police to work I hold no high hopes for the truth to come out.
I think SY is instructed to come up with a conclusion that will end the speculation, I doubt it will be anywhere near the truth.

I can't find it at present because I am on my phone, however I think someone hit the nail on the head on another thread.

The CPS and SY are probably desperate to make sure they have seen every file collected by the PJ. So they can make sure no smoking gun is pulled out of the hat in a libel trial which could turn this on its head.

I am sure they can nick a paedophile in the meantime, is anyone really going to care? Then claim they are sure he/she have done it but the original investigation did not have enough substance to convict. They have probably already got someone in mind, the CPS are probably checking out whether they can get anything to stick.

They can hold them/bail them long enough to get TM through the trial.

by Guest 06.07.13 15:33

sallypelt wrote:
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

I don't think it's a case of not wanting the police to investigate, sallypelt, I think it's a matter of not having confidence in the investigation.

by lj 06.07.13 15:36

Pershing36 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.
Agreed 100%

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

Don't forget Rebecca was behind this. Theresa May had already said no. For the gossip columns anything goes: It does not matter if it is bad news or good news: it's news. I think the whole thing was about getting headlines, and satisfying the xenophobic lust for dragging the Portuguese through the mud.

Kate and Gerry better watch out. The moment the "poor brave mom" articles are exhausted they will find themselves in a snake pit.

by Cristobell 06.07.13 15:47

I'm going demented trying to figure out what is going on. ij has made some convincing points. Undoubtedly there will be a sea of red faces should the full facts of the case be disclosed, and there seems to be evidence of political interference. On the plus side, we have had a change of government, and Gordon Brown can be blamed.

However, on the dark side, Goncalo Amaral has said that Scotland Yard only want to investigate an abduction. I struggle to get past that, as I do trust Goncalo Amaral and he has contacts within the PJ. However, that was quite some time ago, and he has not said anything recently that I know of. I also trust Joana's site, and if the Portuguese Authorities have said they have received no letter, then it must be presumed true and of course, it has now appeared in The Mail.

Scotland Yard have made 16 visits to Portugal, and top prosecutors from the CPS flew out there. They must have gone to see someone? If they are only meeting with high up officials, who are not keeping the force on the ground informed, then alarm bells must ring.

I tend to think this case must have a conclusion. If they wanted to bury it, that could have been done a long time ago. We must also remember that the case was largely dormant for 4 years, in that 'no police force were actively investigating' - but that may have been part of the spin. It may also have been a case of the authorities wishing it would go away. The leading players love the cameras, and the cameras love them. Perhaps if we look at them as the walking goldmines they are, or think they are, we may get to the bottom of it, but not in a good way. There are still millions to be earned from the Madeleine McCann name. The dwindling sales of the tabloids get a boost everytime a Madeleine, or a Kate and Gerry speak out.

There are good financial reasons to string it out, could possibly be the bottom line. In which case, the last bit of faith I have in humanity would disappear.

There is a longer version of this on my blog.

by Seek truth 06.07.13 15:48

sallypelt wrote:
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

Who said anything about not wanting SY to investigate?

I'd love for the Mccanns to get caught, but also those who are covering this up.

Can't understand why SY keep mentioning they are working on it now, when they have been on it since 2007.

Criminals!

by Pershing36 06.07.13 15:48

Finn wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
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

I don't think it's a case of not wanting the police to investigate, sallypelt, I think it's a matter of not having confidence in the investigation.

I for one am not going to accept the SY review if they just come up with some random sex offender with very loose evidence.

Think of it this way if it wound up tomorrow and they concluded Hewlett probably did it, would you be happy to leave it there?

by sallypelt 06.07.13 16:02

Pershing36 wrote:
Finn wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
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

I don't think it's a case of not wanting the police to investigate, sallypelt, I think it's a matter of not having confidence in the investigation.

I for one am not going to accept the SY review if they just come up with some random sex offender with very loose evidence.

Think of it this way if it wound up tomorrow and they concluded Hewlett probably did it, would you be happy to leave it there?

Do you really think that THAT is going to happen?

I will ask the same question, again. What is it some people want? If the police are NOT going to do anything, then what is the point of being here?
I agree that we have to be careful, and not listen to everything we hear, but I understand enough about the law to know that if they just wanted this to go away, they would have left things as they were.

Now, I am not going to say anything else on the subject in regards to a "whitewash". I've said my piece, and I will concentrate on what the likes of Russian doll and those who have an understanding of how the law works.

by Cristobell 06.07.13 16:04

It will be interesting to hear the ejit son telling the learned Judge that he burned the letter BEFORE phoning The Sun.

by Guest 06.07.13 16:07

Pershing36 wrote:
Finn wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
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

I don't think it's a case of not wanting the police to investigate, sallypelt, I think it's a matter of not having confidence in the investigation.

I for one am not going to accept the SY review if they just come up with some random sex offender with very loose evidence.

Think of it this way if it wound up tomorrow and they concluded Hewlett probably did it, would you be happy to leave it there?

I'd honestly be happy, in the same way I'd be delighted if Madeleine was alive. But they'd need to explain the many discrepancies. And I just can't see how that's possible.

by jd 06.07.13 16:28

candyfloss wrote:Tomorrow Express

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

With the final decision within the next few weeks on whether the GA v mccann libel goes to trial.....The "timing" of all this could not be more perfect for the mccanns winkwink

by Guest 06.07.13 16:41

Yes I can only think that this has something to do with the forthcoming proceedings in Portugal. What better news could there be for Team McCann than that someone completely unconnected to them has been arrested?

Even if it's a greasy spotty paedo with a rap sheet as long as your arm, there will still be no evidence that Madeleine has been harmed and they can still claim they need money to "look" for her!

by jd 06.07.13 16:59

It would certainly change the goalposts of the trial now there is a suspect arrested

by jeanmonroe 06.07.13 16:59

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Yes I can only think that this has something to do with the forthcoming proceedings in Portugal. What better news could there be for Team McCann than that someone completely unconnected to them has been arrested?

Even if it's a greasy spotty paedo with a rap sheet as long as your arm, there will still be no evidence that Madeleine has been harmed and they can still claim they need money to "look" for her!

And if the greasy, spotty, egg eating, creepy, photographer peado patsy unconnected to the mccanns protests his innocence, how does that work?

What's more interesting is that there seems to have been no out of court settlement with GA.
And that is what the mccanns are totally afraid of.
In a court room, under OATH!
Remember, that when they were under oath, the first time ever, at Leveson they did not utter the words abducted or abduction once in their entire evidence relating to the case of their missing daughter.

by bobbin 06.07.13 17:16

jeanmonroe wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Yes I can only think that this has something to do with the forthcoming proceedings in Portugal. What better news could there be for Team McCann than that someone completely unconnected to them has been arrested?

Even if it's a greasy spotty paedo with a rap sheet as long as your arm, there will still be no evidence that Madeleine has been harmed and they can still claim they need money to "look" for her!

And if the greasy, spotty, egg eating, creepy, photographer peado patsy unconnected to the mccanns protests his innocence, how does that work?

What's more interesting is that there seems to have been no out of court settlement with GA.
And that is what the mccanns are totally afraid of.
In a court room, under OATH!
Remember, that when they were under oath, the first time ever, at Leveson they did not utter the words abducted or abduction once in their entire evidence relating to the case of their missing daughter.

I agree with SallyPelt, that we should try to see the possibility of a proper investigation, and stay here to keep pushing for that, but when information conflicts, then questions of credibility arise.
Portugal is not singing from the same hymn sheet as UK.
From the start, something v. high up is being covered up.
Goncalo Amaral said non verbatim, jaws will drop, when the truth comes out.
Then there is the looming menace of the court case which G.A. has refused to settle.
Huge problem for the McCs and therefore for the 'establishment' covering up, which could easily be using the so far proven corrupt police at the highest level, in cahouts with kitten heals, who Rebekka threatened to screw (not literally).
So I would ask now, what would be the shortest sentence for a 'stooge' abductor, where things went wrong and Maddie did not survive (see the dogs).
How much would a 'stooge' be prepared to accept as a pay off, to be enjoyed on his early release from prison? spin

by Kepharel 06.07.13 17:17

I may be (probably am) wrong, but haven't I read that Amaral only has to prove that he has reason to believe in the truth of what he was saying. As long as he had reason at the time I can't see how future events will knock that defence over.

by Guest 06.07.13 17:23

Kepharel wrote:I may be (probably am) wrong, but haven't I read that Amaral only has to prove that he has reason to believe in the truth of what he was saying. As long as he had reason at the time I can't see how future events will knock that defence over.

That is correct, and it is why he lost the case recently with that lawyer Marcos whateverhisnameis, the one who went to Brazil? He said he believed what he was told to be true and won the case.

by Guest 06.07.13 17:32

candyfloss wrote:
Kepharel wrote:I may be (probably am) wrong, but haven't I read that Amaral only has to prove that he has reason to believe in the truth of what he was saying. As long as he had reason at the time I can't see how future events will knock that defence over.

That is correct, and it is why he lost the case recently with that lawyer Marcos whateverhisnameis, the one who went to Brazil? He said he believed what he was told to be true and won the case.

Here it is.......

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

by **PeterMac** 06.07.13 17:36

In a "normal" case you arrest the suspect and interview him/her, using the evidence you have gathered during the enquiry to break down any denial or alibi.
It is difficult to see what they are going to do here.

"Do you want to tell me what happened?
"No.
"Did you enter apartment 5A
"No.
"Your fingerprints were not found - how do you explain that ?
"I can't
"There is no sign of your opening the shutter - surely you realise how damning that is ?
"I can't explain it.
"The people who were standing outside in the street did not hear you going in or out. You must be able to explain why not
"Not really
You had almost no time at all to get in and sedate the children, and then get out again. That alone is conclusive.
"Whatever.
"There is enough lack of evidence to let you remain free for a very long time. Is that really what you want ?
"If that's what the enquiry thinks . . .

by Monty Heck 06.07.13 19:01

Portugal and the UK certainly appear not to be on the same page with this. When SY announced they were taking over the investigation and were looking at abduction it did make me wonder what the Portuguese take on this would be. They dismissed the abduction hypothesis, and had grounds for suspecting the McCs of covering up an accidential death.  Why would they now pick up the abduction thread? Why are SY apparently ignoring the evidence pointing to involvement of the T9? Why are they ignoring the people the PJ worked extremely hard to bring back for a reconstruction, in the belief that their evidence needed to be tested?

SY annoucing that there are genuine new leads and want to investigate 38 people with PJ assistance flies completely in the face of the conclustions of the PJ investigation and it would not be surprising if SY's announcement was unwelcome news in Portugal.  They will not have not forgotten that the investigation stalled due to the non co-operation of KMcC and other T9 illuminati who, rather than being under suspicion, are announced by SY as not being among the persons of interest they want to examine. It would be interesting to pinpoint when the views of the UK and Portuguese forces diverged; there seemed to be mutual co-operation until the McC's flight from the Algarve in 2007, the point at which the UK police also shut up shop there.

For the investigation as announced by SY to move forward, the co-operation of the Portuguese is essential, yet the two forces seem to be poles apart in their views.  It looks as if SY might need to review their position and actually take up the investigation where the PJ were forced to leave off, and rule in or out the T9 before interviewing anyone else, to acheive the Portuguese co-operation they cannot do without. As they have not budged from that stance over the past 6 years, so why should they do so now? If there is a genuine desire to find out what happened to this child, a way has to be found through this apparent stand off and SY's recent announcement is the least helpful way of achieving that.

by Pershing36 06.07.13 23:10

sallypelt wrote:
Pershing36 wrote:
Finn wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
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

I don't think it's a case of not wanting the police to investigate, sallypelt, I think it's a matter of not having confidence in the investigation.

I for one am not going to accept the SY review if they just come up with some random sex offender with very loose evidence.

Think of it this way if it wound up tomorrow and they concluded Hewlett probably did it, would you be happy to leave it there?

Do you really think that THAT is going to happen?

I will ask the same question, again. What is it some people want? If the police are NOT going to do anything, then what is the point of being here?
I agree that we have to be careful, and not listen to everything we hear, but I understand enough about the law to know that if they just wanted this to go away, they would have left things as they were.

Now, I am not going to say anything else on the subject in regards to a "whitewash". I've said my piece, and I will concentrate on what the likes of Russian doll and those who have an understanding of how the law works.

I totally understand. I also wouldn't be at all surprised these ridiculous statements are the reason the PJ seem far less than enthusiastic about this review. Why on earth SY want to present themselves to the world as the Key stone cops is beyond me.

I don't understand the law to that extent either. However in passed cases when there have been children go missing and parent involvement has been found to be the cause, have the police openly announced they have ruled out parent involvement only to go back on it? You know the high profile cases were appeals etc have been made.

That is a serious question and would give me more faith if somebody could come up with an example.

As I say I am no expert on law and how courts work, however surely that would play to the defence once a statement like that has been made?

by Woburn_exile 07.07.13 11:50

Why are we even discussing what the media are spouting about the McCanns. We all know they are being fed a pack of lies and the British public don't give a damn except to say that these vile people are at best just bloody awful neglectful parents.
shark

by suzyjohnson 07.07.13 12:13

Monty Heck wrote:
For the investigation as announced by SY to move forward, the co-operation of the Portuguese is essential, yet the two forces seem to be poles apart in their views. It looks as if SY might need to review their position and actually take up the investigation where the PJ were forced to leave off, and rule in or out the T9 before interviewing anyone else, to acheive the Portuguese co-operation they cannot do without. As they have not budged from that stance over the past 6 years, so why should they do so now? If there is a genuine desire to find out what happened to this child, a way has to be found through this apparent stand off and SY's recent announcement is the least helpful way of achieving that.

Yes if the PJ, with access to all the evidence, believe their case, then they have to stick to their guns over this.

by aiyoyo 07.07.13 13:29

jd wrote:It would certainly change the goalposts of the trial now there is a suspect arrested

Personally I think his trial has been intentionally delayed to avoid complication for the imminent arrest expected to happen within few weeks.

The inevitable question has to be : WHO is going to be arrested? Abductor or Murderer? Not that difficult to deduce really going by recent reports. Read articles/statements not literally but between the lines and the implication of what's coming is clear and it is going to SHOCK not only the nation but the world.

Generally while it is normal under portuguese system for a long wait for a trial date, but once allocated and process gets underway it's not normal for long delay between processes, as happened where Amaral's case is concerned
His trial process has reached an impasse due to failed out of court negotiations.
From a logical, practical and legal viewpoint the process (already started) should follow the natural course of being processed fairly closely and in reasonable time frame to a conclusion, and not left hanging in limbo; unless there's a good valid reason for that.

If a foreseeable event about to take place soon is going to have an impact on this trial, then that is valid reason to delay this one.
Two trials that have a relation to each other cannot be allowed to take place concurrently because of sub-judice in that one will prejudice the other.

If we go by the party who asked for the Out of Court settlement,an educated guess would tell us which of the two parties is about to be crashed and living in fear.

The Police and Press are playing with words. The newspapers are preparing the public as seen by them building up the case for poles opposite contrast to afford the greatest sensationalisation that's to come that is going to sell papers.

by aiyoyo 07.07.13 13:53

PeterMac wrote:In a "normal" case you arrest the suspect and interview him/her, using the evidence you have gathered during the enquiry to break down any denial or alibi.
It is difficult to see what they are going to do here.

"Do you want to tell me what happened?
"No.
"Did you enter apartment 5A
"No.
"Your fingerprints were not found - how do you explain that ?
"I can't
"There is no sign of your opening the shutter - surely you realise how damning that is ?
"I can't explain it.
"The people who were standing outside in the street did not hear you going in or out. You must be able to explain why not
"Not really
You had almost no time at all to get in and sedate the children, and then get out again. That alone is conclusive.
"Whatever.
"There is enough lack of evidence to let you remain free for a very long time. Is that really what you want ?
"If that's what the enquiry thinks . . .

If would be fun to watch the "suspect" squirming out of it!

by jozi 07.07.13 14:34

aiyoyo wrote:
jd wrote:It would certainly change the goalposts of the trial now there is a suspect arrested

Personally I think his trial has been intentionally delayed to avoid complication for the imminent arrest expected to happen within few weeks.

The inevitable question has to be : WHO is going to be arrested? Abductor or Murderer? Not that difficult to deduce really going by recent reports. Read articles/statements not literally but between the lines and the implication of what's coming is clear and it is going to SHOCK not only the nation but the world.

Generally while it is normal under portuguese system for a long wait for a trial date, but once allocated and process gets underway it's not normal for long delay between processes, as happened where Amaral's case is concerned
His trial process has reached an impasse due to failed out of court negotiations.
From a logical, practical and legal viewpoint the process (already started) should follow the natural course of being processed fairly closely and in reasonable time frame to a conclusion, and not left hanging in limbo; unless there's a good valid reason for that.

If a foreseeable event about to take place soon is going to have an impact on this trial, then that is valid reason to delay this one.
Two trials that have a relation to each other cannot be allowed to take place concurrently because of sub-judice in that one will prejudice the other.

If we go by the party who asked for the Out of Court settlement,an educated guess would tell us which of the two parties is about to be crashed and living in fear.

The Police and Press are playing with words. The newspapers are preparing the public as seen by them building up the case for poles opposite contrast to afford the greatest sensationalisation that's to come that is going to sell papers.

Well said aiyoyo, that's just the way I see this whole sordid story being played out, you cannot spook the suspects !!! Keep the Aces until the last, then see them try to squirm out of it !!!

Latest topics