Latest interview with Dr Amaral - copied from Joana Morais - with thanks

AndyB wrote:

CynicAl wrote:We are NOT entitled, even as taxpayers, to read every word of an interview, every detail of an investigation or to know every fact.

No we're not but perhaps we should be. The Portuguese are, or at least their criminal justice system provides for it.

ETA

CynicAl wrote:I kid you not, if Mitchell had compromised himself in PDL it would not be a short queue of government figures who'd happily flush the toad, rather than move hell and high water to protect him. We're talking about the unlawful death of a child here in the highest profile case in decades - even if those high level politicos were cold enough to not care and get involved anyway, they're not stupid enough to know the risks of becoming an accessory and conspiring to pervert the course of justice and the scandal of being exposed. There is nothing that can be plausibly put on the table which puts forward anything which is worth that kind of risk

I can think of one thing.

Don't forget the course of justice continues to be perverted by senior people in the case of the former Conservative cabinet minister accused of paedophilia and rape so its not as far fetched as you make out

http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5262/rapist-ex-cabinet-minister-named-in-tom-watson-s-dpp-letter

Silver Shuffle wrote:who is PE?

BlueBag wrote:

MissDaisy wrote:

BlueBag wrote:I'm not having this.

Why did the Government think a media manipulator was required as a priority?

He was there next day!

Was he there the next day? I thought Sheree Dodd was the first person sent by the Government.

Oh yeah.. that's right.

First to arrive in Portugal was a former Mirror journalist and long-term government spokesperson called Sheree Dodd. In an unprecedented move, the Government took over news-handling on behalf of the McCann..

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/SPOKESPERSONS.htm


Then they sent Clarence.

My memory of Government priorities is fading after 7 years.

Because what the McCanns really needed was a Government media person.

Clarence turned up.. when?

fossey wrote:

Silver Shuffle wrote:who is PE?

Philip Edmonds.

Have a read of this.

http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/madeleine-mccann-kray-twins-margaret.html

fossey wrote:

Silver Shuffle wrote:who is PE?

Philip Edmonds.

Have a read of this.

http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/madeleine-mccann-kray-twins-margaret.html

Gollum wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

MissDaisy wrote:

BlueBag wrote:I'm not having this.

Why did the Government think a media manipulator was required as a priority?

He was there next day!

Was he there the next day? I thought Sheree Dodd was the first person sent by the Government.

Oh yeah.. that's right.

First to arrive in Portugal was a former Mirror journalist and long-term government spokesperson called Sheree Dodd. In an unprecedented move, the Government took over news-handling on behalf of the McCann..

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/SPOKESPERSONS.htm


Then they sent Clarence.

My memory of Government priorities is fading after 7 years.

Because what the McCanns really needed was a Government media person.

Clarence turned up.. when?

Gerry McCann allegedly met up with Clarence Mitchell for the first time when he visited England three weeks after Maddie's disappearance.  Iirc the circumstance leading to the first encounter differ according to which report you listen to but whatever, Gerry returned to Portugal with Mitchell in his luggage.  Close enough?

"Gordon Brown has personally intervened in the search for missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann after her parents became frustrated by the lack of progress in the police investigation.
After a series of telephone conversations with Madeleine's father, Gerry McCann in recent days, the Chancellor requested assistance from the Foreign Office and the Home Office. He asked that pressure be brought to bear on the Portuguese authorities to allow more information about the inquiry to be made public.
Gerry and his wife, Kate, have been desperate for a description of a man seen carrying what appears to have been a child on 3 May to be made public, but Portuguese police refused for three weeks because of the country's laws, which forbid the details of an investigation being released.The Observer understands that Brown gave the McCanns an assurance he would do 'anything he can' to help. The British embassy duly applied pressure on the Portuguese authorities to find more flexibility in their secrecy laws. British ambassador John Buck visited the Algarve last Thursday. A day later Portuguese police made a U-turn and issued a detailed description of the man, said to be white, 35 to 40, 5ft 10in and of medium build, with hair longer around the neck, wearing a dark jacket, light beige trousers and dark shoes.
Asked whether Brown had influenced the decision, Clarence Mitchell, a Foreign Office spokesman for the McCann family in the Algarve, said: 'Draw your own conclusions.' He said in a statement: 'I can confirm that telephone conversations have taken place between Gerry McCann and Chancellor Gordon Brown. During them, Mr Brown offered both Gerry and Kate his full support in their efforts to find Madeleine, although details of the conversations will remain private.'
Although they have praised the efforts being made to find their daughter, the McCanns were said to be increasingly frustrated in recent days at delays and communication problems. The family have met lawyers in the Algarve and threatened legal action to push for the information to be released because of the exceptional circumstances.
The Observer can confirm that a top law firm in London had been asked late last week to seek legal avenues through which the McCanns could be kept up to date on the latest developments in the investigations.

It also emerged yesterday that The Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall had been following the case 'closely and with deep concern'."

Gollum wrote:
Gerry McCann allegedly met up with Clarence Mitchell for the first time when he visited England three weeks after Maddie's disappearance.  Iirc the circumstance leading to the first encounter differ according to which report you listen to but whatever, Gerry returned to Portugal with Mitchell in his luggage. 

aiyoyo wrote:

lj wrote:About the drug trafficking: I thought all drugs were legal in Portugal. Why would there be trafficking?

All drugs are legal in Portugal?  uhmmm...can't be right.

MarcoG wrote:Looks as if not going along with the almost psychotic view of a grand conspiracy whitewash, is becoming viewed here as 'working for the enemy'. But who benefits from the idea of an all corrupt  investigation?
 
To quote the literate Tony Bennett, ' "cui" bono'. Terribly sorry, but this is all getting a bit silly.

JackieL wrote:

fossey wrote:

Silver Shuffle wrote:who is PE?

Philip Edmonds.

Have a read of this.

http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/madeleine-mccann-kray-twins-margaret.html

Mr Philip Martin Edmonds is the nephew of Margaret Hodge -high ranking Labour figure and one of the richest women in the country.


PE and his three boys were out in PdL for the week the McCanns were there, but not his wife Reina. We know from Portuguese police files that PE cut short his holiday and flew out of Portugal to Switzerland on Friday 4th May 2007.


When Tony Bennett wrote to PE asking him about events surrounding his departure from PdL he got the following reply:


Dear Mr Bennett,

I am in receipt of your letter of 22 July regarding Madeleine McCann. I am sure you would appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me to comment too much, as we do not know each other, and I have no idea what your connection to the case is. However, I would also not want further conspiracy theories to fester by simply ignoring your letter. 

Therefore, I can confirm that whatever information I had (including some photos of my sons taken on the day Madeleine disappeared, which showed her in the background) was passed both to the police and to the McCanns at the time. Having been in Portugal at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance and seen all of the events first hand, there is not one shred of doubt in my mind that the events as reported were correct. 

In fact one of the most terrible parts of this tragedy is that there are people out there who are questioning this, just adding further to the nightmare that the McCann family have suffered. I cannot imagine anything crueller. 


I’m afraid I won’t enter into further correspondence on this matter with you.

Yours sincerely,

Philip Edmonds

missmar1 wrote:

Gollum wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

MissDaisy wrote:

BlueBag wrote:I'm not having this.

Why did the Government think a media manipulator was required as a priority?

He was there next day!

Was he there the next day? I thought Sheree Dodd was the first person sent by the Government.

Oh yeah.. that's right.

First to arrive in Portugal was a former Mirror journalist and long-term government spokesperson called Sheree Dodd. In an unprecedented move, the Government took over news-handling on behalf of the McCann..

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/SPOKESPERSONS.htm


Then they sent Clarence.

My memory of Government priorities is fading after 7 years.

Because what the McCanns really needed was a Government media person.

Clarence turned up.. when?

Gerry McCann allegedly met up with Clarence Mitchell for the first time when he visited England three weeks after Maddie's disappearance.  Iirc the circumstance leading to the first encounter differ according to which report you listen to but whatever, Gerry returned to Portugal with Mitchell in his luggage.  Close enough?

And when they all arrived back home - there was Mitchel standing side by side with the Mccann's at their garden gate publicly vouching his 100 %  belief in their innocence even though he hadn't even met them before their daughter went missing .

fossey wrote:Some more Mitchell guff...


Clarence Mitchell's bloopers/clangers and out-takes:

..Mr Mitchell hit back: "It's a great shame that people seem more interested in making money out of Madeleine's disappearance instead of helping the search for her."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kate and Gerry are not accused of any crime whatsoever. Neither is there any suggestion that any charges are being considered.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

"However, Kate and Gerry and their friends welcome the police interviews. The friends are more than happy to co-operate fully, as are Kate and Gerry, although in this case Kate and Gerry will not be re-interviewed." "This has not been requested but Kate and Gerry would have agreed to answer any questions had they police wished to put anything to them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~"

There is a wholly innocent explanation for any material the police may or may not have found".

~~~~~~~~~~~~

This appears to be another disgusting attempt to make money out of their plight."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

"An outcome similar to Holly and Jessica is possible. I don't want to, and I can't, talk about Robert Murat but some journalists who worked with me in Soham, and that were now in Portugal, saw resemblances between that case and Robert Murat. And I won't say more."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

They don't cry in public, but plenty of tears are shed 'backstage'.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is not only extremely hurtful to Kate and Gerry but totally disrespectful to Madeleine. The magazine had not sought permission to use Madeleine’s image and the McCanns’ lawyers were now studying the publication.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kate and Gerry are realistic enough to know that Madeleine may be dead and it would be a tragedy that she is found as such, because it rules out the hope that she is alive... But any widening of the search area is encouraging and we would welcome that. If she is dead then she is dead, but not by their hand.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

No decision has been taken on Kate's future yet. She hasn't approached, or been approached by, any children's charities.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is true that we have requested a meeting with the prime minister to show him the strength of our case, to explain Kate and Gerry's innocence and yet all we've been offered is a medium-level-consular meeting, which we rejected.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mirage wrote:@CynicAL.
I hope you won't mind my pointing out some comments you have made that seem contradictory to me.

I noticed in one replyster you mentioned a suspension of logic. I found that a little tough when really all of us are grappling with a case that does not make complete sense from any we can and I amto implythe odd fruitless cul de sac, we realise it ourselves without being hung out to dry as t'were. And it is surely that learning together on this forum, sans the didacticism to be found outside this particular debating chamber, that should be cherished; notwithstanding the odd spat.

Anyway, these are some observations I have drawn from your own words. And incidentally, I have recently complimented you on your post on the Digging thread which was altogether different in tone and a pleasure to read. Anyway some quotes of yours, plus my thoughts in blue:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I'm grateful (and fearful too) for the fact that I do hold a worldview on life which features the notion that a divine justice is approaching that no Pope on the planet has ever been able to pre-empt or avoid." AND:
“Hmmm. I'm playing catch up with posts, but now I'm reading things that are only confirming my fears about the suspension of logic.”

In the first quote, you have a belief, strongly stated, which lies outside the parameters of accepted logic. No one demeaned you for your strongly held, but, ultimately unprovable, belief. In the second quote, you do exactly that to others.


"However, the nature of politics is that this is a hot potato in every constituency. This is a question that could be asked in Luz, but not in Leicester."

You are spot on. You have identified the nature of politics. This (the McCann case) is indeed a hot potato. It is a political hot potato. The MPs who would be fielding their constituents’ questions are afraid to address them. So, by a process of logic, who controls the MPs ? The Whip’s office. Who briefs the whips? The chief whips? Well, you get the picture.  And this is why it is right that those of us with an interest in politics and with that particular ability to join political dots are right to look at the seats of influence within certain windows of time.


"I've repeatedly asserted that a high level conspiracy to cover-up and pervert the course of justice from the outset would have resulted in this case looking very, very different, having been dead and moot for several years by now, never to be resurrected, with the principals who could open their mouths and spoil it all being as quiet as the grave, or else in the grave."

Just because you repeatedly assert something might have ended up differently with a high level cover-up does not render it fact. Any component any element of this case appears to contain all the characteristics of the known volatile gases and the complete cast list of every Shakespeare play simultaneously reading the directive “Exeunt all”  The planned elements collided with the unplanned serendipitously to produce one outcome or many levels of outcome depending on your viewpoint. It is all these mishaps and inconguities have caused this site to come into being –well, as far as we can ascertain - to put them under every microscope we can lay our collective hands on.

As for professional jobs. Imagine a suicide victim getting up and moving to slump under a tree, post mortem. Imagine emergency services being alerted before the call comes in to a police station that a body has been discovered. Imagine.  And the loose ends don’t get tied up. They fester and feed into the whole Iraq war business and it never goes away.

“We daily put faith in borderline sociopaths to know our most intimates. We routinely accept that doctors are safe. And we teach our children to trust a policeman. “

Why stop at doctors and policemen? Up until relatively recently we put our faith in top TV entertainers. In politicians, in priests, scientists, bankers and prime ministers and so on. Sociopaths are known to climb to the top of power structures and dominate. That is why some of us have deduced it is no longer safe to assume anything about political leaders and the ruling elite. These people are risk takers par excellence. As such, they don’t follow normal patterns of behaviour so it is no use looking at them through the normality prism.

Sociopaths are often reactive when backed into a tight corner but have sufficient chutzpah to hide in plain sight Think Huhne, think Aitken, think Archer This means when you get loads of them together acting reactively to save their own backsides you get the sort of omnishambles we are likely witnessing; the thing you think can’t possibly happen.

If anything comes out of this dig, it will most likely be at the very moment there is a tipping point (probably in public opinion) and all the sociopaths will slide seamlessly to one end of the see saw whilst the Mcs get thrown into the air. Should this occur they will be abandoned quicker than a dog can shake off fleas. Then you might see the sociopaths devise a once in a lifetime collective arse-covering exercise that will be much more worthy of an intelligence led operation.

And finally, you said:

“Someone has been very clever levering this deplorable duo into the hearts of the nation, and I have no idea how it has been so successful, because neither of them are remotely endearing and there are no public displays of despair to stick in the mind. I can only think that it is the over-saturation of the media with Maddie's image and the repeated portrayal of quiet, dignified, middle class doctors against the odds, victimised, which drives the sympathy home. “

Rather than this just being the opportunism and brazen behaviour of a couple who got lucky, then? Or a couple who pressed a few productive buttons? You really do think a “someone” has been applying leverage, after all. A certain someone who has worked tirelessly to do this on behalf of two nobodies who lost a child through contemptible neglect abroad. A "someone" who set out to deliberately project an image of them onto a nation. That sounds like high level interference to me. And still you can say this was no organised cover-up? You have certainly identified a commonality with the rest of us in saying you have "no idea how it has been so successful".

So, you see, that is the reason some of us were looking at the politicians and political events of the day in order to try and find an answer to that conundrum you pose. Not so illogical is it?
----------------------------------------------

It looks as if we must all keep digging our own little patch for these answers then contrast and compare in seemly manner....... hopefully.   

fossey wrote:Some more Mitchell guff...


Clarence Mitchell's bloopers/clangers and out-takes:

..Mr Mitchell hit back: "It's a great shame that people seem more interested in making money out of Madeleine's disappearance instead of helping the search for her."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kate and Gerry are not accused of any crime whatsoever. Neither is there any suggestion that any charges are being considered.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

"However, Kate and Gerry and their friends welcome the police interviews. The friends are more than happy to co-operate fully, as are Kate and Gerry, although in this case Kate and Gerry will not be re-interviewed." "This has not been requested but Kate and Gerry would have agreed to answer any questions had they police wished to put anything to them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~"

There is a wholly innocent explanation for any material the police may or may not have found".

~~~~~~~~~~~~

This appears to be another disgusting attempt to make money out of their plight."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

"An outcome similar to Holly and Jessica is possible. I don't want to, and I can't, talk about Robert Murat but some journalists who worked with me in Soham, and that were now in Portugal, saw resemblances between that case and Robert Murat. And I won't say more."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

They don't cry in public, but plenty of tears are shed 'backstage'.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is not only extremely hurtful to Kate and Gerry but totally disrespectful to Madeleine. The magazine had not sought permission to use Madeleine’s image and the McCanns’ lawyers were now studying the publication.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kate and Gerry are realistic enough to know that Madeleine may be dead and it would be a tragedy that she is found as such, because it rules out the hope that she is alive... But any widening of the search area is encouraging and we would welcome that. If she is dead then she is dead, but not by their hand.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

No decision has been taken on Kate's future yet. She hasn't approached, or been approached by, any children's charities.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is true that we have requested a meeting with the prime minister to show him the strength of our case, to explain Kate and Gerry's innocence and yet all we've been offered is a medium-level-consular meeting, which we rejected.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hicks wrote:CynicalAL, I ask again......what was the role of Clarence Mitchel? Mitchel gave up his career to assist the McCann's. How could he be so sure that Madeleine's disappearance would continue past his resignation?

Gollum wrote:@ CynicalAl today 10:22 am

　

"One more question. If this is a big government conspiracy from day one because of someone who was present in the resort at the time, then how do we trust Martin Grime, Mark Harrison, the favourable contributions alleged by British police investigators, the suspicions of British diplomats, and the PJ files? If this was all manipulation and control, why is it not controlled from outset?"

　

It was controlled from the outset, at least as far as was possible. You seem to forget that this case occurred in Portugal, I'm sure it would have been a whole different ball game if Maddie had disappeared in England. It's all very well to spout off about mass cover ups on a general scale but your grand gestures forget to take into consideration all the mysterious happenings surrounding the case, within the investigation and without. These issues have been discussed over and over again for the past seven years with many a differing view point put forward. Please don't presume to know better than the rest having ignored all the strange occurrences known to the world.

　

The GNR and PJ were on the case PDQ and had already started to smell a rat before the intervention of the British rendering the situation rather difficult for control from another country. Enter Clarence Mitchell!  So what is your answer to the recent question posed by Hicks as regards Clarence Mitchell. A sentence or two will suffice.

Mirage wrote:If I were running that investigation I wouldn't put out crass trailers for revelation moments on Crimewatch.

I wouldn't  put out two different e-fits of supposedly the same man without explanation of exactly who saw them.

I wouldn't further muddy already murky waters with an assortment of lurker type images, none of which were properly explained in context of that night.

I wouldn't hang the children's bedroom door on the wrong side and have everyone believe in a completely different viewing angle for the German version.

I would not refuse to have the programme aired in the country where the crime was committed.

I would not film the recon in Spain instead of Portugal.

I would not  expect officers above me to keep coming out with useless statements such as we saw from Hogan-Howe about suspects and arrests. And the other bod about SY being told off by the PJ for being blabbermouths.

On Five-Half-Alive,  Hogan-Howe either pretended to forget, or did forget, what Operation Grange was investigating. Option A or option B - you choose? Very professional, seeing as he'd come especially to answer public concerns and couldn't recall what is shaping up to be the case of the century.

I would not spend over two years telling the public how the two police teams were co-operating and working side by side, then come out at the last minute and say I was conducting an entirely different investigation to the Portuguese.

I would not land in Faro with substantial luggage, wheel it round the streets for a photo shoot and go home again soon after. It looked plonkerish.

I would not rule anyone out or anyone in at any point.

I would do a round of the Fleet street editors and tell them any press releases would come from SY. The usual promise of the full lowdown, as and when. I wouldn't wait for the PJ to tell me I was a blabbermouth first.

I could go on ad infinitum.

So, its not too hard to understand that when we finally learned this revelation moment was crecheman and a pair of his child's seven year old pyjamas, armchair detectives the world over felt their moment had come to shine.

CynicAl wrote:

Gollum wrote:@ CynicalAl today 10:22 am

　

"One more question. If this is a big government conspiracy from day one because of someone who was present in the resort at the time, then how do we trust Martin Grime, Mark Harrison, the favourable contributions alleged by British police investigators, the suspicions of British diplomats, and the PJ files? If this was all manipulation and control, why is it not controlled from outset?"

　

It was controlled from the outset, at least as far as was possible. You seem to forget that this case occurred in Portugal, I'm sure it would have been a whole different ball game if Maddie had disappeared in England. It's all very well to spout off about mass cover ups on a general scale but your grand gestures forget to take into consideration all the mysterious happenings surrounding the case, within the investigation and without. These issues have been discussed over and over again for the past seven years with many a differing view point put forward. Please don't presume to know better than the rest having ignored all the strange occurrences known to the world.

　

The GNR and PJ were on the case PDQ and had already started to smell a rat before the intervention of the British rendering the situation rather difficult for control from another country. Enter Clarence Mitchell!  So what is your answer to the recent question posed by Hicks as regards Clarence Mitchell. A sentence or two will suffice.

It WAS NOT controlled from the outset. I don't know what your definition of 'controlled' is, but I don't recognise it.  If it was controlled we would not be discussing this chaos seven years on. This 'controlled' situation is an embarrassment to anyone who ever controlled anything ever. 

And there are no "mysterious happenings" to account for. There are sheer coincidences and there are total nonsenses, hyped into taking on a life of their own by pure fantasists. And then there are tangible, material facts available for examination in what is at its heart a very elementary case, in which crucial evidence has been successfully spirited away. I do wish we could stick to that.

fossey wrote:Some more Mitchell guff...


Clarence Mitchell's bloopers/clangers and out-takes:

..Mr Mitchell hit back: "It's a great shame that people seem more interested in making money out of Madeleine's disappearance instead of helping the search for her."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kate and Gerry are not accused of any crime whatsoever. Neither is there any suggestion that any charges are being considered.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

"However, Kate and Gerry and their friends welcome the police interviews. The friends are more than happy to co-operate fully, as are Kate and Gerry, although in this case Kate and Gerry will not be re-interviewed." "This has not been requested but Kate and Gerry would have agreed to answer any questions had they police wished to put anything to them.

~~~~~~~~~~~~"

There is a wholly innocent explanation for any material the police may or may not have found".

~~~~~~~~~~~~

This appears to be another disgusting attempt to make money out of their plight."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

"An outcome similar to Holly and Jessica is possible. I don't want to, and I can't, talk about Robert Murat but some journalists who worked with me in Soham, and that were now in Portugal, saw resemblances between that case and Robert Murat. And I won't say more."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

They don't cry in public, but plenty of tears are shed 'backstage'.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is not only extremely hurtful to Kate and Gerry but totally disrespectful to Madeleine. The magazine had not sought permission to use Madeleine’s image and the McCanns’ lawyers were now studying the publication.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kate and Gerry are realistic enough to know that Madeleine may be dead and it would be a tragedy that she is found as such, because it rules out the hope that she is alive... But any widening of the search area is encouraging and we would welcome that. If she is dead then she is dead, but not by their hand.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

No decision has been taken on Kate's future yet. She hasn't approached, or been approached by, any children's charities.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is true that we have requested a meeting with the prime minister to show him the strength of our case, to explain Kate and Gerry's innocence and yet all we've been offered is a medium-level-consular meeting, which we rejected.

~~~~~~~~~~~~