Was there serious police failings

I was just thinking about this. It's quite a difficult question. For several reasons. It seems to have been a difficult investigation. One of the main ones was the language problem. Maybe English speaking policemen should have been brought in from the beginning. There seems to be an air of confusion created by all the different stories, the different timelines and the huge media campaign. The forensics seem to be a minefield. With samples thrown away and the crime scene contaminated. Still there have been other crimes which looked as if they might never be solved and they have been in the end. I think the police should have insisted a reconstruction was done after the first week or so. That would be usual I think in those cases.

A reconstruction would have nailed it.The mccans were prime suspects i would say very early in the investigation.That should of taken place in the first few weeks.

The pj should off looked into the mccanns from day one...made them suspects MADE them all do a reconstruction into the second or third week.


They were way to soft with them as mr amaral stated...they were treated with tweezers.


But then again LP didn't help either .....the British police got the dogs in then decided that they didn't like what they found.....they had a feeling that Madeleine was dead and the dogs backed that theory up, then what did they do, withhold information and refuse to cooperate.


Letting the mccanns decide whom they wanted interviewing by writing a list off people that were so obviously pro and easilly miniupulaed....who ever heard off a suspect telling the police what to ask witnesses.....allowing the suspects to meet witnesses is beyond me and why it was allowed I will never know.


What next....Gerry McCann on the witness stand and getting the prosecutor to ask him questions that don't incriminate him....prearranged questions like their have been for the past 4 years!!

Jeez...

MaryB wrote:I was just thinking about this. It's quite a difficult question. For several reasons. It seems to have been a difficult investigation. One of the main ones was the language problem. Maybe English speaking policemen should have been brought in from the beginning. There seems to be an air of confusion created by all the different stories, the different timelines and the huge media campaign. The forensics seem to be a minefield. With samples thrown away and the crime scene contaminated. Still there have been other crimes which looked as if they might never be solved and they have been in the end. I think the police should have insisted a reconstruction was done after the first week or so. That would be usual I think in those cases.

I understand that English cops were brought in as soon as possible, acting as laison officers for the McCanns, but the McCanns fell out with them in no time at all.

Of course you are right, the police should have ordered a reconstruction whilst the tapas group were all intact in Portugal. I know the police in Portugal have stated it was not practical because of the time of year with plenty of holidaymakers, but when a serious crime is suspected I would have thought a part evacuation of the premises would have taken place so that the police can work without interference. Yes, I know what you are all going to say, that all of the other holidaymakers would have been inconvenienced, but if a police line were drawn around the McCann apartment and the route to the tapas bar, surely the other holidaymakers could have gone to the other Millenium restaurant for their meals? I still do not fully understand why it was not possible to cordon off the apartment, the route/s taken and the tapas bar, until further notice. Why wasn't it possible to have a road closure of the street where Tanner says she saw the abductor. Crowds could have been kept back behind police lines.

Hotels are quick to close restaurants in the case of an outbreak of food poisoning because they are ordered to do so, so why couldn't the tapas bar have been closed also? Surely the complex was not completely sold out in May? Surely inconvenienced holidaymakers could have been transferred to other apartments out of the way of the investigation?

I know its easy to look back and say this and that should have been done, but the police did suspect from the off that something was seriously wrong with the McCann's version of events. None of the group should ever have been allowed to leave Portugal. This was too serious a case in front of the police.

Heavens above, if I went on holiday with friends and one of their children went missing, I would not want to fly home two days later and leave my friends and would expect the police would need my testimony anyway and would not expect to be allowed to leave. It is certain that some of the tapas group did just this, whilst others did stay a bit longer, but they should all have been ordered to stay until that side of the investigation had been completed.

It would have been far better to do the reconstruction whilst events were still fresh in minds, before people are too well rehearsed with their answers. To do it at a much later date would mean that timelines and stories are agreed by one and all and although they can still be disproved it may make the case much harder to crack.

The whole group were valid witnesses to a crime, whichever way you think this crime was carried out, whether it be by abduction or cover up. Therefore, the whole group should have been kept intact, the road/s surrounding the complex should have been temporarily closed pending investigation, the tapas bar should have been sealed off, the route through the complex from apartment to bar should have been sealed off.

We have all seen motorways closed for forensic examination following accidents, we have all seen shops evacuated following bomb scares, we have all seen fans at football matches kept inside stadiums for quite considerable lengths of time until opposing fans have cleared the area, we have all seen wards on hospitals close due to sickness bugs and so investigations can be carried out. Therefore, it is not impossible, is it, to carry out a reconstruction in a quiet seaside town quickly and efficiently?

So if there was to be a list of errors I would say for a start

1) No reconstruction

2) Main witnesses allowed to leave the country

3) Crime scene not cordoned off as is usual when such a grave crime has been committed


I also think it was a grave mistake to circulate that very out of date photograph of Madeleine as the main focus for the identification of the missing child. Has anyone determined exactly how out of date that photograph was.

http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann/Goncalo-Amaral/Justice-is-working-in-silence-12-September-2008-1-801194.html
GA: "....During the time I handled the investigation I always said: Justice is working in silence, but in the end I could do no more, I asked my superiors permission to respond to so many lies, but I was refused....."
---------------------------------------

GD .- Following the report of the disappearance, a police squad arrived at the scene. What went wrong?

GA "I do not intend to blame any colleague, although the photo report left much to be desired, by not collecting any person in those photos, when there were a lot of people in the house that night, it would have been important to have that. There were also weaknesses in taking fingerprints. It was normal, we were a small police station without specialised personnel in an investigation of this nature. "
---------------------------------

GD .- Then, why did your place in the investigation cease and the case be provisionally dismissed recently?

I do not know, it probably had much to do with changing the British police. Whilst the family were in Portugal there was a colleague who supported the thesis of the death of the girl. Later when the couple left Portugal, he changed his line of argument returning to the thesis of abduction; and that change, from one to the other, could have been due to some political pressure because of the significance of the media event. The parents raised more than 2 million pounds to find the girl, do not forget that those dates coincided with the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon. Anyway, it is not understood, not only my retirement, but the filing of the proceedings.

THE WORK OF THE INVESTIGATION AND THE MASS MEDIA

GD .- How do you remember the work of those days?

That it was very hard, working with a lot of pressure, especially from the media that had moved there; there was a huge television presence and an investigation requires a lot of discretion that unfortunately we did not have. I felt like I was kidnapped, we could not eat or go anywhere peacefully. In addition, it was not the only issue that we carried. That was hard, very hard.

GD .- How did you work then?

We sought out a place far away, where all the police officers could meet, it was the called the crisis cabinet, there we shared all the information and decided the steps to continue; it was an investigation of the team, not of a single person.
--------------------------------------------
http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann/Goncalo-Amaral/Gon-alo-Amaral-admits-that-investigators-protected-the-McCanns-27-July-2008-1-800586.html
Gonçalo Amaral admits that investigators protected the McCanns Jornal de Notícias

By Marisa Rodrigues
27 July 2008
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation

For the first time since he began to talk publicly about the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, Gonçalo Amaral, the co-coordinator of the investigation, analyses his own responsibilities in the outcome of the case and in the conduct of all the work of the Judiciary Police.

Of the pressures and constraints that they were anticipating, more than feeling, of the virtually unlimited autonomy in the carrying out of the diligences and even in the mistakes that he himself now assumes to have committed, particularly the group of investigators initial decision to show precaution with everything that concerned Kate and Gerry McCann. For fear of the reaction of public opinion. Today, he would not agree with decisions that he helped the group of investigators to take. In the book " Maddie, The Truth of The Lie " he does not say everything that he knows. A second book is not out of question.

Jornal de Notícias | Who has pressured the Judiciary Police (PJ) so that it could not advance with diligences?

Gonçalo Amaral | The pressures were immediately felt in the morning following the disappearance of the girl. The British consul in the Algarve went to the Judiciary Police to find out about the investigation, which is not abnormal. Shortly afterwards, it was the turn of the ambassador to go there. It is not a normal proceeding with all the English subjects. At least, I had never assisted a similar situation.

But were you prevented from advancing with the diligences that had been planned?

To me no one told me "do not do it". If that had happened the "broth would pour over" [Portuguese idiomatic expression meaning it would be over the top]. There my participation in that investigation would have ended. But we felt constrained.


In what way?

Notice. Soon after the visit of the ambassador, an announcement goes out referring the thesis of abduction.

Was it the ambassador who pressurised the PJ?

It was not that what I said. The pressure was felt in the team of investigators. When, in the heart of the group, if it was discussed the realisation of a determined diligence there was always someone who would say "Oh, oh, we have to be careful".

Who?

I am not going say names. If in the book I was careful to never give names, I am not going to do that now. It is one of those things that are kept. But in the group there were seven, eight, ten persons taking part, between co-ordinators, directors… When the question of the necessity of doing a determined diligence was raised, everything was discussed, namely, which was the importance, the objective that was wanted to accomplish and what were the consequences. And when there were issues that needed us to come even closer to the couple and the group of friends, one was careful for them not to be considered suspects so soon at that time, to prevent them from being accused in the public opinion, faced with the existing media pressure.

Are you saying that the PJ itself decided to protect them. Why so many precautions? It's natural to have suspects in a criminal investigation.

Because, at that time we would have been crucified by public opinion.

You were afraid of the media pressure…

No. We felt it was necessary to treat them with ‘tweezers’. I recognise what we were mistaken.

If you believed in the accidental death thesis and in the parents involvement what was the reason for you not to insist that determined diligences were done?

At the time when the arguments against were suggested they were considered valid for the whole group. It was the group itself that said "let us not go there".

If you didn't agree why didn't you close the door? It was your image, while co-ordinator, that was in question.

Those were not times for rebellions. I always worked in group. If the arguments were valid, one had to respect them.

Even without agreeing with them?

At the time I agreed because I considered them to be valid. Perhaps now, at a distance, I do not agree.

What remained to be done?

Too much. The first version of the rogatory letter, which was changed after my expulsion on 2 October, had several steps that were simply struck out. It was requested that the British dogs be used to search the house of the McCanns in Leicester and also those of their friends and that they smelled their clothes. It also asked to verify the existence of a chart on the refrigerator of the girl's parents, which showed that she had problems with sleep and used to rise several times at night. The chart is referred to by an English police officer. New interviews with the arguidos were proposed but were never done. The charter was amended by the prosecutors.

With what goal?

Probably the steps were not considered important after my removal.

You said that with another prosecutor perhaps the outcome of the investigation would have been different. If there had been another National Director, not Alípio Ribeiro, recently criticised by Almeida Rodrigues, would the investigation have been conducted differently?

I do not know, but probably not. The National Directorate is only one and has a very specific understanding and procedures, regardless of whom addressed.



The line is that you advocate accidental death in the apartment with the involvement of parents. But the book raises suspicions about David Payne. It seems a contradiction.

Nobody can say that the two have no relationship until they are investigated. I have suspicions about this gentleman or against anyone. Only I can see that there are situations that were unclear. There is a testimony from a couple of British doctors who say that in September 2005, when holidaying with the McCanns in Majorca and other couples, they became aware of behaviours that are not normal for them and that they related to this gentleman. The couple went to British police as soon as they saw them on television and the evidence only came to Portugal on 26 October. They say they saw Payne put a finger in his mouth, and move it in and out, whilst rubbing his nipple with the other hand. And speaking of what Madeleine would do, next to the father, Gerry. These testimonials from doctors, as credible as the McCanns, should have had another treatment by the police.

And what did the PJ do when they finally received this information?

Nothing. Not even included in the letter of any investigation related to this episode.

David Payne, in your opinion, may have something to do with the disappearance of Madeleine?

I do not know why it was not investigated properly as it should, in my opinion, have been. He was the last to see Madeleine alive after 17.30 hours, when she left the nursery. Gerry was playing tennis and asked him to look in on Kate and the kids. Gerry replies that he was in the apartment and she (Madeleine) was there. He returned 30 minutes later. Kate says it was 30 seconds. Something that does not fit together.


In the book you say that he was recognised by a social worker. What did you intend by reporting this episode?

Only that people realised that it is one more situation that was not investigated. The following morning to the disappearance, a social worker of English nationality in the Algarve offers to help, but she was almost ill-treated/offended by the couple, apparently by indication of this man [David Payne]. This man is recognised by the social worker as already having passed in a process, in an investigation, without her being able at the time to tell if it was in the quality/status of a witness or as in another processual figure [means a judicial status like arguido or suspect]. If he has or not some relation with the death, I do not know. But these are situations that could not have passed in clear/without being investigated, as they were. They should have been checked.

How did Robert Murat become a translator for the accused?

There were many difficulties in finding translators. We needed him because many had to listen to many people. It was the GNR who suggested the name of Robert Murat because he spoke fluent Portuguese and English. He was known by the military to have helped informally in some translations. He was now accused by a number of factors combined. There is a testimony of Jane Taner that recognises him from the view of his back and assures that this is the man who she saw that night passing with a child.

But Jane Taner was a credible witness?

Never was. But there were other things. Phone calls from anonymous people who came to mention it as a possible abduction.

These anonymous phone calls took place before or after being recognised by Jane Tanner?

I do not know need, but it was certainly before he was made arguido. Either way, nothing has been found that links Robert Murat in this case.

Recently you said that there is much you know and have not written. Is there something that has been purposely left out?

It is logical that yes.

What and for what purpose?

I cannot disclose it.

It leaves room for a second book, for example?

Maybe. Let's see.

I well recall the coincident timing of the signing of the Treaty Of Lisbon, but I fail to see how manipulating an Investigation into /Serious Crime could have smoothed the way.

Indeed, I should have thought that transparency and professionalism would have been far better indicators of trust,of integrity and of the spirit of mutual cooperation.

I go for bumbling - well intentioned treading on hot coals if you like - not conspiracy.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html
GA"...The reconstruction is essential. I did not understand, but I accepted the decision from a hierarchical team that I was part of, why the reconstruction was not done right away. The possibility of trying to make a new reconstruction was opened, but the arguidos had already left Portugal. A thing like this is only done with arguidos. The ideal is to have everyone, but even only with the couple, that were arguidos at that point in time, the reconstruction could have been carried out.

Focus – And with actors?

G.A. – "No. It would be enough to tell them: 'You say that you did this and that, then do it, where did you enter, were you having dinner, weren't you having dinner, what did you order for dinner…? Where did you touch and where didn't you?' All of this. It was important for Kate and Gerry McCann to come over...."

MaryB wrote:I was just thinking about this. It's quite a difficult question. For several reasons. It seems to have been a difficult investigation. One of the main ones was the language problem. Maybe English speaking policemen should have been brought in from the beginning. There seems to be an air of confusion created by all the different stories, the different timelines and the huge media campaign. The forensics seem to be a minefield. With samples thrown away and the crime scene contaminated. Still there have been other crimes which looked as if they might never be solved and they have been in the end. I think the police should have insisted a reconstruction was done after the first week or so. That would be usual I think in those cases.

To me it seems that the police, both in Portugal and the UK were hamstrung by political interference at every stage of the investigation... certainly once the shadow of suspicion fell on the McCanns. How many other parents of a missing child have had the likes of Mitchell running interference for them? A mere propaganda expert who has had no working knowledge of interacting with grieving disassociated parents! All others will have a Family Liaison Officer working with them, guiding them through the traumatic events surrounding the evidence gathering and coping with the media.
How many other parents have been allowed to return to their home to collect evidence for DNA sampling? Forensic Evidence collection is the remit of Crime Scene Investigators, professionals trained in ensuring chain of evidence is secure and accurately gathered.
How many other suspects/arguidos and their witness friends have been allowed to review each others statements and then (allegedly) alter their own, after the police force in question, (Leicestershire Police) had been in a meeting with the then Prime Minister and Home Secretary?
How many other so called grieving parents constantly claiming that there was no one looking for their missing daughter pass up the chance to stage a reconstruction? How many others would be in a position refuse to attend a reconstruction?
Was there serious police failings.... Yes definitely, but not of their making.

I have no evidence for thinking this, but I can't help believing that there will be some form of justice for Madeleine this year. At the least, the Scotland Yard intervention should be able to rule in or out 'abduction', offering proof of one or the other, even if no-one is accused of anything. The British police probably won't come to any conclusion, but if they leave it open that the parents could be involved, and Madeleine is probably dead (eg the dogs' activity) surely people will realise that it's not as straightforward as, "the swarthy people took her"?

malena stool wrote:

MaryB wrote:I was just thinking about this. It's quite a difficult question. For several reasons. It seems to have been a difficult investigation. One of the main ones was the language problem. Maybe English speaking policemen should have been brought in from the beginning. There seems to be an air of confusion created by all the different stories, the different timelines and the huge media campaign. The forensics seem to be a minefield. With samples thrown away and the crime scene contaminated. Still there have been other crimes which looked as if they might never be solved and they have been in the end. I think the police should have insisted a reconstruction was done after the first week or so. That would be usual I think in those cases.

To me it seems that the police, both in Portugal and the UK were hamstrung by political interference at every stage of the investigation... certainly once the shadow of suspicion fell on the McCanns. How many other parents of a missing child have had the likes of Mitchell running interference for them? A mere propaganda expert who has had no working knowledge of interacting with grieving disassociated parents! All others will have a Family Liaison Officer working with them, guiding them through the traumatic events surrounding the evidence gathering and coping with the media.
How many other parents have been allowed to return to their home to collect evidence for DNA sampling? Forensic Evidence collection is the remit of Crime Scene Investigators, professionals trained in ensuring chain of evidence is secure and accurately gathered.
How many other suspects/arguidos and their witness friends have been allowed to review each others statements and then (allegedly) alter their own, after the police force in question, (Leicestershire Police) had been in a meeting with the then Prime Minister and Home Secretary?
How many other so called grieving parents constantly claiming that there was no one looking for their missing daughter pass up the chance to stage a reconstruction? How many others would be in a position refuse to attend a reconstruction?
Was there serious police failings.... Yes definitely, but not of their making.

The McCanns cannot have it both ways though. They cannot, on the one hand, complain that the police did not do enough on the night of the 3rd and, on the other, refuse a reconstruction. If this had been done in the early days and if the tapas group had been ordered not to leave the country, it may have proven that Madeleine had indeed been abducted. I can understand the police thinking, in the first 8 hours lets say, that she had wandered off, but after that the police themselves were putting a picture together of strange behaviours from the tapas group and already were thinking that stories were not straight. I know at this stage they were all witnesses/victims and, for that reason, there was nothing to stop them sitting together and working out who did what and when for the timeline, but the McCanns and co. could not have complained about a reconstruction if it had been carried out so early, as any refusal would have immediately cast suspicion upon themselves, which was the last thing they wanted to do. The cops should have called their bluff and carried out the reconstruction straight away. I believe Mr Amaral to be a very sincere man but even he concedes that standard procedures were not carried out. I doubt if there were interferences, that these would have made a difference in such a short space of time. Mr Amaral is being honest, but the reasons he gives do not carry weight. Saying about an ambassaor coming over to Portugal, so what? The Lisbon Treaty, so what? No teams of coppers I know would bow to such political pressure, they have a job to do. There have been many instances of cases throughout the world where media and political pressure have come together to hamper an investigation but good, old fashioned, hard-working coppers work tirelessly to get their man despite all the rubbish that is thrown at them at times. The Stephen Lawrence case is one of the few exceptions I'm afraid and I admire the police forces in all of the European countries by the way. Its not like Portugal is Russia or any of the other really corrupt countries. I really think GA summed it up when he said they were a small police station without specialist personnel. He knows more than anyone that, with hindsight, standard procedures were not followed. Even if they believed she had wandered off the standard procedures should have been followed. I have said before on this site that the police should not make assumptions of what has happened, they should investigate and then come to a conclusion afterwards.

I will never understand how a witness can be interviewed one day, then be allowed home to speak to another witness who is due to be interviewed the next day.It would not happen in UK so why LP not advise the PJ.
Then we have Tapas 7 in the police station texting out updates FFS.......

HiDeHo wrote:


Recently you said that there is much you know and have not written. Is there something that has been purposely left out?

It is logical that yes.

What and for what purpose?

I cannot disclose it.

It leaves room for a second book, for example?

Maybe. Let's see.

I note that the social workers testimony was very relevant for Goncarlo with regard to David Payne as was the contributory gesture statement by the other doctors!

The above quote makes me happy though, it is this which is left out that is currently scaring the Mccann's isn't it! I wonder if scotland yard will have access to it? Perhaps they already know? as it was they that initially persuaded the portugese to develop the death scenario.

LJC wrote: I believe Mr Amaral to be a very sincere man but even he concedes that standard procedures were not carried out. I doubt if there were interferences, that these would have made a difference in such a short space of time. Mr Amaral is being honest, but the reasons he gives do not carry weight. Saying about an ambassaor coming over to Portugal, so what? The Lisbon Treaty, so what? No teams of coppers I know would bow to such political pressure, they have a job to do.

No matter what police force it is in the world, they are all subject to certain pressures. We've seen a fair few whitewashes in the UK! David Kelly for starters. This is transferable into any occupation really, you may want to do the right thing however it all boils down to money and stability.
If someone in power above you has pressures applied to them that relate to money, then they will inturn apply pressures to you which affects your job stability and in turn your money situation and at the end of the day, no matter what great ideas you have you won't risk the food on your table for yourself or your family. Especially so in countries suffering economic hardship where the most stable employment is given through the state.

With this scenario alluded to by Goncarlo I can now see how the chain of events may have occurred.

At the time Gordon Brown was under a lot of pressure politically with regard to the Lisbon treaty.
On one hand he had the british electorate, the opposition MP's, parts of the media as well as some of his backbenchers telling him he was surrendering British Soverignity by signing it. On the other hand he had the 'city' and the 'markets' watching what he was doing as well as pressures from other European Leaders.

Portugal were at that time the holders of the presidency; if the treaty did not get signed by Gordon they would be left with egg on their face.
It was the countries reputation, they demanded it to be signed in Lisbon, and as such it will forever get recognised as a portguese led treaty as the clues in the name!

At the same time the Mccann's had their friends in high places. Alex Woolfall was Gerry's bezzie mate as well as Gordon Brown's adviser and Alex Woolfall has already stated that he did everything he could for Gerry Mccann; which evidently included shady advice to Gordon Brown and his team.

Gordon then backs the Mccann's, which is fine for the British public as long as they're innocent... however if the Portugese police follow up their 'diligence' and unravel the twisted web that the Mccann's weave it will get shakey on that front, embarrassing the stubborn scotsman and he may succumb to all the other pressures he's facing and not sign the treaty as punishment to the Portuguese for their police showing them up.

The ambassador I imagine was the man relaying part of the message that if the Mccann's suffer a worse image problem due to the investigation it will undermine the prime minister and he will be more likely to not sign the treaty. This could be conveyed in a manner to the Portugese people in power that their own police could undermine their political futures! [and we all know no matter what country you're in promotion is often about who you know in the shady world of politics and the old boys clubs.]

I KNEW he wanted the dogs to go to England and in my view......that was the beginning off the end for mr amaral.


There was a reason he wanted that done.

duncanmac wrote:I will never understand how a witness can be interviewed one day, then be allowed home to speak to another witness who is due to be interviewed the next day.It would not happen in UK so why LP not advise the PJ.
Then we have Tapas 7 in the police station texting out updates FFS.......

LP allowed Russell O'Brien to read Jane Tanner's statement before making his own rogatory statement. And Jane Tanner! When the fire alarm went off, she was able to speak to a lawyer for one of the arguidos.

Sorry Anna.

That was meant to be arguido/suspect.
The two main arguidos were interviewed separately on two different days in Portimao.

duncanmac wrote:Sorry Anna.

That was meant to be arguido/suspect.
The two main arguidos were interviewed separately on two different days in Portimao.

Actually, when she went to the villa, after the first day, wasn't she still a witness? I think it was on the second day that Kate was constituted arguida.

Is it normal to change statements?

Are the 'early' statements just a watered down version of the corrections from a year later, after she was invited to visit the McCanns?

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/11/tvmais-at-what-time-did-maddie-leave.html

Re Catriona Baker:
“I was allowed to refresh my memory by reading the translated version of my original statement to the Portuguese police”, one can read in the report that was taped by Leicester police. The contents of the nanny’s statements was such that she was heard three times on the same day, and had to have her memory refreshed. At Leicestershire police headquarters, Catriona Baker was heard by detective Gierc between 10.09 and 10.54 a.m. on Monday, the 14th of April 2008. Between 11.57 and 12.12 a.m. on the same day, she was heard again by the same detective and between 1.35 and 1.45 p.m. on the same day she was again questioned by the same detective.

I believe that the refusal to do a reconstruction in the first few weeks was down to the PJ. They said it would disrupt holidaymakers holidays and that they would need to close the airspace and there were too many journalists so they decided not to do a reconstruction.

I think it was the worst mistake in the whole case that the PJ decided not to do that reconstruction early on when memories were fresh.

platinum wrote:I believe that the refusal to do a reconstruction in the first few weeks was down to the PJ. They said it would disrupt holidaymakers holidays and that they would need to close the airspace and there were too many journalists so they decided not to do a reconstruction.

I think it was the worst mistake in the whole case that the PJ decided not to do that reconstruction early on when memories were fresh.

Need to close airspace?

LJC wrote:

platinum wrote:I believe that the refusal to do a reconstruction in the first few weeks was down to the PJ. They said it would disrupt holidaymakers holidays and that they would need to close the airspace and there were too many journalists so they decided not to do a reconstruction.

I think it was the worst mistake in the whole case that the PJ decided not to do that reconstruction early on when memories were fresh.

Need to close airspace?

not sure of that...when the cadaver dogs inspected the home of lisa irwin,the police had the airspace closed but only about a two mile radius surounding the house

LJC wrote:

platinum wrote:I believe that the refusal to do a reconstruction in the first few weeks was down to the PJ. They said it would disrupt holidaymakers holidays and that they would need to close the airspace and there were too many journalists so they decided not to do a reconstruction.

I think it was the worst mistake in the whole case that the PJ decided not to do that reconstruction early on when memories were fresh.

Need to close airspace?

That and not wanting to upset holidaymakers were two of the reasons given.

platinum wrote:

LJC wrote:

platinum wrote:I believe that the refusal to do a reconstruction in the first few weeks was down to the PJ. They said it would disrupt holidaymakers holidays and that they would need to close the airspace and there were too many journalists so they decided not to do a reconstruction.

I think it was the worst mistake in the whole case that the PJ decided not to do that reconstruction early on when memories were fresh.

Need to close airspace?

That and not wanting to upset holidaymakers were two of the reasons given.

@Platinum

I think that Amaral himself has stated that the resources available in relation to the import of the events were probably unsatisfactory.

So, given that, and the implicit failings in the early part of the investigation, do you think that materially affects the reality of what happened or simply jeopardised the prospect of getting to the truth?

The End Is Nigh wrote:

platinum wrote:

LJC wrote:

platinum wrote:I believe that the refusal to do a reconstruction in the first few weeks was down to the PJ. They said it would disrupt holidaymakers holidays and that they would need to close the airspace and there were too many journalists so they decided not to do a reconstruction.

I think it was the worst mistake in the whole case that the PJ decided not to do that reconstruction early on when memories were fresh.

Need to close airspace?

That and not wanting to upset holidaymakers were two of the reasons given.

@Platinum

I think that Amaral himself has stated that the resources available in relation to the import of the events were probably unsatisfactory.

So, given that, and the implicit failings in the early part of the investigation, do you think that materially affects the reality of what happened or simply jeopardised the prospect of getting to the truth?

Clearly it jeopardised the getting to the truth as that hasn't happened. It doesn't affect what happened on the night though.