British causes bad feeling in the Judicial Police www.mccannfiles.com

From the summary at the end of the Mark Harrison report,

Mark Harrison wrote:Overall Summary
This report has highlighted the extensive and professional efforts made by the Portuguese authorities regarding the search to locate Madeleine 'McCann alive. It has now begun to consider further possibilities to research locations in order to address the possibility that she has been murdered and concealed nearby. This would be a proportionate and appropriate response given the elapsed time since her disappearance and previous experience in such similar cases …

Seems clear to me that the decision to search locations to look for a dead Madeleine was one which Mark Harrison fully agreed with and actively supported, based on "his experience in such similar cases". That is why the Leicestershire Constabulary suggested he be brought in and the Portuguese authorities agreed to that course of action and to bringing in the dogs, because their "extensive and professional efforts regarding the search to locate Madeleine McCann alive" had unfortunately not led to Madeleine being located alive. There can be absolutely no question of Mark Harrison's remit being dictated to him by the Portuguese - according to Mark Harrison himself the search for a live Madeleine by the Portuguese had been extensive and professional and he indicates quite clearly that the search for a dead Madeleine was a proportionate and appropriate response at that stage.

Carolina wrote:

Palmeras16 wrote:A copy of Mark Harrison's witness statement can be found here http://www.mccannfiles.com/id293.html. It is patently obvious that he was given a very limited brief which solely considered the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered and her body concealed. He was not asked to consider abduction or any other scenario, and I quote from Mark Harrison's witness statement "other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report"

In my humble opinion, the official files are a better factual source than a book based on speculation, hunches, hypothesis or the never-been-wrong-before signals from the co-ordinators bunion.

I'm done with wading through molasses folks, enjoy the rest of the weekend.

His statement does not in any way mean that he was only given the scenario of death and concealment to follow. It means that if they want him to study any other possibilities he could if they so requested but it is obvious that his initial conclusion was that Maddie was dead and that the answer was in Praia da Luz. His conclusions were a shock to the Portuguese police because they were still hoping that they could find her alive.  Do you think that Mark Harrison just does "made to order" reports just to satisfy the "customer's" request?

I think that is a reasonable assessment, but I would say it is unclear. I think it is fair to say that the statements are the better source of fact.

Carolina wrote:BTW, I've had enough of your insulting GA and his book was in no way based on hunches and speculation. I suggest that you read the "acordão" from the court ruling overturning the book ban, it would be eye opening for you. It amuses me how you grasp as straws to justify your trashing of the investigation and the results.

I would not say Palmeras16 was insulting the book. It is clear the book will be a certain amount of speculation, and if there is a difference between something in the book and a statement, that the statement is the better source.

I believe GA is doing the right thing, that the book was and is important, but the conclusion of what happened was of course based on an amount of speculation. Personally, I do not agree 100% with the conclusion. I believe there was more to it than just an accident that evening.

DavidA wrote:

Carolina wrote:

Palmeras16 wrote:A copy of Mark Harrison's witness statement can be found here http://www.mccannfiles.com/id293.html. It is patently obvious that he was given a very limited brief which solely considered the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered and her body concealed. He was not asked to consider abduction or any other scenario, and I quote from Mark Harrison's witness statement "other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report"

In my humble opinion, the official files are a better factual source than a book based on speculation, hunches, hypothesis or the never-been-wrong-before signals from the co-ordinators bunion.

I'm done with wading through molasses folks, enjoy the rest of the weekend.

His statement does not in any way mean that he was only given the scenario of death and concealment to follow. It means that if they want him to study any other possibilities he could if they so requested but it is obvious that his initial conclusion was that Maddie was dead and that the answer was in Praia da Luz. His conclusions were a shock to the Portuguese police because they were still hoping that they could find her alive.  Do you think that Mark Harrison just does "made to order" reports just to satisfy the "customer's" request?

I think that is a reasonable assessment, but I would say it is unclear. I think it is fair to say that the statements are the better source of fact.

Carolina wrote:BTW, I've had enough of your insulting GA and his book was in no way based on hunches and speculation. I suggest that you read the "acordão" from the court ruling overturning the book ban, it would be eye opening for you. It amuses me how you grasp as straws to justify your trashing of the investigation and the results.

I would not say Palmeras16 was insulting the book. It is clear the book will be a certain amount of speculation, and if there is a difference between something in the book and a statement, that the statement is the better source.

I believe GA is doing the right thing, that the book was and is important, but the conclusion of what happened was of course based on an amount of speculation. Personally, I do not agree 100% with the conclusion. I believe there was more to it than just an accident that evening.

The conclusion presented by GA was in no way whatsoever based on speculation as you say. He presented the conclusions of the investigation in his book, not just his own opinion. I suggest that you read the judges' ruling when the book ban was overturned where they confirmed that the conclusions presented in the book were entirely based and confirmed by the police files.

I thought a lot of police work was based on 'hunches'. A feeling of what the real truth was and they might have no concrete evidence. But then with careful policing which takes years in some cases the evidence is found and a prosecution made.

MaryB wrote:I thought a lot of police work was based on 'hunches'.  A feeling of what the real truth was and they might have no concrete evidence.  But then with careful policing which takes years in some cases the evidence is found and a prosecution made.  

Hi Mary

If your theory is true, does this mean that the former Portuguese Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, had no evidence before him, which lead to his conclusion that the McCanns covered up the cadaver scent and they and their friends lied from day one? In other words did Mr Almeida's conclusion, only contain his hunches?

Mr Almeida, sent his report, which can be read in the link below and which contained his conclusions, to the Coordinator of the Criminal Investigator.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

If Mr Almeida's conclusion was based on his hunches, I feel the McCanns would have sued the backside off him. This hasn't happened, they have never even tried to dispute Mr Almeida's conclusions, even though his conclusions are available for everyone to read in the PJ files. They have however, tried and failed to ban Goncalo Amaral's book, 'The Truth of the Lie' stating that Mr Amaral's book, contained his own theories about the case. The Judge knew this wasn't the case, he knew that Mr Amaral, stated facts from the PJ files and that is why he threw out the McCanns case.

In my opinion, the only reason why the McCanns are walking free, is because of intervention by the British Government. In my opinion, the only chance Scotland Yard will have of pinning Madeleine's disappearance on anyone, but the McCanns, is if they reach a conclusion, that Madeleine was taken by person/s unknown, or they pin her disappearance, on the two dead paedophiles, who were already found to have no connection with Madeleine's disappearance.

I may be wrong, but if this happens, I don't think the PJ will dispute what Scotland Yard state in their conclusion, I think they will just be glad to see the back of this case.

I think experienced policemen do develop 'intuition' which might lead them in a certain direction or to suspect certain people. This is what I mean by hunches. Of course they might not be right but they don't usually ignore them. That's what I've seen on TV programmes and such. And sometimes there are indications but the indications might not be evidence as such.

Carolina wrote:

DavidA wrote:

Carolina wrote:

Palmeras16 wrote:A copy of Mark Harrison's witness statement can be found here http://www.mccannfiles.com/id293.html. It is patently obvious that he was given a very limited brief which solely considered the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered and her body concealed. He was not asked to consider abduction or any other scenario, and I quote from Mark Harrison's witness statement "other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report"

In my humble opinion, the official files are a better factual source than a book based on speculation, hunches, hypothesis or the never-been-wrong-before signals from the co-ordinators bunion.

I'm done with wading through molasses folks, enjoy the rest of the weekend.

His statement does not in any way mean that he was only given the scenario of death and concealment to follow. It means that if they want him to study any other possibilities he could if they so requested but it is obvious that his initial conclusion was that Maddie was dead and that the answer was in Praia da Luz. His conclusions were a shock to the Portuguese police because they were still hoping that they could find her alive.  Do you think that Mark Harrison just does "made to order" reports just to satisfy the "customer's" request?

I think that is a reasonable assessment, but I would say it is unclear. I think it is fair to say that the statements are the better source of fact.

Carolina wrote:BTW, I've had enough of your insulting GA and his book was in no way based on hunches and speculation. I suggest that you read the "acordão" from the court ruling overturning the book ban, it would be eye opening for you. It amuses me how you grasp as straws to justify your trashing of the investigation and the results.

I would not say Palmeras16 was insulting the book. It is clear the book will be a certain amount of speculation, and if there is a difference between something in the book and a statement, that the statement is the better source.

I believe GA is doing the right thing, that the book was and is important, but the conclusion of what happened was of course based on an amount of speculation. Personally, I do not agree 100% with the conclusion. I believe there was more to it than just an accident that evening.

The conclusion presented by GA was in no way whatsoever based on speculation as you say. He presented the conclusions of the investigation in his book, not just his own opinion. I suggest that you read the judges' ruling when the book ban was overturned where they confirmed that the conclusions presented in the book were entirely based and confirmed by the police files.

Of course, and I agree with you here. I was not meaning to suggest that the book was not based on the evidence. There was more than enough for the conclusion reached that Madeleine was not abducted. However, I would say that aspects of it, as with all investigations, were speculation. If that was not the case then the McCanns would be in jail.

I believe there is also evidence that things were not right before tapas night, and to me this suggests that it was not only an accident on that one night. I am also speculating of course, but also based on some evidence.

Therefore I do not think it is wrong to question some of GA's conclusions.

DavidA: Which conclusions do you question then?

Carolina wrote:DavidA: Which conclusions do you question then?

Good question.

I think the conclusions do use the evidence and also certain assumptions / speculation based both on evidence and logic, which lead to conclusions with the result which is an accident on tapas night. But I think there is also logic and evidence that could question these conclusions.

What I question is:

1) that the event occurred on tapas night

2) that it was an accident due to neglect

3) that the McCanns, once discovering this accident could build such a story, including friends, in the time they had

4) that the friends were so willing to go along with the story, unless there was more to this, and how that could lead to much deeper investigation.

As well as other evidence, I do not think the conclusions take account of the strange aspects that the friends were not surprised by Gerry's very odd outburst in front of his family on the airport bus, and the lack of photos of Madeleine during the holiday and especially the final day, or Kate placing too much focus on tapas day (for example, being Madeleine's 'best day ever').

Palmeras - In my humble opinion, the official files are a better factual source than a book based on speculation, hunches, hypothesis or the never-been-wrong-before signals from the co-ordinators bunion.
 
 
Cant get much more insulting than that I would have thought!
 
 
Kathybelle -  If Mr Almeida's conclusion was based on his hunches, I feel the McCanns would have sued the backside off him. This hasn't happened, they have never even tried to dispute Mr Almeida's conclusions, even though his conclusions are available for everyone to read in the PJ files. They have however, tried and failed to ban Goncalo Amaral's book, 'The Truth of the Lie' stating that Mr Amaral's book, contained his own theories about the case. The Judge knew this wasn't the case, he knew that Mr Amaral, stated facts from the PJ files and that is why he threw out the McCanns case.
 

cherry1 wrote:Kathybelle -  If Mr Almeida's conclusion was based on his hunches, I feel the McCanns would have sued the backside off him. This hasn't happened, they have never even tried to dispute Mr Almeida's conclusions, even though his conclusions are available for everyone to read in the PJ files. They have however, tried and failed to ban Goncalo Amaral's book, 'The Truth of the Lie' stating that Mr Amaral's book, contained his own theories about the case. The Judge knew this wasn't the case, he knew that Mr Amaral, stated facts from the PJ files and that is why he threw out the McCanns case.
 

Yes, I think this is a good point also. I would be interested to know what others such as the UK police think of these elements. Are they simply told to ignore them, because it seems odd that with such an investigation, all parts are not considered.

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

cherry1 wrote:

Palmeras16 wrote:

comperedna wrote:I can think of a simple sad solution, but it would involve Blair thinking that the PJ were totally incompetent, and Portugal was trying to fit the McCanns up

... and there we have it folks, the simple explanation to all those niggling questions...

 
 
British Police were working with PJ, so that means the British Police must have been involved in the fit up too!!

(If you think the Mccanns were fitted up Palmeras)

And it was the Brit Mark Harrison who suggested bringing in the dogs and who told the PJ they should be looking for a body.

Yeah, but I bet they had Portuguese girlfriends. Or they holiday here. Or like sardines. One of the three.

Or regularly has coffee at a Pastelaria Portuguesa. Those little custard tarts can affect the mind you know!

They certainly do! Nasty little custards of hell!

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

cherry1 wrote:

Palmeras16 wrote:

comperedna wrote:I can think of a simple sad solution, but it would involve Blair thinking that the PJ were totally incompetent, and Portugal was trying to fit the McCanns up

... and there we have it folks, the simple explanation to all those niggling questions...

 
 
British Police were working with PJ, so that means the British Police must have been involved in the fit up too!!

(If you think the Mccanns were fitted up Palmeras)

And it was the Brit Mark Harrison who suggested bringing in the dogs and who told the PJ they should be looking for a body.

Yeah, but I bet they had Portuguese girlfriends. Or they holiday here. Or like sardines. One of the three.

Or regularly has coffee at a Pastelaria Portuguesa. Those little custard tarts can affect the mind you know!

They certainly do! Nasty little custards of hell!

I agree! You have one and you are forced to take some home with you and then the whole family is affected!  

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

cherry1 wrote:

Palmeras16 wrote:

comperedna wrote:I can think of a simple sad solution, but it would involve Blair thinking that the PJ were totally incompetent, and Portugal was trying to fit the McCanns up

... and there we have it folks, the simple explanation to all those niggling questions...

 
 
British Police were working with PJ, so that means the British Police must have been involved in the fit up too!!

(If you think the Mccanns were fitted up Palmeras)

And it was the Brit Mark Harrison who suggested bringing in the dogs and who told the PJ they should be looking for a body.

Yeah, but I bet they had Portuguese girlfriends. Or they holiday here. Or like sardines. One of the three.

Or regularly has coffee at a Pastelaria Portuguesa. Those little custard tarts can affect the mind you know!

They certainly do! Nasty little custards of hell!

I agree! You have one and you are forced to take some home with you and then the whole family is affected!  

Before you know it, the whole neighbourhood is tainted...

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

cherry1 wrote: 
 
British Police were working with PJ, so that means the British Police must have been involved in the fit up too!!

(If you think the Mccanns were fitted up Palmeras)

And it was the Brit Mark Harrison who suggested bringing in the dogs and who told the PJ they should be looking for a body.

Yeah, but I bet they had Portuguese girlfriends. Or they holiday here. Or like sardines. One of the three.

Or regularly has coffee at a Pastelaria Portuguesa. Those little custard tarts can affect the mind you know!

They certainly do! Nasty little custards of hell!

You do, of course, have to have several large glasses of Vinho Verde with them in order to get the full nutritional value from all the eggs that were used.

Not much longer to wait, I believe, until we hear officially that Goncalo Amaral has had his out of court settlement offer accepted by the McCanns.

Palmeras16 wrote:Not much longer to wait, I believe, until we hear officially that Goncalo Amaral has had his out of court settlement offer accepted by the McCanns.

I don't know why he'd want to settle when the highest court in Portugal decided that the McCanns' rights had not been infringed.

Palmeras16 wrote:Not much longer to wait, I believe, until we hear officially that Goncalo Amaral has had his out of court settlement offer accepted by the McCanns.

Just seen the same rumour from ordinisrubri on Twitter.
Yeah right, and I'm the Queen of Sheba ......

If it is true it will mean he has been emotionally exhausted by the whole shebang and has had enough!

The waiting (to hear about the out of court settlement) is agonising!

The gruesome twosome do so relish those out of court settlements, and it would certainly warm the cockles of their hearts if true.  Yes indeed, history has shown the child neglecting pair's unbridled greed is second to none.

Palmeras16 wrote:Not much longer to wait, I believe, until we hear officially that Goncalo Amaral has had his out of court settlement offer accepted by the McCanns.

You will look a bit silly if the rumours are true.

Palmeras16 wrote:Not much longer to wait, I believe, until we hear officially that Goncalo Amaral has had his out of court settlement offer accepted by the McCanns.

 No chance, NEVER!

and even if it was to be settled out of court, it will be Mr Amaral excepting the McCanns offer of  settlement....it's the Mcs that are bricking it now 

pennylane wrote:The gruesome twosome do so relish those out of court settlements, and it would certainly warm the cockles of their hearts if true.  Yes indeed, history has shown the child neglecting pair's unbridled greed is second to none.

 Yes pennylane they can only dream that Mr A would except an out of court settlement! They're not running the show any longer, and boy aren't they going to be suffering, waiting for this case to start.
By the way they don't have hearts pennylane, they have a swinging brick:haha:

Palmeras16 wrote:Not much longer to wait, I believe, until we hear officially that Goncalo Amaral has had his out of court settlement offer accepted by the McCanns.

"Don't believe everything you read on the Internet" - Abraham Lincoln.