Panorama Tonight!!

Wasn`t as bad as I thought it would be.

Was it brought forward because of Murdoch appearing at the Leveson Inquiry and they stated that Murdoch pressurised Cameron?

Very bad saying the dogs only found DNA rather than cadaver odour and blood - designed to mislead obviously.

Redwood going all sheepish about saying whether SY review prompted the Porto review - well we know it didn`t because the Porto review started 3 months before the SY one.

It seems Robert Murat is no fan of Goncalo Amaral either. Murat spoke on the programme and said Mr Amaral met with Murat and more or less intimated the PJ would pin this on Murat. Murat felt the PJ were under too much pressure to bring somebody to book at a very early stage instead of seeking the truth.

Loopdaloop wrote:IT was impartial!!! Thats a positive! and not only was it impartial but it pointed the general public towards the alternate theory... repeatedly AND Showed the dogs!!!

I would not say impartial = what part of the prog pointed the finger at the parents apart from the 5% that said it was only the Portugese people that thought the parents were involved!!?? and the 30% of the prog that tried to bash Amaral for saying as much??

Whoops that makes it 100% pro!!

To me it was like a double bluff, its a way of telling people not every-one agrees with the Mccanns

so it was nothing to do with some of the T9 that said he was seen in the vicinity of the apartment that night that led to Murat being investigated. only that G Amaral had to make an arrest.

Well, I thought it was a good programme. I thought the Portuguese and Mr Amaral came across very well. No way are the McCanns home and dry, nothing in that programme pointed to that to me

NoStone wrote:British dogs found possible traces of DNA in the apt and in the car!

No they did'nt they indicated cadiver and blood!

Are you suggesting that what the dogs 'marked' contained no DNA ?

I can see how the Johnson fellow got sucked in - one can imagine the two of them (clever dick and injured angel) putting their case - he stood no chance.

quickfingers wrote:I didn't think the PJ and Amaral bashing was fair but this programme will have put some ideas in peoples minds I think. How can Amaral's book be a best seller when it hasn't been on sale for years now? Duarte didn't mention the books she was (and maybe still is) holding did she.

They didn't bash Amaral though, they did the interview technique of providing the argument against him so he could give his side of things.
This was the first time I've seen in any mainstream uk media Armaral have the opportunity to say that he wrote the book (plugged as a bestseller) to defend his reputation and he was allowed to expand upon it!

Loopdaloop wrote:IT was impartial!!! Thats a positive! and not only was it impartial but it pointed the general public towards the alternate theory... repeatedly AND Showed the dogs!!!

Agree, more balanced than other reports, the odd mistake 'the dogs found traces of dna'......(the dogs are not analytical chemists, they sniff)
but it did allow for a different pov rather than the abduction theory. The Murdoch/Sun/Cameron bit was interesting, after Theresa May gave the McCs short shrift.

wjk wrote:Well, I thought it was a good programme. I thought the Portuguese and Mr Amaral came across very well. No way are the McCanns home and dry, nothing in that programme pointed to that to me

I agree i think they will be shitting bricks in rothley towers

i agree wjk i thought it was a good programme, some PJ and Amaral bashing, though we expected that. i dont think what was expected was that they would speak to Portuguese police who said that what they believed that an accident happened and Madeleine died hasnt changed. i think that andy redwood it too confident, lets wait and see. he keeps saying that the PJ have sovereignty in this case, so its a let out for him in any event. Also it didnt hold back on the pressure put on Cameron by News International and the Sun to reopen the case. not good for Cameron responding to the puppet strings jimo.

just got to add i did not like Alan Johnson, he is such a slime ball saying that political careful handling, or words to that effect, will bring about the desired result. He felt the treatment of the McCanns was disgraceful. Hey Alan go have a word with John Buck he appears to disagree with you, and he was there giving all the assistance he could and he still fel things werent right with what the McCs were saying. I jimo.snt that why were here today, too much political interference.

chrissie1 wrote:To me it was like a double bluff, its a way of telling people not every-one agrees with the Mccanns

Thats how I took it too!! especially as the SY guy did not give anything away!

Fern wrote:

NoStone wrote:British dogs found possible traces of DNA in the apt and in the car!

No they did'nt they indicated cadiver and blood!

Are you suggesting that what the dogs 'marked' contained no DNA ?

Fern - the point being made was that he dogs had indicated DNA that later was found to be inconclusive -

That is not the case - that is misleading. Dogs indicate scent! You should rewind the prog and see the what was actually said!

ann_chovey wrote:

Loopdaloop wrote:IT was impartial!!! Thats a positive! and not only was it impartial but it pointed the general public towards the alternate theory... repeatedly AND Showed the dogs!!!

Agree, more balanced than other reports, the odd mistake 'the dogs found traces of dna'......(the dogs are not analytical chemists, they sniff)
but it did allow for a different pov rather than the abduction theory. The Murdoch/Sun/Cameron bit was interesting, after Theresa May gave the McCs short shrift.

I think the general public will have got quite a strong message from "the dogs found traces of DNA." That would possibly mean more to most people than that the dogs detected cadaver odour and blood.

Argh we were putting updates on the other panorama thread but after watching l do have more with in redwood it certainly wasn't a pro fest at all.

Overall I felt the programme came across as rather balanced.

(What did strike me was just how much Mr A has aged in the past 5 years, goodness me what a change)

[quote="tanszi"]i agree wjk i thought it was a good programme, some PJ and Amaral bashing, though we expected that. i dont think what was expected was that they would speak to Portuguese police who said that what they believed that an accident happened and Madeleine died hasnt changed. i think that andy redwood it too confident, lets wait and see. he keeps saying that the PJ have sovereignty in this case, so its a let out for him in any event. Also it didnt hold back on the pressure put on Cameron by News International and the Sun to reopen the case. not good for Cameron responding to the puppet strings jimo.[/quote]

Good point Tanszi - very topic - it leaves a big door open given that Carmeron instigated the 'review' with special funding and a given brief!!

Bit calmer now! Did I miss it or not. Didn't see where closure was mentioned. Maybe more people will access the statements and make their own minds up. OH not obsessed like me and he didn't think it was too bad. Sadly I just can't see how the mainstream press can go on from here and show the parents as guilty.

And they showed the dogs!

tanszi wrote:so it was nothing to do with some of the T9 that said he was seen in the vicinity of the apartment that night that led to Murat being investigated. only that G Amaral had to make an arrest.

It would be interesting to know if Murat did say anything about the T9 trying to frame him - it probably ended up on the cutting room floor. Just his comments about Mr Amaral and the PJ being under pressure to nail this on Murat.

chrissie1 wrote:

wjk wrote:Well, I thought it was a good programme. I thought the Portuguese and Mr Amaral came across very well. No way are the McCanns home and dry, nothing in that programme pointed to that to me

I agree i think they will be shitting bricks in rothley towers

I didn't manage to watch it, but from what I have read here, it sounds like it was a good programme and if Clarrie had known what it was like, no wonder he didn't look all that pleased in the video where he was talking about the new age-advanced image.

I've rewound mine this is what is says about the dogs...


"It was British police sniffer dogs that changed the way Portuguese detectives were,thinking. The dogs indicated possible traces of DNA in the McCann families flat and hire car. Although this was found to be inconclusive by forensic scientists the Portuguese police made Kate and Gerry McCann arguidos, or suspects, in their daughter disappearance"

jay2001 wrote:Bit calmer now! Did I miss it or not. Didn't see where closure was mentioned. Maybe more people will access the statements and make their own minds up. OH not obsessed like me and he didn't think it was too bad. Sadly I just can't see how the mainstream press can go on from here and show the parents as guilty.

And they showed the dogs!

They won't, as to do so would prejudice a fair Trial ...............

I thought it came across fairly impartially, but then I noticed Brendan de Beer's name in the end credits. IIRC he's a pro isn't he? Maybe someone can remind me.

Well I interpreted it differently. It said to me the Portuguese police made lots of mistakes and got it completely wrong. And missed lots of important leads that could have led to the abductor. And diplomatic pressure should be put on for the case to be re-opened so closure could come for the poor parents.