the case passed back to portugal??

by scotland yard thats what im reading on twitter?????

Ordinisrubricrucis ‏@ordinisrubri 2h
A former Portuguese investigator in the Madeleine #McCann case has been brought in for questioning following Yard's review of files

AnnaEsse wrote:Ordinisrubricrucis ‏@ordinisrubri 2h
A former Portuguese investigator in the Madeleine #McCann case has been brought in for questioning following Yard's review of files

That person's Tweet's are to be taken with a large dose of salt...........

wantthetruth wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:Ordinisrubricrucis ‏@ordinisrubri 2h
A former Portuguese investigator in the Madeleine #McCann case has been brought in for questioning following Yard's review of files

That person's Tweet's are to be taken with a large dose of salt...........

Just been told on Twitter that that person's tweets are a load of rubbish!

AnnaEsse wrote:

wantthetruth wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:Ordinisrubricrucis ‏@ordinisrubri 2h
A former Portuguese investigator in the Madeleine #McCann case has been brought in for questioning following Yard's review of files

That person's Tweet's are to be taken with a large dose of salt...........

Just been told on Twitter that that person's tweets are a load of rubbish!

Rumours are it's a well known pro in another guise.

Anyway, it tweets are mostly pink crock

wantthetruth wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

wantthetruth wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:Ordinisrubricrucis ‏@ordinisrubri 2h
A former Portuguese investigator in the Madeleine #McCann case has been brought in for questioning following Yard's review of files

That person's Tweet's are to be taken with a large dose of salt...........

Just been told on Twitter that that person's tweets are a load of rubbish!

Rumours are it's a well known pro in another guise.

Anyway, it tweets are mostly pink crock

AnnaEsse wrote:Ordinisrubricrucis ‏@ordinisrubri 2h
A former Portuguese investigator in the Madeleine #McCann case has been brought in for questioning following Yard's review of files

Maybe they are questioning the former investigator as to why he knows more than THEM! (because he was actually at the 'scene'?)
Maybe the former investigator will point out a few 'inconsistancies' the experts at SY have, erm, um, er diliberately, MISSED in their review of the files!
Could be good!

Just a thought.

Now that GA and RM are private citizens could they 'team' up and bring possible defamation/libel cases against the McS and 'friends'?

As we know it's all in 'writing' NOW.

Glad you wrote those books now, Kate?

Wasn't it GA that said of KM book: ""A book that is written by someone who was a suspect may become of use as a document, maybe even a piece of documental evidence. Let us wait,"

After all, it is GA that has what the McS are so desparately after.................information!
______________________________________________________________________________
Note....................... to any journos that are reading this, you don't even have to get off your asses, to get this 'exclusive'
(just copy and paste)

The McCanns, who FAILED in their recent appeal to Portugal's Supreme Court to reimpose the ban, must now return all seized copies of the book, currently placed with their lawyer, Isabel Duarte, or risk INCURRING A CRIMINAL CHARGE OF DISOBEDIENCE.

"Legality has been re-established," said Goncalo Amaral. "The McCanns have JUST LOST ONE MORE judicial action that was PAID FOR WITH MONEY FROM A FUND that they say is for recovering their daughter.

"Both her and her husband were, and still are, more concerned with defending their image than in finding out what CAUSED the child's mysterious disappearance."

PRINT THAT, IF YOU VERY, VERY DARE!

I doubt there is anyone out there with the cojones to print the truth of this. puppets all of them. jimo.

Well, I know a former investigator who certainly wasn't being questioned as he was on live TV this morning until around 1 PM. Thinking about it, the show presenter asked him some questions, in fact.

oh Clauda well I hope he is well, thanks for that info.

He will have his day in court.

tanszi wrote:oh Clauda well I hope he is well, thanks for that info.

The last time I spoke to him, on the 17th, he was fine. And he looked pretty well this morning too.

kitti wrote:He will have his day in court.

And I for one can't wait

Anyone know the date for the trial, I believe it is sometime in September the last I heard, want to book some time off to follow it on this forum then celebrate the Macs being exposedfor what they are. Best of luck to Mr Amaral, I am sure he will have his day in court and all the British press can hang their heads in shame.

Do I take it that 'the case is being passed back to Portugal' is just a rumour?

It has always bothered me that one outcome of all this business could be that SY, having exhausted everything that was on their agenda (which likely didn't include a reconstruction) could pass the case back saying: 'We have followed up all the leads you didn't, and here are some distinct possibilities for further investigation... Whereas the Portuguese, being satisfied that they have done as much as they could without a reconstruction, believe 'leads' are not enough and that there is not enough hard evidence now available to go to court with, and stand a chance of getting a conviction. (That's what would happen over here if the Crown Prosecution Service didn't believe there was enough evidence for the police to get a conviction... however sure they were of what happened because of hard information they had that had been disallowed).

Is there any chance that phone records which were disallowed before could be now allowed into the case? Could SY request medical data on Madeleine? Could they eventually request bank and credit card data from TM and this not be felt to be 'too intrusive'... My mind boggles at this idea... 'too intrusive'... A child is missing, and possibly dead, and such esoteric niceties are observed! I think it is utterly shocking... scandalous...

comperedna wrote:Do I take it that 'the case is being passed back to Portugal' is just a rumour?

It has always bothered me that one outcome of all this business could be that SY, having exhausted everything that was on their agenda (which likely didn't include a reconstruction) could pass the case back saying: 'We have followed up all the leads you didn't, and here are some distinct possibilities for further investigation... Whereas the Portuguese, being satisfied that they have done as much as they could without a reconstruction, believe 'leads' are not enough and that there is not enough hard evidence now available to go to court with, and stand a chance of getting a conviction. (That's what would happen over here if the Crown Prosecution Service didn't believe there was enough evidence for the police to get a conviction... however sure they were of what happened because of hard information they had that had been disallowed).

Is there any chance that phone records which were disallowed before could be now allowed into the case? Could SY request medical data on Madeleine? Could they eventually request bank and credit card data from TM and this not be felt to be 'too intrusive'... My mind boggles at this idea... 'too intrusive'... A child is missing, and possibly dead, and such esoteric niceties are observed! I think it is utterly shocking... scandalous...

I am sure they could do all of these things without any problem at all comperedna. So why don't they??? that is the burning question.
The Portuguese will never re-open the case on what Scotland Yard are feeding them. They know who did it so what is the point of spending money on the stupid leads that have been sent from SY. If on the other hand SY came up with something that was incriminating against the people they know did it. Only then will they open the case. imo

Absolutely.The Portuguese know who done it,waste of time looking for anyone else.

Well I suppose the evidence against those new so called suspects isn't very convincing if it actually exists at all. I wonder what is going to happen. I thought earlier in the week the case might be re-opened but I think a bigger breakthrough than some vague stuff about cleaners in white vans is needed.

I am actually quite encouraged by the fact that nothing much seems to be happening. If they have anything of real value then they wouldn't be splashing it about all over the papers.

why should portugal reopen the case ? unless they have enough for a conviction of sorts why should they - yes the could look for as many swathy looking me woman and keep looking - but without talking about madeleines last movements - and establish when she went missing how she could have gone missing - who was the LAST person to see madeleine - and have the backing off sy that reinterviewing everyone is going to happen i wouldnt even think about reopening the case -- if i was portugal - i would make a statement saying robert murrat is prepared to be questioned and or others - we have put our cards on the table now lets see yours -

What was all that about then? All this breakthrough. Are we any the wiser. No. So was it spin or is something going to happen soon. Why don't they either tell us nothing or give a proper report. These half baked droplets of non=information are really more than annoying.

MaryB wrote:What was all that about then? All this breakthrough. Are we any the wiser. No. So was it spin or is something going to happen soon. Why don't they either tell us nothing or give a proper report. These half baked droplets of non=information are really more than annoying.

It looks like it was Hamish Campbells swansong, Mary, on the eve of his retirement. Nothing happening imo.

Yep. You are right fuzeta... and the rest who have written above. Right now I am back to 'as you were' and I think nothing will happen. :-( However, tomorrow is another day... then I may get back to refusing to believe the SY police would ignore great tranches of information and evidence from the Portuguese police files. Why would they? I don't believe in conspiracy theories, and all of this happened six years ago with other governments in power anyway. Mess ups, omissions, failures to do this or that, possibly, but no more in this case than in any other complex case. The red-top press over here have vilified the PJ totally unreasonably... pure populist xenophobia. Surely the Met are more likely to respect the work of overseas colleagues honestly attempting to do the same job as they are... and look at the findings particularly carefully.

cass wrote:why should portugal reopen the case ? unless they have enough for a conviction of sorts why should they - yes the could look for as many swathy looking me woman and keep looking - but without talking about madeleines last movements - and establish when she went missing how she could have gone missing - who was the LAST person to see madeleine - and have the backing off sy that reinterviewing everyone is going to happen i wouldnt even think about reopening the case -- if i was portugal - i would make a statement saying robert murrat is prepared to be questioned and or others - we have put our cards on the table now lets see yours -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-489404/Dont-say-theyve-turned-microphone-Gerry-warns-Kate-Spanish-TV.html

He described the last time he saw his daughter, SAYING: "I WAS THE LAST TO SEE HER. I saw her and thought how beautiful she was, and how lucky I was to be a father of three children."
AND I ALWAYS THOUGHT, dumbass thicko me, THAT IT WAS JANE TANNER WHO WAS THE LAST ONE TO SEE HER!
If Gerry is saying, well actually, he DID say, he WAS the LAST one to SEE Madeleine then who was the child Jane Tanner supposedly saw being carried away?
Obviously, it could NOT have been Madeleine!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRAW5hR1rNE
"around, er, the time that Madeleine, er, was found to be missing shortly before that there was a suspect, (er?) seen walking away from the apartment, er, with, (big intake of breath) erm, PROBABLY CARRYING A CHILD"
If it wasn't a CHILD, then what was it the 'suspect' was PROBABLY carrying?
_______________________________________________________________

He said the group of friends who were with them in Praia da Luz - the so-called Tapas Nine - knew they were not involved in the disappearance.
He added: "They know we are innocent, absolutely. They will help us. They will clear our names."

WHY do their group of friends KNOW/KNEW that they are innocent?
What PROOF have their friends got that they haven't yet told the world, to completely clear their friends, because they KNOW the McCanns are absolutely 'innocent'?

I'd want my friends to be shouting from the rooftops, at every opportunity, if ever i were accused of a crime i had absolutely nothing to do with!
And especially if i were to be suspected in covering up a possible childs death!

WHY haven't the McCanns 'friends' ever put their version of events to Lorraine, or others, which would, of course, totally exonerate the McCanns of ANY involvement in the disappearance of their daughter?
And why hasn't Lorraine, or others, ever 'invited' them to?
Now THAT is a question! LOL.
__________________________________________________________________
Asked if he had any regrets, he replied: "Not from the minute we found Madeleine gone."

So, NO regrets about leaving his THREE children, all under four years old, alone in an unlocked apartment, totally out of sight, (dispite aunty Phils valiant effort to lie about the McCanns 'having a clear line of sight of the children') in a foreign country, BEFORE Madeleine was gone.?
____________________________________________________________________

Gerry nearly stormed out of the television interview after being quizzed over drugging his children.
Sources said Mr McCann was "fuming" at being asked a question that the Spanish interviewer had promised not to pose. Mr McCann stormed out of a previous interview with another Spanish TV channel.
A source said today: "Kate and Gerry were annoyed towards the end of the interview because of the drugs question. Gerry was on the verge of another walkout."

ANOTHER walkout when an 'awkward' question was asked!

A source close to the McCanns insisted Gerry's warning to Kate followed a question about allegations they had drugged their daughter which the programme makers had been told they could not ask.

"a SOURCE'? It WAS Clarence Mitchell!
"a question about allegations..........the interviewer had been TOLD they could NOT ask"

NOW YOU KNOW WHY NO INTERVIEWERS, LORRAINE AND OTHER SYCHOPHANTS, HAVE EVER BEEN ALLOWED TO ASK THE MCCANNS, 'AWKWARD' QUESTIONS WHILE THEY MERRILY JUMP FROM STUDIO SOFA TO STUDIO SOFA, GRINNING EAR TO EAR!
BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD TO STICK TO THE SCRIPT/LIST OF PERMISSABLE QUESTIONS MR MITCHELL DICTATES!
Mitchell is always at these 'interviews' hiding just off camera.
Listen to what McCann says when Mitchell isn't there!
http://paulorebelononeglect.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/gerry-mccanns-confession-there-is-no.html
Gerry SAYS ' there's no evidence to implicate US in her (Madeleine) DEATH!'

The source said: "Kate was very upset she was asked the question and Gerry was furious. "What was said wasn't said because they have anything to hide."

IT WOULD APPEAR, TO DATE, THAT MITCHELL HAS TOLD THE SY REVIEW TEAM NOT TO ASK/POSE THE MCCANNS AND THEIR FRIENDS 'AWKWARD' QUESTIONS!
AND THE COMPLIANT, YELLOW BELLIED, SPINELESS, SY REVIEW TEAM HAVE OBEYED MITCHELL, TO THE LETTER!

WHY?

I don't believe that can possibly be true, jeanmonroe. Some two bit ex-reporter turned PR man, aka Clarence Mitchell, tells the police what to do? Why should they listen to him? The press listen to him because they have been stung for shedlods of money by Carter Ruck, the best and IMHO the most unscrupulous libel lawyers in the UK, and better make that the world, because UK has the appalling record of being the world capital of libel payouts.

All the people higher up the thread talking about the obvious things the police look at from the off when there is someone claiming that a child has been abducted... who saw the child last, and if this is the same person who is calling 'abduction', who was the last non-involved/non close family and independent person who saw the child, and where, and at what time? Indeed, establishing a timeline of events, and where people were during the crucial 'disappearance' period, is so basic to an investigation, is such an obvious priority that it hardly needs to be stated... but none of this is seems to be a priority for the SY. Until the basics have been established, looking for other leads in paperwork or elsewhere, seems downright perverse. Are we really sure they have not attempted to sort out the basics?