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

Thanks to Joana Morais....


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

14 August 2013 | Posted by  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  



English police and PJ investigate the Maddie McCann case again

Inquiry. Although in Portugal the inquiry into the little girl's disappearance was archived, the Attorney General has granted a request from the English authorities to investigate new leads and suspects. The situation is unheard of within judiciary cooperation

The Judiciary Police (PJ) will again be requested to hear suspects and to carry out other actions concerning the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, whose investigation inquiry was shelved, without a solution, five years ago by the Public Ministry (MP). The execution of a request for mutual judiciary cooperation made by the British authorities to the Attorney General's Office (PGR), who granted it and forwarded it to the Public Ministry of Portimão, that will be responsible for directing and carrying out the rogatory letter, is at stake.

The situation is unheard of: two countries that opened inquiries into the same case, and after one of them archived it, the other keeps the investigation open and forces the first one to "reopen" the investigation. The Attorney General's Office sustains that "granting the execution of the request is justified by compliance with existing legal norms within the English and the Portuguese legal orders, and it is not impeded by the fact that the criminal case that was opened in Portugal is shelved".

In an interview to DN newspaper, Alípio Ribeiro, who at the time of the disappearance was the PJ's national director, considers it to be "natural and understandable".

As far as DN newspaper was able to establish, the PJ has not received the rogatory letter yet, and only after they know what the English police wants to clarify, can the necessary means to support the detectives from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) be adjusted. According to the MPS, "it has been requested that a small number of British investigators would be present in Portugal to accompany these actions". According to sources that are following this process, said request has not been submitted to the PJ's National Directory, but that could happen at any moment.

This investigation that the English started in 2011 and that also led to the creation of a team with inspectors from the PJ's Oporto Directory, in 2012, has had, according to the Metropolitan, "the full support of Great Britain's Government". Prime minister David Cameron, who was on holiday in the Algarve last week, expressed, at the start of the month, his satisfaction in the opening of the inquiry by the Scotland Yard. ""It is welcome because they say that there is new evidence, new leads to follow, new things to be done", he told The Telegraph.

The Metropolitan's detectives, who can only participate as observers, as any intervention in the questioning that will be carried out is forbidden for them, wish to obtain the "anticipated fulfillment" of the diligences in this manner, keeping the information right away and thus avoiding that it has to be sent through the Portuguese General Attorney's Office.

This request for mutual assistance appears following a revision of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann that was carried out by a team of more than thirty MPS detectives.

"It was a complex task" with "true challenges", the Met Police says. The analysis and organisation of "approximately 30 500 documents" resulted in "new leads and new witness evidence". There are 12 English suspects that should be questioned.

Leads reevaluated in different countries produce no results

Investigation. The leads that the Scotland Yard is investigating to try to clarify the disappearance of Maddie McCann extend over 12 European countries, with Portugal taking the centre position of the new diligences. Nevertheless, within the British authorities' offensive, leads have been reevaluated that ended up being unfounded. That is the case of a Swiss suspect who killed a child two months after Maddie disappeared.

Ylenia was five years old when she was abducted in July 2007, in Saint-Gall, in Switzerland. Her body was found in a forest and the suspect, who committed suicide before the police could get to him, was a Swiss pensioner who at the time was a resident in Spain. The close location to the Algarve and the abduction of a child led the English authorities to search for a connection between both cases.

The Swiss police had already set the possibility aside, but after a request from the Scotland Yard, as it now happens in Portugal, they reevaluated the case.

"There is nothing to indicate a connection between the situations", Hanspeter Krusi, the spokesman for Saint-Gall police, stressed earlier this month, further informing that the result of the investigations in Switzerland had already been communicated to the English authorities.

3 questions for Alípio Ribeiro, former PJ Director

"Contributions should be seen in a positive manner"

- The Portuguese authorities could refuse to cooperate, as the process has been shelved?

- Judiciary cooperation is one of the European Union's pillars and it is within that frame that the Portuguese authorities will have to respond to possible solicitations from the British authorities. As the disappearance of an English child is at stake, it is natural and understandable that they continue to work in the sense of finding out what happened.

- This is an unheard of situation, right?

- It should always be stressed that the archiving that took place in Portugal happened due to an insufficiency of evidence and because it was decided that there was no further action to take. Any action or any clarification that the British authorities want must not be seen as a devaluation of what was done in Portugal. On the contrary, all contribution must be seen in a positive manner, as it is the reason why there is cooperation in the first place.

- But could it be assumed that the PJ has not done enough?

- The Portuguese judiciary authorities cooperate with the judiciary authorities in many other countries, on a daily basis. I do not believe that the cooperation that is requested in this particular case may cause specific difficulties and cannot or should not be carried out within the score of habitual practices.


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

It follows from this that Scotland Yard are interested in interviewing suspects / persons of interest / potential witnesses / people they want to eliminate from their enquiries in Portugal.

That should keep Redwood and his merrie band of soon-to-be-retirees occupied at the taxpayers' expense for at least another year or two.

Cost of Operation Grange: £6,160 per day (based on Scotland Yard's own announcements).

Length of Operation Grange to date: 12 May 2011 to 14 August 2013: 826 days.

826 days x £6,160 =

£5,088,160

Tomorrow it will have risen to

£5,094,320

and by the end of 2013 it will have risen to

£5,882,800

(I have not included in the above totals the expenses of e.g. booking RyanAir budget flights to Faro, local 'bus fares to their one star bed-and-breakfasts, sardine sandwiches and grape juice, and may be a few 'extras')

QUOTE:  "The situation is unheard of: two countries that opened inquiries into the same case, and after one of them archived it, the other keeps the investigation open and forces the first one to 'reopen' the investigation".

There are quite a few things in this case that have been 'unheard of'

+++++++++++++++++++++++

un·heard-of (n-hûrdv, -v) adj.

1. Not previously known; unknown.

2. Without precedent; unparalleled.

3. Highly offensive; outrageous or brazen

Probably a daft question, but I thought it was Interpol`s job to investigate crimes of a cross-country nature.

"
The role of Interpol is defined by the general provisions of its constitution.
Article 2 states that its role is:
[*]To ensure and promote the widest possible mutual assistance between all criminal police authorities within the limits of the laws existing in the different countries and in the spirit of the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
[*]To establish and develop all institutions likely to contribute effectively to the prevention and suppression of ordinary law crimes.

Article 3 states:^{[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]}It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character. "

"In order to maintain as politically neutral a role as possible, Interpol's [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] forbids it, at least [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], to undertake any interventions or activities of a political, military, religious, or racial nature.^{[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]} Its work focuses primarily on public safety, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], illicit [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] in [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] production, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]."
Wikipedia.

If SY suspected human trafficking, surely Interpol are the people to alert.

Great, it is working.  The Yard officially visiting the crime scene too, I presume. 
The crime happened in Algarve, the answer will come from Algarve.
I read the Portuguese text where it is said  "witnesses evidence", in the plural. It could not sound better. Music from Haeven played by angels.

Everybody is in favor of the investigation.

Those witnesses evidence are probably coming from some of theTapas 7, if not from all of them.

The one of them who does not come forward with the truth, will be seen as suspetc.

Wonderful!

aiyoyo wrote:

marconi wrote:

Those witnesses evidence are probably coming from some of theTapas 7, if not from all of them.



Are you sure?  Thought Redwood said the Tapas 9 are not Persons of Interest!

 aiyoyo,  witness is a person who give firsthand account of something seen, heard or experienced.

Tapas 7 were present that night, they are the first witnesses. And there are still Tapas 10, 11  and  12,  according to Moita Flores, probably people who  helped hiding the body, days later.
If Tapas 10, 11, and 12 saw the body, they are also witnesses.

Of course Tapas 9 are not yet persons of interest. The police are still cleaning up the road that will bring them to the Tapas.

After elliminating all of the innocent suspects, Tapas 9 will be the left over.

By that time, I believe that some of them have told  already the truth. Perhaps O'Brian or even Tanner.
They are under a terrible pressure and imo they choose being a witness instead of being suspects.

And I expect the answer will come from Algarve, pointing to the parents.

marconi wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:

marconi wrote:

Those witnesses evidence are probably coming from some of theTapas 7, if not from all of them.



Are you sure?  Thought Redwood said the Tapas 9 are not Persons of Interest!

 aiyoyo,  witness is a person who give firsthand account of something seen, heard or experienced.

Tapas 7 were present that night, they are the first witnesses. And there are still Tapas 10, 11  and  12,  according to Moita Flores, probably people who  helped hiding the body, days later.
If Tapas 10, 11, and 12 saw the body, they are also witnesses.

Of course Tapas 9 are not yet persons of interest. The police are still cleaning up the road that will bring them to the Tapas.

After elliminating all of the innocent suspects, Tapas 9 will be the left over.

By that time, I believe that some of them have told  already the truth. Perhaps O'Brian or even Tanner.
They are under a terrible pressure and imo they choose being a witness instead of being suspects.

And I expect the answer will come from Algarve, pointing to the parents.

Well, I believe the 38 so called POI that Yard are keen to investigate are *witnesses*. You don't seriously believe they are suspects, or do you ?
38 suspects would be unrealistic so logically they must be witnesses, what else could they be?
At most the figure could be a combination of witnesses and suspects with the former in higher ratio.

IIRC Redwood proclaimed that neither the Mccanns nor their hol. friends are suspects or POI (meaning witnesses) -- not verbatim, but words to that effect.

Maybe someone could kindly post up that relevant clip?

Of course, if the ultimate purpose of re-interviewing the 38 POI is in order to close the gap of legal loopholes, and the real focus is on the perp/s at home, then I am sure Redwood is well capable of explaining away the change of focus. Situation can change as a consequence of emerging new info. Et viola!

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


When, questioned on the suggestion of the McCanns involvement in Madeleine's disappearance, Mr Redwood states that: "Neither her parents or any of the member of the group that were with her are either persons of interest or suspects."

he omitted the very important word  YET .........

 THEY MUST BE PERSONS OF INTEREST...THEY WERE WITH HER ON THAT HOLIDAY.

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


When, questioned on the suggestion of the McCanns involvement in Madeleine's disappearance, Mr Redwood states that: "Neither her parents or any of the member of the group that were with her are either persons of interest or suspects."

Thanks Angelique.

One wonders why did he not say the group that were with them (meaning Mr & Mrs) ? Rather, why did he say "...the group that were with *her* (referring to Madeleine) ?

You would think every word within that statement had been carefully deliberated then selected, yet the use of "her" floored me.

If you are going to take one of the biggest cases ever to court , where you will be up against some of the
Best law firms in the Europe would you not want to cover every possible angle interview every one connected 
With the case   Before you get to court?
IMO. By the time they get round to talking to the tapas they will be able to convince them that they need to
Tell the truth and nothing but the truth and dam the doctors
Then the court case will or should be the easy part

I agree totally, Redwood is NOT going to give anything away....imo he will have the tapas friends in his sights, that is we're the answers lie, if they're going to do a proper job which I believe they will.......Redwood was hardly going to be shouting of the roof tops......we're coming to get you lot. 
But he is, that's why we've had the silence from the Mcs & Co! 

Ask yourself why in the first place did Redwood. Feel the need to even mention the Mcs and friends? because he knows that most people "interested" in this case knows the lot of them are involved somehow, and he had to say something to keep a steady ship!

This sounds positive?

[b style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Trebuchet, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 20px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"]This is an unheard of situation, right?[/b]

- It should always be stressed that the archiving that took place in Portugal happened due to an insufficiency of evidence and because it was decided that there was no further action to take. Any action or any clarification that the British authorities want must not be seen as a devaluation of what was done in Portugal. On the contrary, all contribution must be seen in a positive manner, as it is the reason why there is cooperation in the first place.


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

Cameron on holiday in Portugal last week the article states. Did he turn postman and deliver it from his diplomatic bag last week I wonder? 

I don't agree that Redwood had to say anything at all to the media and the public. Scotland Yard, imo, should have investigated the case without comment.
It's, well - ludicrous, to give advance notification to persons of interest or indeed suspects that the Yard is a-coming to interview them (in the next few weeks)!!!!
I wonder how many of the thirty odd people will just pack up and leave without notice before the Yard get around to actually arriving in Portugal and getting cracking on the interviews - well directing operations via those useless PJ dimwits.
If Redwood had kept quiet, as he should have, some people could have even be surprised when the knock on the door happened.
Oh well, back to the drawing board.

In serious crime cases, there are two group of people that lie:

A) the perpetrator(s)

B) the police.

Police are lying as much as the perpetrators are doing.

In the B case it is called strategy.

We really don't know what is going on. But we know that this case will be solved.

Casey5 wrote:I don't agree that Redwood had to say anything at all to the media and the public. Scotland Yard, imo, should have investigated the case without comment.
It's, well - ludicrous, to give advance notification to persons of interest or indeed suspects that the Yard is a-coming to interview them (in the next few weeks)!!!!
I wonder how many of the thirty odd people will just pack up and leave without notice before the Yard get around to actually arriving in Portugal and getting cracking on the interviews - well directing operations via those useless PJ dimwits.
If Redwood had kept quiet, as he should have, some people could have even be surprised when the knock on the door happened.
Oh well, back to the drawing board.

***
I wouldn't be surprised if some of those people are on a close watch. Trying to leave the country now is as good as a confession of some sorts ...

Whatever has been said here and on some other threads: I maintain full faith in an "elite" corpse, detectives by passion, that will try and get to the heart of the matter: the truth about the disappearance of an innocent young girl.

Your posts do cheer me up Marconi, and the segment highlighted by Sweetex is unequivocal - what has gone before is not going to be swept away.  

As for People of Interest, how can the McCanns and Tapas friends not be?  They are integral to the whole abduction story.  It would be like investigating a plane crash and ignoring the black box!





 

Meant to add, I have done a short blog on the hostile takeover of Facebook Group Madeleine Controversy, the clue is in the title: 'Thieving B'stads',  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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


When, questioned on the suggestion of the McCanns involvement in Madeleine's disappearance, Mr Redwood states that: "Neither her parents or any of the member of the group that were with her are either persons of interest or suspects."

 With thanks to Hobs, Tigger and all the other experts on here, I am becoming quite a dab hand at forensic linguistics myself!  The word HER jumps out at me, and it is said a couple of times.  This tells me Mr. Redwood and his team are very much on Madeleine's side.  I think we have all read and heard so much from, and about, the McCanns this past six years, that we have become used to the poor little mite being left out of the equasion.  It is reassuring to hear the detectives are focusing on the victim.  

Am I on the track Hobs?

Tony Bennett wrote:It follows from this that Scotland Yard are interested in interviewing suspects / persons of interest / potential witnesses / people they want to eliminate from their enquiries in Portugal.

That should keep Redwood and his merrie band of soon-to-be-retirees occupied at the taxpayers' expense for at least another year or two.

Cost of Operation Grange: £6,160 per day (based on Scotland Yard's own announcements).

Length of Operation Grange to date: 12 May 2011 to 14 August 2013: 826 days.

826 days x £6,160 =

£5,088,160

Tomorrow it will have risen to

£5,094,320

and by the end of 2013 it will have risen to

£5,882,800

(I have not included in the above totals the expenses of e.g. booking RyanAir budget flights to Faro, local 'bus fares to their one star bed-and-breakfasts, sardine sandwiches and grape juice, and may be a few 'extras')  

I know I've said this before, but I note the sarcasm above so I will ask again. 

How much do you think this sort of thing should cost? 

The general public are unable to go up against their mighty solicitors and barristers as they do not have the financial clout, despite some particular people having the legal experience and the good will of the public.  

We pay staff in Scotland Yard to investigate crimes. Often they investigate some of the most high profile crimes our country has to offer and this is one of the most high profile crimes that our country has. 

Either A> There is an elite international pedophillie ring, so cunning that they slipped into an apartment stole a child and then escaped, confounding everyone around and leaving the world guessing at where poor Madeleine might be now. In which case Poor Kate's worries that she writes on that particular page of her book might just be true. This would mean that You, I or anyone would not want this terrible situation happening to any other child or family in the country. 

or B> There was an accident (or some quarters might suggest something more sinister along the lines of the Gaspars perceptions of David Payne and Possibly Yvonne Martin's thoughts) which resulted in the biggest cover-up and deception the world has ever seen. Aided by shadowy dark forces within politics and the media which has enabled this hoax to be perpetuated whilst conning the public out of a ridiculous amount of money which they funneled into a fund to spend on frivolous things and also the most highly paid solicitors in this country. This would mean that, you, I or anyone else would agree that this corruption needs to end and we would want light  illuminated upon all aspects of it to prevent this sort of thing happening again. 

Either way, this needs to be solved. 

This is costing the same amount as it does to guard Julian Assange outside the Ecuador Embassy, so this is clearly better value for money. Scotland Yard Detectives are hardly MP's buying duckponds. Let them have some sardines, it contains omega 3 and will keep their minds sharp. Why would you begrudge them of that?

The cost is a factor in view of the absolute rubbish spouted by SY so far. 

This elite team coming hard on the heels of the 'soothing couple' and various other pantomime characters is not inspiring confidence. 

Why this publicity? So they are seen to be doing something for the money and time which could be better spent on other cases. 
You may add to these costs those incurred for the brief performance on behalf of  Kerry Needham. Which imo was purely to make it look like routine procedure for all children missing abroad.

Eta:  Assange is a waste of time,  space and money  as well - this smug creature will have to sort it out for himself.

tigger wrote:The cost is a factor in view of the absolute rubbish spouted by SY so far. 

This elite team coming hard on the heels of the 'soothing couple' and various other pantomime characters is not inspiring confidence. 

Why this publicity? So they are seen to be doing something for the money and time which could be better spent on other cases. 
You may add to these costs those incurred for the brief performance on behalf of  Kerry Needham. Which imo was purely to make it look like routine procedure for all children missing abroad.

Eta:  Assange is a waste of time,  space and money  as well - this smug creature will have to sort it out for himself.

 In a civilized society the cost of investigating a crime should never ever be a factor in deciding whether that crime should be properly invistigated or not, for the simple reason that if the cost of investigation were to be a factor, those involved in the case of a missing person for example, could adopt a strategy of  purposely fomenting 'awareness' to generate lead after lead from around the world and of using the media to spread false information, thus making the cost of investigating and solving the crime prohibitive.

Is there, somewhere, figures of the costs spent 'searching' for the one and a half MILLION people that had/have gone 'missing' over the last six years?
250,000 people 'missing' every year according to CEOP and Missing people charity.

Can anyone remember when K McCann said it was only 49.3 metres NOT fifty metres to the tapas?
I think it was a time when she went back to PDL with a 'friend' and she also said "you CAN see a persons details crossing the road"

All missing children cases should be treated the same imo. Spending millions on one child and not on the other missing children imo goes against their human righst. I have no objecton to taxpayers' money being used to search for Maddie or any other missing child, but how many other childrens' parents have a Fund which has had vast amounts of public money donated to it and yet to our knowledge, they have made no contribution to the cost of the police (in either country) search for their missing child.

Fair play for every child, then maybe the general public would not be asking these sorts of questions.

Also public funds being used need to, at some stage, be accounted for and I believe the gen. public have the right to ask that this is done.

jeanmonroe wrote:Can anyone remember when K McCann said it was only 49.3 metres NOT fifty metres to the tapas?
I think it was a time when she went back to PDL with a 'friend' and she also said "you CAN see a persons details crossing the road"

I think it was the Australian interview. 2012?

tigger wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:Can anyone remember when K McCann said it was only 49.3 metres NOT fifty metres to the tapas?
I think it was a time when she went back to PDL with a 'friend' and she also said "you CAN see a persons details crossing the road"

I think it was the Australian interview. 2012?

She seems to think taking away 0.7m lessen the severity of her action. Unbelievable!

tigger wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:Can anyone remember when K McCann said it was only 49.3 metres NOT fifty metres to the tapas?
I think it was a time when she went back to PDL with a 'friend' and she also said "you CAN see a persons details crossing the road"

I think it was the Australian interview. 2012?

do you have a 'link'?

jeanmonroe wrote:

tigger wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:Can anyone remember when K McCann said it was only 49.3 metres NOT fifty metres to the tapas?
I think it was a time when she went back to PDL with a 'friend' and she also said "you CAN see a persons details crossing the road"

I think it was the Australian interview. 2012?

do you have a 'link'?

It will be on mccannfiles.com - I think there's a transcript there as well.