Re: Tip off anyone?

Oldartform Wed 7 Dec - 18:44

Panda wrote:I think the Detectives will investigate rather than review because their reputation with regards to the phone hacking scandal and the
Chief being forced to resign etc will make them use this opportunity to redeem their reputation . The Police know the McCanns are
guilty, as I mentioned before about the Met Policeman I met socially a long time ago inferred. I asked if he thought the McCanns were guilty and he told me one of his friends in the Met had been seconded to Leicester Police and told him the McCanns were "heavily involved" but
he would not elaborate. I also met a retired Detective earlier this year and he said everyone at his Station believes the McCanns are
guilty but unless Madeleine"s body is found there is no proof.

I`m sure this is the case across the country Panda, but it`s good to hear. I also think you`re right about `investigating` for another reason, i.e. it`s not in a copper`s nature to `review`. Also what does `review` actually mean. It means re-view. And its not as if its an old case of their own that they are viewing again. As someone has already said, you don`t have 30 coppers re-viewing a case that they didn`t even deal with in the first place. It must be detection.

**Panda** Wed 7 Dec - 20:03

Oldartform wrote:
Panda wrote:I think the Detectives will investigate rather than review because their reputation with regards to the phone hacking scandal and the
Chief being forced to resign etc will make them use this opportunity to redeem their reputation . The Police know the McCanns are
guilty, as I mentioned before about the Met Policeman I met socially a long time ago inferred. I asked if he thought the McCanns were guilty and he told me one of his friends in the Met had been seconded to Leicester Police and told him the McCanns were "heavily involved" but
he would not elaborate. I also met a retired Detective earlier this year and he said everyone at his Station believes the McCanns are
guilty but unless Madeleine"s body is found there is no proof.

I`m sure this is the case across the country Panda, but it`s good to hear. I also think you`re right about `investigating` for another reason, i.e. it`s not in a copper`s nature to `review`. Also what does `review` actually mean. It means re-view. And its not as if its an old case of their own that they are viewing again. As someone has already said, you don`t have 30 coppers re-viewing a case that they didn`t even deal with in the first place. It must be detection.

Oldartform,

The McCanns contention is that the Portugese Police did not search for Madeleine and may have overlooked information. Considering
Leicester Police spent well over a £million and the Portugese double that is quite churlish of the McCanns to blame them for closing the case so soon when they had the option to re-open it within two months, when they and the Tapas seven did absolutely nothing to help
and refused a recon. I would think the Foreign Office advised the SY team to tread softly because Portugal has long been an ally of Britain . Now wouldn"t it be marvellous if instead of SY finding fault with the Portugese, their Report states there was no evidence that
the PJ were negligent, but plenty of evidence that the McCanns impeded their progress to the extent that the British Government were
not helpful. Tip off anyone? - Page 2 25346

As Taxpayers we should be allowed to see the Report since we are paying for this investigation .

NoStone Wed 7 Dec - 20:44

Just a point! If - having undertaken their 'review' of the case the Met find something that the PJ seriously overlooked in their investigations - would that be sufficient for the PJ to re-open the case would you know???? Tip off anyone? - Page 2 857143

**Panda** Wed 7 Dec - 20:58

NoStone wrote:Just a point! If - having undertaken their 'review' of the case the Met find something that the PJ seriously overlooked in their investigations - would that be sufficient for the PJ to re-open the case would you know????

Hi NoStone I would think any evidence which the PJ did not investigate at the time , after almost 5 yrs would be worthless. However, if
there were enough clues the PJand SY could work together to try to investigate but it would not be sufficient to re-open the case unless
Madeleine was found dead or alive.IMO of course. Tip off anyone? - Page 2 25346

gillyspot Wed 7 Dec - 21:14

[quote="kathybelle"]

duncanmac wrote:

Kathybelle, I dont think Brown distanced himself at all from the McCanns after being made arguidos. Amaral says he was instrumental in his removal from the case many weeks later and we also know that Brown made a mysterious visit to LP after the Macs returned to UK

Hi Duncanmac, I remember Clarence Mitchell saying the McCanns were upset because Gordon Brown was not returning their calls. If it wasn't while they were still arguidos, it must have been after their arguido status was removed. I also remember Brown saying he was going to Portugal and he would be speaking to the Portuguese Prime Minister about the case, this was while the McCanns were still arguidos.

I've had a look to see if I can find a link, to Clarence's statement, but I've had no luck so far. I'll keep looking.

Hi All

This is what Amaral is referring to I think

Madeleine: Brown quizzes Portuguese PM about bungled police inquiry

"Gordon Brown has raised concerns about the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance with his Portuguese counterpart.

Mr Brown discussed the police inquiry with the premier Jose Socrates during private talks in Lisbon, where the pair are attending the EU summit.
Mr Brown said he wanted to be assured "that the police authorities are taking the actions that are necessary and there's proper cooperation between the British and Portuguese police".

The pair previously discussed the case in July, when Mr Socrates assured Mr Brown "everything possible" was being done to find the missing four-year-old.
Mr Brown's involvement in the case has sparked resentment in Portugal in the past.
One detective accused parents Gerry and Kate McCann of creating "constant interruptions and distractions" after it emerged they had been keeping him personally updated on developments over Madeleine, who went missing in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on May 3.
The policeman said: "It is amazing to me that people in high positions are getting involved. I can't think of any case in Portugal where this has happened."
A source in the Portugese police admitted yesterday they have no evidence against the McCanns, who are still official suspects.
A high-ranking detective in the investigation told the Portuguese newspaper 24 Horas: "The truth is, nothing which allows us to make a definite accusation against the McCanns has yet emerged."

It also emerged yesterday that Mrs McCann is having haunting visions of Madeleine at night.

Her mother Susan Healey said: "She told me she was unable to sleep a couple of nights ago and I said, 'Did the twins wake you up?' She said, 'No, Madeleine came'."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488399/Madeleine-Brown-quizzes-Portuguese-PM-bungled-police-inquiry.html#ixzz1fsxjDvAM

Notice newspaper speak in McCanns favour ( I agree with the McCanns it is appalling behaviour by the media):

From: A high-ranking detective in the investigation told the Portuguese newspaper 24 Horas: "The truth is, nothing which allows us to make a definite accusation against the McCanns has yet emerged."

To: A source in the Portugese police admitted yesterday they have no evidence against the McCanns, who are still official suspects.

PS forgot to say Gordon Brown was in Lisbon to discuss the Lisbon Treaty at the time (not Madeleine McCann case amazingly)

kathybelle Wed 7 Dec - 21:30

NoStone wrote:Just a point! If - having undertaken their 'review' of the case the Met find something that the PJ seriously overlooked in their investigations - would that be sufficient for the PJ to re-open the case would you know????

If it wasn't for the McCanns the case would still be open, because Goncalo Amaral said they were the ones who demanded the archiving of the case in the first place. Goncalo Amaral was asked by a journalist from the Portuguese newspaper Campeao Das Provincias "Do you think the opening of the process is possible?" Goncalo Amaral replied "May I remind you that they demanded the archiving of the process, in 2008, when they were arguidos, merely to defend their image. They are not interested in the reopening of the process or the investigation."

Anyone who followed the first court case when the McCanns were trying to get Goncalo Amaral's book permanently banned, would have heard a Portuguese journalist asking the McCanns if they wanted the case reopened and if they did they could walk into the court there and then and ask for the case to be reopened. They didn't so Goncalo Amaral was right, when he said "They are not interested in the reopening of the process or the investigation.

The McCanns have proved time and time again that they are more involved with Madeleine's disappearance than neglect. When posters say there is not enough evidence to bring charges against the McCanns, there is and the PJ and Scotland Yard know there is. The McCanns admitted leaving their children unsupervised, when they went out for the evening. They broke the Portuguese law and their offences were made more serious because they said that Madeleine was abducted while they were out.

I know the McCanns managed to escape justice in 2007/8, because of intervention by the British Government and because they were never prosecuted for their offences, they should still face charges for those offences, which carry a jail sentence. I would love to know why the PJ are still not prosecuting the McCanns for those offences. There is nothing to stop them prosecuting the McCanns because they have a cast iron case against them. The PJ and Scotland Yard, could still investigate Madeleine's disappearance and if at the end of their investigation, they haven't found Madeleine alive or dead, the McCanns should then face charges of murder.

They will soon squeal like pigs, if for instance, they gave Madeleine away. They know they probably wouldn't face jail for neglect, even though they should, but they certainly wouldn't want to face a lengthy jail sentence for murder, if Madeleine is alive and living with someone who they know.

Oldartform Wed 7 Dec - 22:06

" Now wouldn"t it be marvellous if instead of SY finding fault with the Portugese, their Report states there was no evidence that
the PJ were negligent, but plenty of evidence that the McCanns impeded their progress to the extent that the British Government were
not helpful.

As Taxpayers we should be allowed to see the Report since we are paying for this investigation ..
Panda"

Wouldn`t it just Tip off anyone? - Page 2 944533

Tho` I vaguely remember something about the METs report not being available for public scrutiny - hope I`m wrong here.

kathybelle Wed 7 Dec - 22:15

Oldartform wrote:" Now wouldn"t it be marvellous if instead of SY finding fault with the Portugese, their Report states there was no evidence that
the PJ were negligent, but plenty of evidence that the McCanns impeded their progress to the extent that the British Government were
not helpful.

As Taxpayers we should be allowed to see the Report since we are paying for this investigation ..
Panda"

Wouldn`t it just

Tho` I vaguely remember something about the METs report not being available for public scrutiny - hope I`m wrong here.

Hello Oldartform, I also read that the "Met" report was not being made available for public scrutiny. They might change their minds if the McCanns are brought to justice and I can't see how the McCanns can't be brought to justice. If they aren't, it shows that the officers who have conducted the review are as corrupt as the member/s of the British Government who intervened when the PJ were about to bring charges against the McCanns.

Oldartform Wed 7 Dec - 22:18

I don`t get this statement by GA :-

"Goncalo Amaral replied "May I remind you that they demanded the archiving of the process, in 2008, when they were arguidos, merely to defend their image."

Since when can suspects DEMAND their case be archived? or am I missing something?

**Lioned** Wed 7 Dec - 22:23

Panda wrote:I think the Detectives will investigate rather than review because their reputation with regards to the phone hacking scandal and the
Chief being forced to resign etc will make them use this opportunity to redeem their reputation . The Police know the McCanns are
guilty, as I mentioned before about the Met Policeman I met socially a long time ago inferred. I asked if he thought the McCanns were guilty and he told me one of his friends in the Met had been seconded to Leicester Police and told him the McCanns were "heavily involved" but
he would not elaborate. I also met a retired Detective earlier this year and he said everyone at his Station believes the McCanns are
guilty but unless Madeleine"s body is found there is no proof.

I know a number of policemen who are quite sure the mccanns are involved.

gillyspot Wed 7 Dec - 22:28

Sadly Oldartform that was me that said the review is not going to be transparent.

I have received a letter from high up within the Home Office and I have been advised that I will need a Freedom of Information Act request to get any information regarding the review.

**Panda** Wed 7 Dec - 22:46

Lioned, I know we have been privy to a lot of info on this Forum which not even the British Police know so I do find it puzzling that the
British Press continue to lick the McCanns boots. The public are heartily sick of them and none of my friends are interested any more
and can"t understand why I am. It can"t be to sell more Papers because the public have other things to think about so I am genuinely
curious as to why the Press grovel , print what Clarrie says they should print, remove photos of the McCanns because they are laughing,
I can"t think of another Country whose Press is so subservient.

kathybelle Wed 7 Dec - 22:52

Oldartform wrote:I don`t get this statement by GA :-

"Goncalo Amaral replied "May I remind you that they demanded the archiving of the process, in 2008, when they were arguidos, merely to defend their image."

Since when can suspects DEMAND their case be archived? or am I missing something?

I could never understand why the McCanns as arguidos were allowed to demand the archiving of the case, either Oldartform and as time has gone on, I have never understood how the McCanns have had many high profile people fighting their corner, when it is plainly obvious to anyone with half a brain that they are 100% responsible for whatever happened to Madeleine.

Anyway Goncalo Amaral's statement is there for all to see on the home page of the NHS: The McCanns Abuse of Power website. Incidently this isn't the first time Goncalo Amaral has made references to the McCanns archiving the case. He also said that the British Government assisted the McCanns in the archiving of the case. That information seems to have vanished off the internet.

Funny how the McCanns never publicly kicked up a fuss about that statement, but then they never kicked up a fuss when Goncalo Amaral, during the adjournment of the court case to ban his book, stood outside the Lisbon court to say that the British Government intervened in the case. I presume it was because a senior member of the Portuguese police, made the same statement inside the Lisbon court, when he took the stand.

Anyone who followed the court case live on the Sky website will have heard those statements, just as they will have heard the journalist tell the McCanns to go back into the court and ask for the case to be reopened

**Lioned** Wed 7 Dec - 22:57

Panda wrote:Lioned, I know we have been privy to a lot of info on this Forum which not even the British Police know so I do find it puzzling that the
British Press continue to lick the McCanns boots. The public are heartily sick of them and none of my friends are interested any more
and can"t understand why I am. It can"t be to sell more Papers because the public have other things to think about so I am genuinely
curious as to why the Press grovel , print what Clarrie says they should print, remove photos of the McCanns because they are laughing,
I can"t think of another Country whose Press is so subservient.

Then again the press do seem to enjoy their 'games' aswell.Like the headline pages and subliminal messages and mccann photos linked to handcuffs to name but one of many we have seen.

**Panda** Wed 7 Dec - 23:09

Lioned wrote:
Panda wrote:Lioned, I know we have been privy to a lot of info on this Forum which not even the British Police know so I do find it puzzling that the
British Press continue to lick the McCanns boots. The public are heartily sick of them and none of my friends are interested any more
and can"t understand why I am. It can"t be to sell more Papers because the public have other things to think about so I am genuinely
curious as to why the Press grovel , print what Clarrie says they should print, remove photos of the McCanns because they are laughing,
I can"t think of another Country whose Press is so subservient.

Then again the press do seem to enjoy their 'games' aswell.Like the headline pages and subliminal messages and mccann photos linked to handcuffs to name but one of many we have seen.

That"s only occasionally though, Lazzerella makes me want to puke!!!!! BTW did you know Mulcaire has been arrested again?

gillyspot Wed 7 Dec - 23:12

kathybelle wrote:
Oldartform wrote:I don`t get this statement by GA :-

"Goncalo Amaral replied "May I remind you that they demanded the archiving of the process, in 2008, when they were arguidos, merely to defend their image."

Since when can suspects DEMAND their case be archived? or am I missing something?

I could never understand why the McCanns as arguidos were allowed to demand the archiving of the case, either Oldartform and as time has gone on, I have never understood how the McCanns have had many high profile people fighting their corner, when it is plainly obvious to anyone with half a brain that they are 100% responsible for whatever happened to Madeleine.

Anyway Goncalo Amaral's statement is there for all to see on the home page of the NHS: The McCanns Abuse of Power website. Incidently this isn't the first time Goncalo Amaral has made references to the McCanns archiving the case. He also said that the British Government assisted the McCanns in the archiving of the case. That information seems to have vanished off the internet.

Funny how the McCanns never publicly kicked up a fuss about that statement, but then they never kicked up a fuss when Goncalo Amaral, during the adjournment of the court case to ban his book, stood outside the Lisbon court to say that the British Government intervened in the case. I presume it was because a senior member of the Portuguese police, made the same statement inside the Lisbon court, when he took the stand.

Anyone who followed the court case live on the Sky website will have heard those statements, just as they will have heard the journalist tell the McCanns to go back into the court and ask for the case to be reopened

Sadly just read my link about Gordon Brown's involvement (lets hope David Cameron is better?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488399/Madeleine-Brown-quizzes-Portuguese-PM-bungled-police-inquiry.html#ixzz1fsxjDvAM

kathybelle Wed 7 Dec - 23:38

gillyspot wrote:
kathybelle wrote:
Oldartform wrote:I don`t get this statement by GA :-

"Goncalo Amaral replied "May I remind you that they demanded the archiving of the process, in 2008, when they were arguidos, merely to defend their image."

Since when can suspects DEMAND their case be archived? or am I missing something?

I could never understand why the McCanns as arguidos were allowed to demand the archiving of the case, either Oldartform and as time has gone on, I have never understood how the McCanns have had many high profile people fighting their corner, when it is plainly obvious to anyone with half a brain that they are 100% responsible for whatever happened to Madeleine.

Anyway Goncalo Amaral's statement is there for all to see on the home page of the NHS: The McCanns Abuse of Power website. Incidently this isn't the first time Goncalo Amaral has made references to the McCanns archiving the case. He also said that the British Government assisted the McCanns in the archiving of the case. That information seems to have vanished off the internet.

Funny how the McCanns never publicly kicked up a fuss about that statement, but then they never kicked up a fuss when Goncalo Amaral, during the adjournment of the court case to ban his book, stood outside the Lisbon court to say that the British Government intervened in the case. I presume it was because a senior member of the Portuguese police, made the same statement inside the Lisbon court, when he took the stand.

Anyone who followed the court case live on the Sky website will have heard those statements, just as they will have heard the journalist tell the McCanns to go back into the court and ask for the case to be reopened

Sadly just read my link about Gordon Brown's involvement (lets hope David Cameron is better?)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488399/Madeleine-Brown-quizzes-Portuguese-PM-bungled-police-inquiry.html#ixzz1fsxjDvAM

Hi Gillyspot, I've just read your link and thank you for posting it. I pressed the link where the Portuguese police have said "We have no evidence to accuse the McCanns" but the link takes you to another article which is dated 2009 and has nothing to do with the McCanns case. I find it rather strange that 3yrs later, Goncalo Amaral and a senior member of the Portuguese police, both said that the British Government intervened when the PJ wanted to bring charges against the McCanns. Also at the time the McCanns were made arguidos they said they expected to be charged with neglect, or so Philomena McCann said. I also heard British and Portuguese lawyers say that the McCanns had broken the Portuguese law when they left their children unsupervised while they were out.

I keep making this point and because I seem to be the only poster who says there is enough evidence to bring charges against the McCanns, I think I must be missing something.

I have just been on the Joana Morais site to find information about the Portuguese Journalist who told the McCanns to go into court and reopen the case. I found that information on page 32 of the archived pages, under the heading " Exclusive Video: McCanns Press Conference."

I'm sure if I look through the other pages I will find the information where Goncalo Amaral stood on the steps of the Lisbon court and said that the British Government intervened in the case and information where the senior member of the Portuguese police, made a similar statement within the court.

I'm going to keep looking for information regarding the McCanns breaking the Portuguese law.

**Panda** Wed 7 Dec - 23:51

I copied and pasted this on 12th September .......it proves the SY police and PJ are co-operating and the trip to Spain I"m sure had more tp do with a secret meeting with Metodo 3 rather than going over old ground about the posh spice look alike. Do you remember when the Head of Metodo 3 accompanied by Brian Kennedy had a meeting in Portugal with the PJ? Maybe it"s something to do with that.

Three officers of the
Elite British police
investigation, Scotland Yard discreetly arrived in Lisbon
Earlier this
month. And they went immediately to the
Scheduled meeting at the
headquarters of the Judicial Police - to "tune
Mechanisms of cooperation" in
the analysis of new clues about the Maddie case,
Confirms the Peter MC do
Carmo, deputy national director of
PJ.

NoStone Thu 8 Dec - 7:19

Panda wrote:I copied and pasted this on 12th September .......it proves the SY police and PJ are co-operating and the trip to Spain I"m sure had more tp do with a secret meeting with Metodo 3 rather than going over old ground about the posh spice look alike. Do you remember when the Head of Metodo 3 accompanied by Brian Kennedy had a meeting in Portugal with the PJ? Maybe it"s something to do with that.

Three officers of the
Elite British police
investigation, Scotland Yard discreetly arrived in Lisbon
Earlier this
month. And they went immediately to the
Scheduled meeting at the
headquarters of the Judicial Police - to "tune
Mechanisms of cooperation" in
the analysis of new clues about the Maddie case,
Confirms the Peter MC do
Carmo, deputy national director of
PJ.

NEW CLUES! Where have these come from and should they not be passed to the PJ if they are the lead force so they can consider re-opening the case????

**kitti** Thu 8 Dec - 7:41

The mccanns excuse for asking for the archiving off the case was because they were made arquidos and the pj or no other force was looking for Madeleine so Mitchell reported that the archiving was so the mccanns could look for her themselves and employ private detectives ....that was the mccanns excuse for the archiving.

marxman Thu 8 Dec - 7:52

Panda wrote:
NoStone wrote:Just a point! If - having undertaken their 'review' of the case the Met find something that the PJ seriously overlooked in their investigations - would that be sufficient for the PJ to re-open the case would you know????

Hi NoStone I would think any evidence which the PJ did not investigate at the time , after almost 5 yrs would be worthless. However, if
there were enough clues the PJand SY could work together to try to investigate but it would not be sufficient to re-open the case unless
Madeleine was found dead or alive.IMO of course.

Hi NoStone and Panda

The point I was attempting to whittle-out was that it may
exactly be the investigative relationship between the two
national police services that has created the correct operational timing
and political momentum to bring this case to resolution.

GA, when he was co-ordinator, requested from the UK, a raft
of important information, banking, medical and other sensitive
security information. This was denied. Therefore, the case
stalled and could not be ignited without this data.

Therefore, I believe, that the information held by various UK
agencies, and freely available to SY may result in the 'tip-off'
that re-opens and resolves this case.

I also believe that many Brit and Portuguese politicians,
and high ranking police members of both countries, suspect
major criminal activities but quite rightly hesitate to settle
for lesser convictions.

Moreover, being an eternal optimist, I think that the time
that has evolved so far is really nothing considering a crime
that may 'make our jaws hit the floor'. Time is on the investigation
side.Remember the last question, and only question Kate felt
comfortable to answer of the 49? It may come to bite her.

All just my opinion of course. Tip off anyone? - Page 2 25346

**Panda** Thu 8 Dec - 7:56

kitti wrote:The mccanns excuse for asking for the archiving off the case was because they were made arquidos and the pj or no other force was looking for Madeleine so Mitchell reported that the archiving was so the mccanns could look for her themselves and employ private detectives ....that was the mccanns excuse for the archiving.

Morning Kitti, that"s B****hit....the McCanns hired Metodo 3 much against the Portugese directive that they do not allow secondary
investigation. It was Ribiero who turned a blind eye to it and Metodo 3 were hired BEFORE the McCanns were made arguidos. I think the
PJ archived the case because they felt every avenue had been explored and the McCanns were interfering too much.

**Panda** Thu 8 Dec - 8:12

marxman wrote:
Panda wrote:
NoStone wrote:Just a point! If - having undertaken their 'review' of the case the Met find something that the PJ seriously overlooked in their investigations - would that be sufficient for the PJ to re-open the case would you know????

Hi NoStone I would think any evidence which the PJ did not investigate at the time , after almost 5 yrs would be worthless. However, if
there were enough clues the PJand SY could work together to try to investigate but it would not be sufficient to re-open the case unless
Madeleine was found dead or alive.IMO of course.

Hi NoStone and Panda

The point I was attempting to whittle-out was that it may
exactly be the investigative relationship between the two
national police services that has created the correct operational timing
and political momentum to bring this case to resolution.

GA, when he was co-ordinator, requested from the UK, a raft
of important information, banking, medical and other sensitive
security information. This was denied. Therefore, the case
stalled and could not be ignited without this data.

Therefore, I believe, that the information held by various UK
agencies, and freely available to SY may result in the 'tip-off'
that re-opens and resolves this case.

I also believe that many Brit and Portuguese politicians,
and high ranking police members of both countries, suspect
major criminal activities but quite rightly hesitate to settle
for lesser convictions.

Moreover, being an eternal optimist, I think that the time
that has evolved so far is really nothing considering a crime
that may 'make our jaws hit the floor'. Time is on the investigation
side.Remember the last question, and only question Kate felt
comfortable to answer of the 49? It may come to bite her.

All just my opinion of course.

Morning marxman, much depends on the remit given to SY Police. A police Officer publicly announced that it was a Review, not
Investigation to satisfy the McCanns that the PJ did everything they could to find Madeleine. If SY have received secret instructions
to widen the investigation it is really going to upset the McCanns. My main interest in all this is the Trial in February and Amaral"s
defence of the reason he believes Madeleine died in 5a. He might just be able to offer evidence on the U.K. Government"s interference
and the McCanns unhelpfulness which made it impossible for the PJ to do their job properly which is why he felt the need to write the
book and have the Video produced to set the record straight.

kathybelle Thu 8 Dec - 8:13

Panda wrote:
kitti wrote:The mccanns excuse for asking for the archiving off the case was because they were made arquidos and the pj or no other force was looking for Madeleine so Mitchell reported that the archiving was so the mccanns could look for her themselves and employ private detectives ....that was the mccanns excuse for the archiving.

Morning Kitti, that"s B****hit....the McCanns hired Metodo 3 much against the Portugese directive that they do not allow secondary
investigation. It was Ribiero who turned a blind eye to it and Metodo 3 were hired BEFORE the McCanns were made arguidos. I think the
PJ archived the case because they felt every avenue had been explored and the McCanns were interfering too much.

Good morning Panda. In your opinion, was Goncalo Amaral telling lies, when he said publicly that the McCanns demanding the archiving the case? Or as he put it the process of the investigation.

As for the PJ exploring every avenue, I keep saying that Goncalo Amaral and a senior Portuguese police officer, both said that the British Government intervened, when the PJ wanted to bring charges against them. I will find that information I am sure, in the archived pages on the Joana Morais board.

It looks like I am the only poster on here, who followed the court case, between the McCanns and Goncalo Amaral, live on the Sky Website in 2010. If I wasn't I'm sure that the information I have given more than once, would be verified by others who watched the court case.

**Panda** Thu 8 Dec - 8:41

kathybelle wrote:
Panda wrote:
kitti wrote:The mccanns excuse for asking for the archiving off the case was because they were made arquidos and the pj or no other force was looking for Madeleine so Mitchell reported that the archiving was so the mccanns could look for her themselves and employ private detectives ....that was the mccanns excuse for the archiving.

Morning Kitti, that"s B****hit....the McCanns hired Metodo 3 much against the Portugese directive that they do not allow secondary
investigation. It was Ribiero who turned a blind eye to it and Metodo 3 were hired BEFORE the McCanns were made arguidos. I think the
PJ archived the case because they felt every avenue had been explored and the McCanns were interfering too much.

Good morning Panda. In your opinion, was Goncalo Amaral telling lies, when he said publicly that the McCanns demanding the archiving the case? Or as he put it the process of the investigation.

As for the PJ exploring every avenue, I keep saying that Goncalo Amaral and a senior Portuguese police officer, both said that the British Government intervened, when the PJ wanted to bring charges against them. I will find that information I am sure, in the archived pages on the Joana Morais board.

Morning kathybelle, to be honest I never read that Amaral suggested that it was the McCanns who demanded the archiving and wouldn"t even know where to look for such info. Remember, we were getting information from the British Press which always has to be
taken with a pinch of salt. One interesting report if you can find it, is the departure of Almeida who was apparently removed from the
investigation because of his outspoken views on the McCann claim that Madeleine was abducted.

It looks like I am the only poster on here, who followed the court case, between the McCanns and Goncalo Amaral, live on the Sky Website in 2010. If I wasn't I'm sure that the information I have given more than once, would be verified by others who watched the court case.

Sponsored content