Re: Joana Morais - The PJ will conduct the questioning that was requested by the English police - 14/8/2013

by **PeterMac** 21.08.13 11:26

jeanmonroe wrote:
Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice................................maximum sentence...................LIFE imprisonment.
Conspiracy to defraud. ie...'the fund '.( knowing full well the facts about the 'disappearance' BEFORE 'fund' set up).....maximum sentence,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,10 years imprisonment.
Proceeds of Crime Act....................., houses, cars, money etc, all forfeited to get back the cost of operation £5.5 million.
And that's before they even face the gauntlet of hate they'd ALL face from the public they, and their 'family members' ASKED to donate to a private company they set up.

Lying to the Pope ? Excommunication.

by lj 21.08.13 14:41

PeterMac wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:
Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice................................maximum sentence...................LIFE imprisonment.
Conspiracy to defraud. ie...'the fund '.( knowing full well the facts about the 'disappearance' BEFORE 'fund' set up).....maximum sentence,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,10 years imprisonment.
Proceeds of Crime Act....................., houses, cars, money etc, all forfeited to get back the cost of operation £5.5 million.
And that's before they even face the gauntlet of hate they'd ALL face from the public they, and their 'family members' ASKED to donate to a private company they set up.
Lying to the Pope ? Excommunication.

Kate has her backup church all set up already.

by lj 21.08.13 14:43

PeterMac wrote:ONE MINUTE AND TWENTY SECONDS
To enter, sedate, select, turn round, exit
No point of entry
No point of exit
No forensic trace

and a dog !

Sounds more like an alien abduction than a stranger abduction.

by Montclair 21.08.13 20:35

lj wrote:
PeterMac wrote:ONE MINUTE AND TWENTY SECONDS
To enter, sedate, select, turn round, exit
No point of entry
No point of exit
No forensic trace

and a dog !
Sounds more like an alien abduction than a stranger abduction.

My question is how could anyone sedate 3 children without waking them up, whether by injection, pill, syrup or a chloroform soaked cloth? It is such a ridiculous idea that this could be done at all.

by Harriet94 21.08.13 21:05

I have never understood how a stranger could have sedated the children in the time scale available. Someone with planned access to the children and a detailed knowledge of safe sedation would be more plausible IMO if of course they were sedated.

by AndyB 21.08.13 21:52

marconi wrote:Can any of you tell me how long does a person gets for prison in case of obstruction of police work,for concealing of a corpse, for fraudulent fund, for accidental or otherwise death, in the UK?

The key part of your question is in the phrase "in the UK". The obstruction of police, concealing of a corpse & accidental death all happened in Portugal (assuming they happened at all). They are therefore outside the jurisdiction of the UK police. The "fraudulent fund" is, I fear, not fraudulent in the legal sense of the word. It is, as we know, a privately owned limited company that was established to search for Madeleine and provide (financial?) support to the McCanns. (Shortly after being established, its articles of association, which is the document that defines what the company has been set up for, were changed to include social work - I have no idea why). Since being established the fund has spent large sums of money employing private investigators to look for Madeleine. It has also supported the McCanns and, no doubt, spent a proportion of its income on administrative expenses. All of this is entirely permissible in law.

That leaves "otherwise death". The sentence for this can be anything up to life imprisonment but, as the Met have said that they believe Madeleine might still be alive, I don't think its a line of enquiry that they're persuing

by Guest 21.08.13 22:31

quote
"The "fraudulent fund" is, I fear, not fraudulent in the legal sense of the word. It is, as we know, a privately owned limited company that was established to search for Madeleine and provide (financial?) support to the McCanns."
unqote

We've been here before, Andy, but IF the McCs knew that Madeleine was sadly not alive, the "Fund" would be classed as a "fraud". IMO, of course.

by marconi 22.08.13 0:34

AndyB wrote:
marconi wrote:Can any of you tell me how long does a person gets for prison in case of obstruction of police work,for concealing of a corpse, for fraudulent fund, for accidental or otherwise death, in the UK?
The key part of your question is in the phrase "in the UK". The obstruction of police, concealing of a corpse & accidental death all happened in Portugal (assuming they happened at all). They are therefore outside the jurisdiction of the UK police. The "fraudulent fund" is, I fear, not fraudulent in the legal sense of the word. It is, as we know, a privately owned limited company that was established to search for Madeleine and provide (financial?) support to the McCanns. (Shortly after being established, its articles of association, which is the document that defines what the company has been set up for, were changed to include social work - I have no idea why). Since being established the fund has spent large sums of money employing private investigators to look for Madeleine. It has also supported the McCanns and, no doubt, spent a proportion of its income on administrative expenses. All of this is entirely permissible in law.

That leaves "otherwise death". The sentence for this can be anything up to life imprisonment but, as the Met have said that they believe Madeleine might still be alive, I don't think its a line of enquiry that they're persuing

AndyB, thanks. I don't believe in large sums of money in the search for Madeleine. The McCanns are using it to pay their lawyers. The fund has its base on a lie: abduction and people believed them.
The PJ's conclusion is that Madeleine died in the apartment, on that same night.

Of course the Yard is saying she could be alive. When they started the review, they started from zero with fresh eyes and with no prejudice. Imo opinion they officially did not arrive yet at 5A nor to the boot of the Scenic.
The presence of the Met police in Algarve is unprecedent be
cause laws are flexible. A Judge can change the course of a probe in order to solve a crime. Yes, the crime happened in Portugal but the perpetrators can be triad in the UK, because it was a crime against a Briton and probably committed by a Briton or Britons. It will depend on Portugal and on the UK.
Besides, 15.125 DNA marks, in England enough to prove it is Madeleine's, cadaver scent, the Smiths, inconsistences, serious neglect and irresponsibility ( if it was not intentional), the cheating fund, concealing of the body, obstruction of police work...

In England that is more than enough to convict the suspect(s).

Of course the death of Madeleine's is the only line of inquiry that the Met police are pursuing and they are not telling.

by AndyB 22.08.13 18:16

marconi wrote:
AndyB wrote:
marconi wrote:Can any of you tell me how long does a person gets for prison in case of obstruction of police work,for concealing of a corpse, for fraudulent fund, for accidental or otherwise death, in the UK?
The key part of your question is in the phrase "in the UK". The obstruction of police, concealing of a corpse & accidental death all happened in Portugal (assuming they happened at all). They are therefore outside the jurisdiction of the UK police. The "fraudulent fund" is, I fear, not fraudulent in the legal sense of the word. It is, as we know, a privately owned limited company that was established to search for Madeleine and provide (financial?) support to the McCanns. (Shortly after being established, its articles of association, which is the document that defines what the company has been set up for, were changed to include social work - I have no idea why). Since being established the fund has spent large sums of money employing private investigators to look for Madeleine. It has also supported the McCanns and, no doubt, spent a proportion of its income on administrative expenses. All of this is entirely permissible in law.

That leaves "otherwise death". The sentence for this can be anything up to life imprisonment but, as the Met have said that they believe Madeleine might still be alive, I don't think its a line of enquiry that they're persuing
AndyB, thanks. I don't believe in large sums of money in the search for Madeleine. The McCanns are using it to pay their lawyers. The fund has its base on a lie: abduction and people believed them.
The PJ's conclusion is that Madeleine died in the apartment, on that same night.

Of course the Yard is saying she could be alive. When they started the review, they started from zero with fresh eyes and with no prejudice. Imo opinion they officially did not arrive yet at 5A nor to the boot of the Scenic.
The presence of the Met police in Algarve is unprecedent be
cause laws are flexible. A Judge can change the course of a probe in order to solve a crime. Yes, the crime happened in Portugal but the perpetrators can be triad in the UK, because it was a crime against a Briton and probably committed by a Briton or Britons. It will depend on Portugal and on the UK.
Besides, 15.125 DNA marks, in England enough to prove it is Madeleine's, cadaver scent, the Smiths, inconsistences, serious neglect and irresponsibility ( if it was not intentional), the cheating fund, concealing of the body, obstruction of police work...

In England that is more than enough to convict the suspect(s).

Of course the death of Madeleine's is the only line of inquiry that the Met police are pursuing and they are not telling.

We know from the fact that private investigators were employed that at least some of the money was spent looking for Madeleine even if it was on a wild goose chase. Its my belief that it will be enough to keep the company on the right side of the law, at least in terms of prosecutability. The rest can legitimately be classified in the accounts as admin costs. You should see how large a percentage of charities income is used as admin and promotion (80% and above) but the fund isn't even a charity, its a private limited company. I think you're seriously underestimating how difficult it is to prosecute companies under English law, and particularly the fund for fraud.

"the crime happened in Portugal but the perpetrators can be triad in the UK, because it was a crime against a Briton and probably committed by a Briton or Britons"
I'm afraid it isn't that simple. There are very few crimes committed abroad that can be tried in the UK. Causing someone's death, Manslaughter or Murder, can be but in the Madeleine McCann case the police would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a) Madeleine is dead and b) that the accused is actually the person that caused her death. The only evidence for a is that of the dogs but on its own that's insufficient and there is none for b. If, as Goncalo Amaral believes, she died due to an accident there are no charges at all for the McCann's to answer in the UK.

Your final point does raise a very interesting question though: Exactly what are the Met investigating, given the extremely limited number of crimes that they can prosecute in the UK?

by russiandoll 22.08.13 19:58

quote " If, as Goncalo Amaral believes, she died due to an accident there are no charges at all for the McCann's to answer in the UK."

Concealing a body, setting up a fraudulent fund, perverting the course of justice ? Are you sure of your claims re no case to answer in the above scenario ?

by Guest 22.08.13 20:11

IMO [and IMO only] the "Fund" is going to be their Nemesis.

by Praiaaa 22.08.13 20:22

Chatelaine - yes - I agree... if they could have just left it and vanished into obscurity, IMO they would have been home & dry, but IMO it will be the 'Al Capone' 'postal fraud' type scenario that will bring them down...

by Guest 22.08.13 20:41

Praiaa: "postal fraud", "tax evasion", or in this case IMO "fund fraud". Money is so much more easy to pin than evidence for a little girl to vanish ...

Mind: I do not "hate" them. I just want justice for that little girl. A girl, none of us ever knew, but who's grown close to our hearts. There's no vengeance. It's about justice to be done.

by AndyB 22.08.13 20:51

russiandoll wrote:quote " If, as Goncalo Amaral believes, she died due to an accident there are no charges at all for the McCann's to answer in the UK."

Concealing a body, setting up a fraudulent fund, perverting the course of justice ? Are you sure of your claims re no case to answer in the above scenario ?

The key part of the quote above is "in the UK".

Concealing a body. Definitely a crime, but it didn't happen in the UK (unless you're suggesting that they managed to smuggle the body back somehow). It is therefore not in the jurisdiction of the English (or Scottish) courts
Setting up a fraudulent fund. If you refer to my replies to Marconi above you'll see the reasons why I think that it is unlikely that a fraud has been committed but in a nutshell its because the company has done exactly what it was set up to do. Companies make all sorts of outlandish claims about their business - its called advertising - but its extremely rare for the courts to regard it as anything more than "sales puff"
Perverting the course of justice. I'm not certain that this is an offence unless its a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice (i.e. it involves two or more people conspiring together) but regardless, any justice that has been perverted is Portuguese justice and is therefore no concern of the English courts.

I'm not making moral judgements here and I'm not saying what I think should happen. I'm only voicing an honestly held opinion that, regrettable as it is, I don't think there's anything that the McCanns can be prosecuted for IN THE UK. The only possibilities that I can see are manslaughter if Madeleine's death was caused by a blow by either of the parents or some sort of fraud for the fund but I think both are unlikely in the extreme, particularly as neither are what the Met are investigating

by Guest 22.08.13 21:14

@ AndyB:
"I don't think there's anything that the McCanns can be prosecuted for IN THE UK."
***
I repeat [excuses] that IF the McCs knew that madeleine was dead, the "fund" is a fraud and can be prosecuted IN THE UK. IMO

by AndyB 22.08.13 21:30

Châtelaine wrote:@ AndyB:
"I don't think there's anything that the McCanns can be prosecuted for IN THE UK."
***
I repeat [excuses] that IF the McCs knew that madeleine was dead, the "fund" is a fraud and can be prosecuted IN THE UK. IMO

I know that's your opinion Chatelaine, and I don't seek an argument with you, but I disagree. You are talking from a logical and moral perspective, both of which I agree with, but I am talking from a legal perspective and the law is neither moral nor logical. (I should point out here that I have absolutely no legal qualifications whatsoever but speak only from years of experiencing the frustrations of the English legal system not providing what any sane, rational human being would describe as justice)

Incidentally, I emphasised the phrase "in the UK" because both Marconi and Russiandoll were replying as if the phrase didn't exist and it's quite an important part of the point that I was making. I'm not sure why you felt the need to do the same in reply to me

by Casey5 22.08.13 21:55

What about the crime in India, the so-called "honour killing" of Surjit Kaur Athwal a British Sikh woman who was murdered in India but the trial was held at the Old Baily in London.

Is this not similar in that the crime was committed abroad but the perpetrators were tried in the country that they lived in and that the victim also lived in?

"

Bachan Kaur, A 70-year-old grandmother was facing the prospect of dying behind bars yesterday after a landmark case in which she was found guilty of plotting the "honour killing" of her daughter-in-law.
Bachan Athwal, one of the oldest women in Britain to be convicted of murder, decided to "get rid" of Surjit Kaur Athwal, 27, by luring her to India after she had an affair.
Surjit, a customs officer described by her family as an "enthusiastic mother and a happy sister" is believed to have been strangled in the Punjab and her body dumped in the river Ravi in December 1998. Her body has never been found and details of the plot only came to light when her Indian-born mother-in-law boasted that she had got a relative to kill her."

"The mother-in law was given a minimum of 20 years without parole, and the husband a minimum of 27 (subsequently reduced on appeal to a minimum of 15 and 20 respectively)."

Why would it be impossible for the McCanns to be charged and tried in this country?

by marconi 22.08.13 22:08

Laws are flexible and authorities both countries are willing to solve this case. England belongs to the EU and I believe that both countries want to do everything for justice for Madeleine. If I am right, British pedophiles who commit sex crimes in Asia can be convicted in the UK.
I know cases where European terrorists were sent to the USA to be judged there.
Maddie's case has a high(international too) profile and the public demand justice.

by AndyB 22.08.13 22:21

marconi wrote:Laws are flexible and authorities both countries are willing to solve this case. England belongs to the EU and I believe that both countries want to do everything for justice for Madeleine. If I am right, British pedophiles who commit sex crimes in Asia can be convicted in the UK.
I know cases where European terrorists were sent to the USA to be judged there.
Maddie's case has a high(international too) profile and the public demand justice.

Laws are not flexible. If you mean that police forces are flexible in whether to apply the law or not then I agree that it happens, but there is not sufficient flexibility to allow a police officer in (e.g.) France to decide to investigate and prosecute a crime in (e.g.) Austria.

The Portuguese would like to solve the case but I'm not convinced that the corrupt and institutionally racist Met are motivated in the same way.

The UK's membership of the EU is irrelevant.

If the UK government wanted justice for Madeleine they wouldn't have interfered in the original investigation the way that they did.

I believe that you're correct about the sex crimes committed abroad but how is that relevant the Madeleine McCann case? As I understand it Bigamy, murder, manslaughter, offences against the official secrets act and certain sex crimes are the only crimes that, when committed abroad, can be tried in the UK. Which of these do you suspect the McCanns of committing?

by marconi 22.08.13 22:27

AndyB wrote:
marconi wrote:Laws are flexible and authorities both countries are willing to solve this case. England belongs to the EU and I believe that both countries want to do everything for justice for Madeleine. If I am right, British pedophiles who commit sex crimes in Asia can be convicted in the UK.
I know cases where European terrorists were sent to the USA to be judged there.
Maddie's case has a high(international too) profile and the public demand justice.
Laws are not flexible. If you mean that police forces are flexible in whether to apply the law or not then I agree that it happens, but there is not sufficient flexibility to allow a police officer in (e.g.) France to decide to investigate and prosecute a crime in (e.g.) Austria.

The Portuguese would like to solve the case but I'm not convinced that the corrupt and institutionally racist Met are motivated in the same way.

The UK's membership of the EU is irrelevant.

If the UK government wanted justice for Madeleine they wouldn't have interfered in the original investigation the way that they did.

I believe that you're correct about the sex crimes committed abroad but how is that relevant the Madeleine McCann case? As I understand it Bigamy, murder, manslaughter, offences against the official secrets act and certain sex crimes are the only crimes that, when committed abroad, can be tried in the UK. Which of these do you suspect the McCanns of committing?

Darling, you don't need an answer, do you?

by marconi 22.08.13 22:33

I hope that this will be solved very soon, before it becomes Extremely Old Baily. spin

by marconi 22.08.13 22:37

marconi wrote:
AndyB wrote:
marconi wrote:

The UK's membership of the EU is irrelevant.

Barking dogs too.

by lj 23.08.13 1:23

Sounds like someone had too much Baileys.

by marconi 23.08.13 7:47

by marconi 23.08.13 7:49

again a week-end without any news?

by jeanmonroe 23.08.13 10:21

Are BHH's 'elites' in Portugal right now, or are they still packing their 'cossies' and on 'standby' waiting for the GO!,GO!,GO! from Bernie?
What did the THIRTY EIGHT Met Police 'elites' do yesterday to find Madeleine?

'DRESSING UP' AS ORANGE PICKERS, IN THE SY POLICE CANTEEN, DOSEN'T COUNT!

by marconi 23.08.13 16:33

longer than 6 years on.
are we anywhere?

Joana Morais - The PJ will conduct the questioning that was requested by the English police - 14/8/2013