McCanns Lawyer says police must take position on the lead provided by S.A Businessman

Just to clarify something, the PJ can't arrest, put under surveillance or bug anyone's phone without permission. Sadly.

Kathybelle, I have no gripe with the PJ and actually believe Mr Amaral to be a fine man and excellent police officer.
As you say he has agreed that mistakes were made which is to his credit, my issue is that if Mr Amaral accepts that mistakes were made, why posters on this forum cannot.
For the record, good luck to Mr Amaral when the libel trial comes round in September.
I am hoping that something may come out which will allow the re opening of the case.
I know Mr Amaral will be there in person, unlike some cowards who will be sat on the end of a video link.
I am not well versed on Portuguese law, but if any of our legal friends on this forum can confirm, I would like to know.
How can someone bring legal proceedings but then refuse to attend ?

]quote="Claudia79"]Just to clarify something, the PJ can't arrest, put under surveillance or bug anyone's phone without permission. Sadly.

Thank You Claudia, I know have the answer to why there was no covert observations

duncanmac wrote:Kathybelle, I have no gripe with the PJ and actually believe Mr Amaral to be a fine man and excellent police officer.
As you say he has agreed that mistakes were made which is to his credit, my issue is that if Mr Amaral accepts that mistakes were made, why posters on this forum cannot.
For the record, good luck to Mr Amaral when the libel trial comes round in September.
I am hoping that something may come out which will allow the re opening of the case.
I know Mr Amaral will be there in person, unlike some cowards who will be sat on the end of a video link.
I am not well versed on Portuguese law, but if any of our legal friends on this forum can confirm, I would like to know.
How can someone bring legal proceedings but then refuse to attend ?

I have to admit Duncanmac, that I didn't believe the PJ had made mistakes, until I read a translation of a report where Goncalo Amaral admitted the PJ made mistakes.

Regarding the McCanns forthcoming lawsuit against Goncalo Amaral, are they going to appear by video link? Goncalo Amaral was going to call them to the witness box. I don't know anything about Portuguese law, but if this is so, I wonder if this will help the McCanns win this lawsuit.

dazedandconfused wrote:Very unpatriotic of me I know, but I have absolutely no faith that SY will find anything other than what the PJ already have. I really don't buy the fact that Deadwood gave the statement which clearly supported abduction to be something to lull the McCanns into a false sense of security. Tbey're already so lulled that they're practically horizontal with relaxation.

I am sorrowfully beginning to agree with this... hwoever if we're going to say that McCanns are free because of PJ blunders and not the unprecedented political and public pressure, then we have to say that they will continue to be free because of SY blunders.

however, Rebekah Brooks gave a pretty compelling testimony about how she extorted 3M pounds out of David Cameron by threatening to put him on the front page of the Sun every day for weeks if he didnt give McCanns what they wanted so she could get the serialization rights to Kate's book.

It's difficult to argue that there was NOT powerful and deep interference. To say this ignores facts brought out in questioning that is online for anyone to see, those forces did not come into play in 2012, they were there since May 4 2007.

duncanmac wrote:

]quote="Claudia79"]Just to clarify something, the PJ can't arrest, put under surveillance or bug anyone's phone without permission. Sadly.

Thank You Claudia, I know have the answer to why there was no covert observations

You didn't know that?

kathybelle wrote:

duncanmac wrote:Kathybelle, I have no gripe with the PJ and actually believe Mr Amaral to be a fine man and excellent police officer.
As you say he has agreed that mistakes were made which is to his credit, my issue is that if Mr Amaral accepts that mistakes were made, why posters on this forum cannot.
For the record, good luck to Mr Amaral when the libel trial comes round in September.
I am hoping that something may come out which will allow the re opening of the case.
I know Mr Amaral will be there in person, unlike some cowards who will be sat on the end of a video link.
I am not well versed on Portuguese law, but if any of our legal friends on this forum can confirm, I would like to know.
How can someone bring legal proceedings but then refuse to attend ?

I have to admit Duncanmac, that I didn't believe the PJ had made mistakes, until I read a translation of a report where Goncalo Amaral admitted the PJ made mistakes.

Regarding the McCanns forthcoming lawsuit against Goncalo Amaral, are they going to appear by video link? Goncalo Amaral was going to call them to the witness box. I don't know anything about Portuguese law, but if this is so, I wonder if this will help the McCanns win this lawsuit.

The biggest mistake was the fact that someone from the PJ should have shouted from the rooftops to the world that they weren't being allowed to investigate properly. But they were afraid of the consequences. And we know there are consequences (what happened to GA is a clear example).

duncanmac wrote:Kathybelle, I have followed this case from day one, but it does not take up all my life like some.
You suggest I read the files, have you ?
Rebello took over from Amaral as a matter of fact, and you say GM phoned Gordon Brown the day after Madeleine disappeared.
Why would he do that ?
Tony Blair was Prime Minister when Madeleine disappeared and I think you will find it was him he spoke to not Gordon Brown.
I believe that the Macs are still free due to PJ errors and I will not change my view.

.


Do they never, in the UK, do a good job investigating againt huge odds and in a foreign language with pressure from on top - but still fail to bring the suspect to justice? Wow, a 100% win rate, that must be the envy of all other LE everywhere on earth. Even in just regular cases that are in your own mother tongue and where the suspects and witnesses don't get up and leave the next day, and wehre you don't have the PM calling to see if the lead invstigator has been removed yet, you might think some cases fail to be closed, even when there is evidence. I think the win rate in the US is about 10% of the criminals arrested ever get brought to trial and 10% of those go to prison...

I await SY to find all the information the PJ bungled, and Crack the case... seriously though if Cameron bowed to pressure from the Sun, I doubt he handed that case over to SY saying "just do your best and a thorough job, we want the truth whoever it implicates" - if he was frightened enough of Rebekah Brooks' threats to spend this kind of money on a case where the chief suspects refused to cooperate, he clearly wants an outcome that will make McCanns, and hence the Sun, happy, and keep him OFF the frront page, except in a good way.

On the other hand maybe he's so pissed that they did this to him, that he told SY "help the PJ get these bastards" through his gritted teeth.

I would love to believe that SY will find what there is to find and the truth will come out and wrong doers be outed for their crimes (whatever they were and whoever they were) but I think I kind of expect a different outcome because I think the files show a thorough investigation was done, I don't think you could have leaned on people to crack and spill the beans, given what was at stake, if it's what we suspect, or some of us do, they'll have been fully informed of their right to remain silent and will avail themselves of that as soon as the questioning gets ugly.

As Clarence said, this is all the info we wish to and need to provide....

I'd love to know why the times were so screwed up, Clarrie says you can't get all these holiday makers to agree on anything, no one had watches. But yet they agreed on a timeline that gives the abductor about 15 minutes to be in and out, drug the kids and open the window, and seen by Jane between Gerry's check and Matt's, with the father just outside the door, and then walk down the middle of the street...

Claudia79 wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

duncanmac wrote:Kathybelle, I have no gripe with the PJ and actually believe Mr Amaral to be a fine man and excellent police officer.
As you say he has agreed that mistakes were made which is to his credit, my issue is that if Mr Amaral accepts that mistakes were made, why posters on this forum cannot.
For the record, good luck to Mr Amaral when the libel trial comes round in September.
I am hoping that something may come out which will allow the re opening of the case.
I know Mr Amaral will be there in person, unlike some cowards who will be sat on the end of a video link.
I am not well versed on Portuguese law, but if any of our legal friends on this forum can confirm, I would like to know.
How can someone bring legal proceedings but then refuse to attend ?

I have to admit Duncanmac, that I didn't believe the PJ had made mistakes, until I read a translation of a report where Goncalo Amaral admitted the PJ made mistakes.

Regarding the McCanns forthcoming lawsuit against Goncalo Amaral, are they going to appear by video link? Goncalo Amaral was going to call them to the witness box. I don't know anything about Portuguese law, but if this is so, I wonder if this will help the McCanns win this lawsuit.

The biggest mistake was the fact that someone from the PJ should have shouted from the rooftops to the world that they weren't being allowed to investigate properly. But they were afraid of the consequences. And we know there are consequences (what happened to GA is a clear example).

What happened to David Cameron was a clear example as well, that there is one outcome the government wants now, at least, and that is pro McCann, otherwise the papers who have the alliance with Kate McCann, will trash the Prime Minister, FO and Home Secretary until they cause governments to change.

Maybe it wasn't quite so drastic and obvious in May 2007 but there is certainly no question NOW, that this is the case.

In my opinion, the fact that the T7 refuse to cooperate with a reconstruction is all the evidence I need that they were lying about the checks.

Not all of them lied and refused however.

I think the Oldfields did - his wife's the lawyer? - and one of the others, was it Payne or O'Brien?

Without all 9 it was a no go, but it would be interesting to know if it was actually Matt and Jane who refused.

Matt is the guy who saw MM at 930 safely tucked up until he realized for that to be true, Jane's 915 sighting of the abduction couldn't have happened, so he changed it that he checked but didn't see her, and went back to the table quite satisfied with his check on a missing child - and Jane of course had the sighting she told no one about til later in case it upset anyone to know she'd seen the abduction, could identify the guy and which direction he went, etc. Things most parents would want to know right away, and most friends would be eager to share.

Really baffling people are the secretive 7. I've never met anyone who thinks like them, certainly not in the case of something so important.

kathybelle wrote:The PJ didn't fall for the abduction story at all. The McCanns began to lie as soon as the Portuguese police arrived at their apartment to investigate Madeleine's disappearance. This is what Mark Williamx-Thomas, a child protection expert, who is also a criminologist and a former police officer, told the media.

First of all, Mr William-Thomas said he flew over to PDL, to offer his support to the McCanns, but they refused his support. He said he discovered that the McCanns had told the police that the shutter was jemmied. The McCanns said that the abductor, entered the apartment through the jemmied shutter, then exited the same way carrying Madeleine.

The McCanns were asked if their apartment was secured when they went out and they said yes. The shutter was examined and found to be intact and the McCanns were asked once again if their apartment was secured, and they said no. Mr William Thomas said the police decided that Madeleine most probably had walked out of the apartment and they would be changing the search from an abducted child, to a missing child. Mr William Thomas said the McCanns agreed that it could have been possible for Madeleine to have walked out of their apartment.

Goncalo Amaral also said, that as soon as the McCanns began to lie to the police, the police suspected that the story was not as the McCanns had said it was.

When the police arrived at the McCanns apartment, they had made all their important phone calls, including the one to Gordon Brown. This is only my opinion, but I believe that the PJ's hands were tied, once Gordon Brown had been contacted and this is why the McCanns were not arrested on the spot. They had already told the PJ that their children were left unsupervised, which was a crime in Portugal. I believe if Gordon Brown hadn't become involved so quickly, the McCanns would have been arrested for what they admitted to.

However I don't know Goncalo Amaral and he would be the only one to say if this was so.

I don't agree with this completely... as duncanmac points out Blair was PM then not Brown, I dont think Gerry called Gorgon Brown that evening nor that calling the British PM ties the hands of the PJ. The PM of the UK does not control the feds in Portugal.

Also, Amaral in his book says that he suspected the McCanns were lying immediately - about the state of the window and door -but implies that they were lying in order to minimise their neglect, which was foolish in his view because clearly, had they been there NOT neglecting their children, one wouldn't have gone missing.

It would be understandable not to leap to the conclusion immediately that McCanns killed MM and hid her body because they were there with a table full of witnesses that alibi'd them at the time. Clearly they had a question of whether it was an abduction, but I think the other alternative at that time was woke and wandered rather than death in the apt.

It's way back in the mists of time now, but wasn't Gerry's brother a friend or neighbour of Gordon Brown's brother and that's how Gordon first got involved in the sorry saga?

dazedandconfused wrote:It's way back in the mists of time now, but wasn't Gerry's brother a friend or neighbour of Gordon Brown's brother and that's how Gordon first got involved in the sorry saga?

Aughh... I think the brother ANDREW was in business of a nuclear sort, wanting to build power plants all over Britain and they had hired Gerry to do a study about how living near a nuclear plant doesn't harm fetuses or children, which I found odd in that he reads cardiograms, he's neither a pediatrician nor a oncologist and it seems to me that living near any kind of industrial plant is hazardous to anyone. Whether Andrew Brown, though (IIRC) was inviting Gerry to be in the business with him or just paying for his "study" who knows.

the woman who lived in the street of Gordon Brown's brother, was a friend of Kate's from school, I thought.

Anyhow they did have some kind of connection to GB however Britain is so small it's almost like there are fewer than 6 degrees of separation between any person, and a politician. I have worked with a company where we had on exec staff a woman who was working with Brown at one point before he became PM, when I worked for a UK based company, lots of people seem to know him. It's not impossible to think "who do I know who knows the PM" and call them.

they were calling everyone they knew to get the word out that Madeleine had been abducted which in itself is somewhat odd, what on earth do you think your friends in the UK will or could or should do when your child has been missing in Portugal for an hour? Besides go out and spread the word that it happened, that shutters were jemmied and windows smashed and a man took madeleine.

Thanks widowan. I thought there was a connection somewhere along the line with Gordon Brown's brother.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id166.html

Kate McCann's diary

26 July 2008
Thanks to 'astro' for translation

The English prime minister called the couple directly and the British diplomacy took care of the travelling

"To increase the political pressure". The phrase, by Kate McCann, written among the notes that were found in her house and which the Polícia Judiciária (PJ) had apprehended, is clear about the manner in which Maddie's parents intended to manage their daughter's disappearance, bringing it into the press' first pages and turning it into a case with political outlines.

On the morning of the 23rd of May 2007 (twenty days after Maddie's disappearance), before they left for the Sanctuary of Fátima, Kate and Gerry left Gordon Brown a message. Maddie's mother describes it as a form of "raising the political pressure" and reveals that the present Prime Minister – at that date, he was not in functions but had already been confirmed as Tony Blair's successor – answered her only three hours later. He spoke with Gerry, was "very sympathetic and gave strength", tells Kate, who describes the visit to the catholic sanctuary as overwhelming, potent and emotional.

On the same day in the afternoon, Gordon Brown called Maddie's parents again. Kate's notebooks do not report the conversation but one is able to understand that the purpose was to create political pressure, forcing the PJ to act swiftly.

Today, at more than a year's distance from the child's disappearance and after the case has been archived, Kate's notes expose the pressures that were reported by the former coordinator of the case, Gonçalo Amaral, who from the moment when he was removed from the investigation, realised that the process would not produce an accusation.

widowan wrote:

kathybelle wrote:The PJ didn't fall for the abduction story at all. The McCanns began to lie as soon as the Portuguese police arrived at their apartment to investigate Madeleine's disappearance. This is what Mark Williamx-Thomas, a child protection expert, who is also a criminologist and a former police officer, told the media.

First of all, Mr William-Thomas said he flew over to PDL, to offer his support to the McCanns, but they refused his support. He said he discovered that the McCanns had told the police that the shutter was jemmied. The McCanns said that the abductor, entered the apartment through the jemmied shutter, then exited the same way carrying Madeleine.

The McCanns were asked if their apartment was secured when they went out and they said yes. The shutter was examined and found to be intact and the McCanns were asked once again if their apartment was secured, and they said no. Mr William Thomas said the police decided that Madeleine most probably had walked out of the apartment and they would be changing the search from an abducted child, to a missing child. Mr William Thomas said the McCanns agreed that it could have been possible for Madeleine to have walked out of their apartment.



Goncalo Amaral also said, that as soon as the McCanns began to lie to the police, the police suspected that the story was not as the McCanns had said it was.

When the police arrived at the McCanns apartment, they had made all their important phone calls, including the one to Gordon Brown. This is only my opinion, but I believe that the PJ's hands were tied, once Gordon Brown had been contacted and this is why the McCanns were not arrested on the spot. They had already told the PJ that their children were left unsupervised, which was a crime in Portugal. I believe if Gordon Brown hadn't become involved so quickly, the McCanns would have been arrested for what they admitted to.

However I don't know Goncalo Amaral and he would be the only one to say if this was so.

I don't agree with this completely... as duncanmac points out Blair was PM then not Brown, I dont think Gerry called Gorgon Brown that evening nor that calling the British PM ties the hands of the PJ. The PM of the UK does not control the feds in Portugal.

Also, Amaral in his book says that he suspected the McCanns were lying immediately - about the state of the window and door -but implies that they were lying in order to minimise their neglect, which was foolish in his view because clearly, had they been there NOT neglecting their children, one wouldn't have gone missing.

It would be understandable not to leap to the conclusion immediately that McCanns killed MM and hid her body because they were there with a table full of witnesses that alibi'd them at the time. Clearly they had a question of whether it was an abduction, but I think the other alternative at that time was woke and wandered rather than death in the apt.

Regarding Gordon Brown, if you read my post I already said I knew Gordon Brown was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Tony Blair the Prime Minister. However you are wrong when you say Gerry McCann didn't phone Gordon Brown, he did phone him and he did say that Brown told him he could phone him anytime day or night. Also Philomena McCann was asked why her brother was able to contact Gordon Brown and she said he was an old family friend.

I've been looking for information regarding Gerry McCann's phone call to Gordon Brown, as yet I have to find any, but I found this old news report, that some might find interesting. Especially the bit about the MP's wearing the yellow ribbons, that had been a sign of hope Madeleine would be found soon.

http://www.news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_6660000/newsid_6660400/0000463.stm

kathybelle wrote:

widowan wrote:

kathybelle wrote:The PJ didn't fall for the abduction story at all. The McCanns began to lie as soon as the Portuguese police arrived at their apartment to investigate Madeleine's disappearance. This is what Mark Williamx-Thomas, a child protection expert, who is also a criminologist and a former police officer, told the media.

First of all, Mr William-Thomas said he flew over to PDL, to offer his support to the McCanns, but they refused his support. He said he discovered that the McCanns had told the police that the shutter was jemmied. The McCanns said that the abductor, entered the apartment through the jemmied shutter, then exited the same way carrying Madeleine.

The McCanns were asked if their apartment was secured when they went out and they said yes. The shutter was examined and found to be intact and the McCanns were asked once again if their apartment was secured, and they said no. Mr William Thomas said the police decided that Madeleine most probably had walked out of the apartment and they would be changing the search from an abducted child, to a missing child. Mr William Thomas said the McCanns agreed that it could have been possible for Madeleine to have walked out of their apartment.



Goncalo Amaral also said, that as soon as the McCanns began to lie to the police, the police suspected that the story was not as the McCanns had said it was.

When the police arrived at the McCanns apartment, they had made all their important phone calls, including the one to Gordon Brown. This is only my opinion, but I believe that the PJ's hands were tied, once Gordon Brown had been contacted and this is why the McCanns were not arrested on the spot. They had already told the PJ that their children were left unsupervised, which was a crime in Portugal. I believe if Gordon Brown hadn't become involved so quickly, the McCanns would have been arrested for what they admitted to.

However I don't know Goncalo Amaral and he would be the only one to say if this was so.

I don't agree with this completely... as duncanmac points out Blair was PM then not Brown, I dont think Gerry called Gorgon Brown that evening nor that calling the British PM ties the hands of the PJ. The PM of the UK does not control the feds in Portugal.

Also, Amaral in his book says that he suspected the McCanns were lying immediately - about the state of the window and door -but implies that they were lying in order to minimise their neglect, which was foolish in his view because clearly, had they been there NOT neglecting their children, one wouldn't have gone missing.

It would be understandable not to leap to the conclusion immediately that McCanns killed MM and hid her body because they were there with a table full of witnesses that alibi'd them at the time. Clearly they had a question of whether it was an abduction, but I think the other alternative at that time was woke and wandered rather than death in the apt.

Regarding Gordon Brown, if you read my post I already said I knew Gordon Brown was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Tony Blair the Prime Minister. However you are wrong when you say Gerry McCann didn't phone Gordon Brown, he did phone him and he did say that Brown told him he could phone him anytime day or night. Also Philomena McCann was asked why her brother was able to contact Gordon Brown and she said he was an old family friend.

I've been looking for information regarding Gerry McCann's phone call to Gordon Brown, as yet I have to find any, but I found this old news report, that some might find interesting. Especially the bit about the MP's wearing the yellow ribbons, that had been a sign of hope Madeleine would be found soon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_6660000/newsid_6660400/0000463.stm

Have a look at my post just above yours. It's an extract from Kate's diary mentioning phoning Gordon Brown.

AnnaEsse wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

widowan wrote:

kathybelle wrote:The PJ didn't fall for the abduction story at all. The McCanns began to lie as soon as the Portuguese police arrived at their apartment to investigate Madeleine's disappearance. This is what Mark Williamx-Thomas, a child protection expert, who is also a criminologist and a former police officer, told the media.

First of all, Mr William-Thomas said he flew over to PDL, to offer his support to the McCanns, but they refused his support. He said he discovered that the McCanns had told the police that the shutter was jemmied. The McCanns said that the abductor, entered the apartment through the jemmied shutter, then exited the same way carrying Madeleine.

The McCanns were asked if their apartment was secured when they went out and they said yes. The shutter was examined and found to be intact and the McCanns were asked once again if their apartment was secured, and they said no. Mr William Thomas said the police decided that Madeleine most probably had walked out of the apartment and they would be changing the search from an abducted child, to a missing child. Mr William Thomas said the McCanns agreed that it could have been possible for Madeleine to have walked out of their apartment.



Goncalo Amaral also said, that as soon as the McCanns began to lie to the police, the police suspected that the story was not as the McCanns had said it was.

When the police arrived at the McCanns apartment, they had made all their important phone calls, including the one to Gordon Brown. This is only my opinion, but I believe that the PJ's hands were tied, once Gordon Brown had been contacted and this is why the McCanns were not arrested on the spot. They had already told the PJ that their children were left unsupervised, which was a crime in Portugal. I believe if Gordon Brown hadn't become involved so quickly, the McCanns would have been arrested for what they admitted to.

However I don't know Goncalo Amaral and he would be the only one to say if this was so.

I don't agree with this completely... as duncanmac points out Blair was PM then not Brown, I dont think Gerry called Gorgon Brown that evening nor that calling the British PM ties the hands of the PJ. The PM of the UK does not control the feds in Portugal.

Also, Amaral in his book says that he suspected the McCanns were lying immediately - about the state of the window and door -but implies that they were lying in order to minimise their neglect, which was foolish in his view because clearly, had they been there NOT neglecting their children, one wouldn't have gone missing.

It would be understandable not to leap to the conclusion immediately that McCanns killed MM and hid her body because they were there with a table full of witnesses that alibi'd them at the time. Clearly they had a question of whether it was an abduction, but I think the other alternative at that time was woke and wandered rather than death in the apt.

Regarding Gordon Brown, if you read my post I already said I knew Gordon Brown was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Tony Blair the Prime Minister. However you are wrong when you say Gerry McCann didn't phone Gordon Brown, he did phone him and he did say that Brown told him he could phone him anytime day or night. Also Philomena McCann was asked why her brother was able to contact Gordon Brown and she said he was an old family friend.

I've been looking for information regarding Gerry McCann's phone call to Gordon Brown, as yet I have to find any, but I found this old news report, that some might find interesting. Especially the bit about the MP's wearing the yellow ribbons, that had been a sign of hope Madeleine would be found soon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_6660000/newsid_6660400/0000463.stm

Have a look at my post just above yours. It's an extract from Kate's diary mentioning phoning Gordon Brown.

Thanks AnnaEsse, there is some good information on that page.

Regarding Gerry's phonecall to Gordon Brown, I can still see Gerry stood in front of the apartment block, speaking to the media about his phonecall to Gordon Brown. At that time, I thought Madeleine had been abducted, but after I heard Mark Williams-Thomas, speaking on television, I knew the McCanns were more involved with Madeleine's disappearance than neglect. Nothing I have heard since has made me change my mind.

Regarding the link I put on the board, that won't open. I even edited the post and put www. in front of the news, to see if the link would open, but it still won't open.

kathybelle wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

widowan wrote:

kathybelle wrote:The PJ didn't fall for the abduction story at all. The McCanns began to lie as soon as the Portuguese police arrived at their apartment to investigate Madeleine's disappearance. This is what Mark Williamx-Thomas, a child protection expert, who is also a criminologist and a former police officer, told the media.

First of all, Mr William-Thomas said he flew over to PDL, to offer his support to the McCanns, but they refused his support. He said he discovered that the McCanns had told the police that the shutter was jemmied. The McCanns said that the abductor, entered the apartment through the jemmied shutter, then exited the same way carrying Madeleine.

The McCanns were asked if their apartment was secured when they went out and they said yes. The shutter was examined and found to be intact and the McCanns were asked once again if their apartment was secured, and they said no. Mr William Thomas said the police decided that Madeleine most probably had walked out of the apartment and they would be changing the search from an abducted child, to a missing child. Mr William Thomas said the McCanns agreed that it could have been possible for Madeleine to have walked out of their apartment.



Goncalo Amaral also said, that as soon as the McCanns began to lie to the police, the police suspected that the story was not as the McCanns had said it was.

When the police arrived at the McCanns apartment, they had made all their important phone calls, including the one to Gordon Brown. This is only my opinion, but I believe that the PJ's hands were tied, once Gordon Brown had been contacted and this is why the McCanns were not arrested on the spot. They had already told the PJ that their children were left unsupervised, which was a crime in Portugal. I believe if Gordon Brown hadn't become involved so quickly, the McCanns would have been arrested for what they admitted to.

However I don't know Goncalo Amaral and he would be the only one to say if this was so.

I don't agree with this completely... as duncanmac points out Blair was PM then not Brown, I dont think Gerry called Gorgon Brown that evening nor that calling the British PM ties the hands of the PJ. The PM of the UK does not control the feds in Portugal.

Also, Amaral in his book says that he suspected the McCanns were lying immediately - about the state of the window and door -but implies that they were lying in order to minimise their neglect, which was foolish in his view because clearly, had they been there NOT neglecting their children, one wouldn't have gone missing.

It would be understandable not to leap to the conclusion immediately that McCanns killed MM and hid her body because they were there with a table full of witnesses that alibi'd them at the time. Clearly they had a question of whether it was an abduction, but I think the other alternative at that time was woke and wandered rather than death in the apt.

Regarding Gordon Brown, if you read my post I already said I knew Gordon Brown was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Tony Blair the Prime Minister. However you are wrong when you say Gerry McCann didn't phone Gordon Brown, he did phone him and he did say that Brown told him he could phone him anytime day or night. Also Philomena McCann was asked why her brother was able to contact Gordon Brown and she said he was an old family friend.

I've been looking for information regarding Gerry McCann's phone call to Gordon Brown, as yet I have to find any, but I found this old news report, that some might find interesting. Especially the bit about the MP's wearing the yellow ribbons, that had been a sign of hope Madeleine would be found soon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_6660000/newsid_6660400/0000463.stm

Have a look at my post just above yours. It's an extract from Kate's diary mentioning phoning Gordon Brown.

Thanks AnnaEsse, there is some good information on that page.

Regarding Gerry's phonecall to Gordon Brown, I can still see Gerry stood in front of the apartment block, speaking to the media about his phonecall to Gordon Brown. At that time, I thought Madeleine had been abducted, but after I heard Mark Williams-Thomas, speaking on television, I knew the McCanns were more involved with Madeleine's disappearance than neglect. Nothing I have heard since has made me change my mind.

Regarding the link I put on the board, that won't open. I even edited the post and put www. in front of the news, to see if the link would open, but it still won't open.

I can't work out what's wrong with that link, kathybelle. I tried finding the article on Google and found one about Philomena saying that Gordon Brown had promised to help. This is what must have led to the McCanns phoning him.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6661113.stm




Last Updated: Wednesday, 16 May 2007, 14:06 GMT 15:06 UK

Chancellor Gordon Brown has told relatives of missing Madeleine McCann he will help "in any way he can".
Philomena McCann, lobbying MPs for support in the search for her niece, four, said he was "extremely helpful".

British suspect Robert Murat, 33, has said he is "a scapegoat". Police have searched his mother's Algarve villa, close to where Madeleine was last seen.

A fighting fund will be launched later at the Walkers Stadium in Leicester, to help cover escalating legal bills.

Ms McCann, of Glasgow - accompanied by Glasgow Central MP Mohammed Sarwar - said she wanted MPs to use their power and influence to help, and she was not there to criticise the British or Portuguese police.

She said Mr Brown had offered support on "a practical and a personal level" in their meeting.

She added: "For someone to abduct Madeleine, we're aware they would want such a beautiful, caring little girl as she is, and I can totally understand them.

"But give her back, she isn't yours, we want her home and safe."

Meanwhile at Prime Ministers' Questions, Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, who will meet Ms McCann later, said: "I'm sure that the thoughts of the whole House will be with them at this terrible time."

Many MPs wore yellow ribbons that have become a symbol of hope for Madeleine.

The family's push to keep the search in the public eye comes after Mr Murat was questioned for 12 hours by police.

Mr Murat, who previously lived in Hockering, Norfolk, has recently been living with his mother Jenny, 71, in Praia da Luz.

Speaking off camera after questioning, Mr Murat told Sky News: "This has ruined my life and made my life very difficult for my family here and in Britain.

"The only way I will survive this is if they catch Madeleine's abductor."

Members of Mr Murat's family have insisted he was having dinner with his mother on the night the four-year-old disappeared.

Tuck Price, a friend of the family, said Mr Murat was keen to get the focus "back on Madeleine and away from him".

"His daughter is now in hiding in the UK," he added.

"The one thing, the compassionate thing, that made him get involved in the case has put his daughter in this horrible position."

Forensic tests

On Tuesday, Chief Inspector Olegario de Sousa told a news conference he could not confirm whether Madeleine was alive or dead.

He said police had searched five houses and seized "various materials" from the properties which were undergoing forensic tests.

It is believed two cars used by the Murats have been examined, and computers, mobile phones and several video tapes were taken away.

Two other people - a German woman and a Portuguese man - have been questioned as witnesses.

Mr Murat has not been formally named by police as their suspect.

The suspect has signed an identity and residence statement that prevents him from moving house or leaving Portugal.

Mr Murat may have been designated a suspect by police, or he could have chosen to take "arguido" status himself to gain additional protections under Portuguese law.

An arrest can be made once someone is a suspect, but only if there is sufficient evidence.

Mr Murat, a former property developer who has a four-year-old daughter, had become well known to journalists during the search for Madeleine.

Madeleine disappeared from her bedroom 13 days ago as her parents ate dinner at a nearby tapas restaurant.

Claudia79 wrote:

duncanmac wrote:

]quote="Claudia79"]Just to clarify something, the PJ can't arrest, put under surveillance or bug anyone's phone without permission. Sadly.

Thank You Claudia, I know have the answer to why there was no covert observations

You didn't know that?

No I did not know you have to have their permission to put them under surveillance, as I have said I am not familiar with Portuguese law.
Can you clarify for me then what you mean by the PJ are unable to arrest someone without their permission.
I am just trying to imagine the scenario.
PJ : " Mr & Mrs MaCann, you are both under arrest, can I have your permission"
GM: " No "
PJ: " Never mind then"

Does not surprise me, after all it looks like the PJ had to get their permission to do a reconstruction.
They said No and the PJ accepted it, who is controlling who ?

"Does not surprise me, after all it looks like the PJ had to get their permission to do a reconstruction.
They said No and the PJ accepted it, who is controlling who ?"

I would agree with you there duncanmac, apparently the PJ rented 5a for a year and should have requested a recon while the Mccanns were still in
Portugal. A child goes missing , no evidence of abduction, the Parents and their Friends timelines are cause for concern by the British Ambassador, yet
over a year goes by before the recon is requested.!!! Add to this the fact that Stuart Prior said "nothing would be served" in reply to Rachel Mapilly's
question and it appears the PJ were overwhelmed by the McCanns and their friends in high places.

duncanmac wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

duncanmac wrote:

]quote="Claudia79"]Just to clarify something, the PJ can't arrest, put under surveillance or bug anyone's phone without permission. Sadly.

Thank You Claudia, I know have the answer to why there was no covert observations

You didn't know that?

No I did not know you have to have their permission to put them under surveillance, as I have said I am not familiar with Portuguese law.
Can you clarify for me then what you mean by the PJ are unable to arrest someone without their permission.
I am just trying to imagine the scenario.
PJ : " Mr & Mrs MaCann, you are both under arrest, can I have your permission"
GM: " No "
PJ: " Never mind then"

Does not surprise me, after all it looks like the PJ had to get their permission to do a reconstruction.
They said No and the PJ accepted it, who is controlling who ?

Claudia doesn't say that the PJ are unable to arrest someone without their permission, she says that the PJ are unable to arrest someone without permission. I suggest she means that the PJ have to have permission from a higher authority, not the person the PJ want to arrest. That's the way I'm looking at it.

Regarding the McCanns refusing to do a construction, it's thanks to someone in a higher authority than the PJ and interference from the British Government, that the McCanns were able to refuse to take part in a construction and flout the terms of the arguido status.

Kathybelle says:

Claudia doesn't say that the PJ are unable to arrest someone without their permission, she says that the PJ are unable to arrest someone without permission. I suggest she means that the PJ have to have permission from a higher authority, not the person the PJ want to arrest. That's the way I'm looking at it.

So a PJ officer observes someone commiting a crime, but has to phone someone in authority before they can arrest them ?????

duncanmac wrote:Kathybelle says:

Claudia doesn't say that the PJ are unable to arrest someone without their permission, she says that the PJ are unable to arrest someone without permission. I suggest she means that the PJ have to have permission from a higher authority, not the person the PJ want to arrest. That's the way I'm looking at it.

So a PJ officer observes someone commiting a crime, but has to phone someone in authority before they can arrest them ?????

I think this relates to the PJ approaching a Judge to ask if there was enough evidence to go to Trial, the Judge said "show me the body". It would be
inconceivable that a Portugese Policeman could not arrest someone for breaking the Law.

I think GB has a lot of explaining to do, it has been reported he knew that Amaral was going
before Amaral did.

I think the British Gov lent on the Portuguese, told them who else may have been out there and needed protecting so they needed the whole affair hushed up. Perhaps exposing what may have gone on could also possibly implicate/connect to something going on in Portugal. They must have had something some leverage against Portugal to get them to get rid of Amaral, not insist on the reconstruction etc. Otherwise why didnt the Portuguese administration tell the British Government to get lost and stop interfering in its affairs.