Case Files discussions

I now realise why they never requested the re-opening of the case within the time period, the extended time period they were granted! I now realise why they still do not request that the case of their child they claim was abducted be re-opened. I now realise why they the parents of a mysteriously disappeared child they claim was abducted are happy to have her archived file sitting on a shelf gathering dust! I now realise why they are happy not to have the right people looking for their missing child because the right people looking for the missing child will at the same time be investigating their child's disappearance! It seems they do not want an investiagation just people to send them money so they can control the non search and have non news farcical worldwide press/media coverage with the addition of an exclusive right to the UK press/media to peddle their propaganda! Propaganda such as, no law enforcement agency is actively looking for their child they claim has been abducted and how frustrating that is! I now realise that my thoughts and suspicions when I heard about this child on the 4.5.07 and everything else I have seen and heard from the behaviour and the mouths of these two people who were duty bound to protect all 3 of their children are the right train of thought and feelings. I now realise that everything they have done and said since they opened their mouths on the 3.5.07 will be what gets them in the end. If this case is re-opened based on fresh evidence imo they do not have a leg to stand on! Every piece of footage will go against them and it is so sad that a little 3- year-old child who was left with her even younger siblings has no legal rights and her voice is trying to be stifled by those who failed in their duty to protect her in the first place! Imo this also should have been on the leaflet that was distributed recently in Rotley the words in that report that are part of the official investigation on there own are very powerful! These are words that can be proven to exist! I think the McC's thought that when their Arguido/a status was lifted that the case file would be handed to them and they would decide what the world would and would not know. Fortunately that did not happen! I wonder when SP went to Portugal to request that certain documentation not be available in the public domain just exactly what it was he was requesting. The same SP who phoned the PJ about GA and the comments being made about DP! Hmm it really is a pity that the poor mother with the disabled child who sadly took her life and her child's life did not get the same special treatment from the Police.

I hope Stevo puts this report on his website!

viv wrote:I do not understand all the indignation on this thread as though this report can be transformed into the facts, or indeed the suggestion it would seem that people have not seen this report before,

“Concerning the other indicated crimes [abduction, homicide, concealment of a cadaver], they are only that, and although the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, due to its high degree of probability, it has to remain a supposition due to a lack of sustaining elements in the files.”

Exactly how does this state, as a fact, the McCanns are responsible for the death of Madeleine? These are working hypotheses, including, it will be seen, abduction! It has to remain a supposition due to a lack of sustaining elements in the files. That means it cannot be put any higher than than that due to a lack of evidence on the files to sustain that conclusion.

This is the careful analysis of one officer in the case, it is not the final analysis of senior prosecutors who analysed all the evidence. YOu cannot prosecute someone on the basis of a police officer's working hypotheses for the purposes of conducting a thorough investigation looking at all the possibilities as to how they got rid of Madeleine. It is not the job of the PJ to make conclusions on the evidence and decide on charges, I am sure Claudia will tell you that and indeed it is exactly the same in UK. Many police officers get frustrated, they think great I have got them, but when the Crown Prosecution Service have a look they are dismayed to be told, no, they would not secure a conviction, you need to get more evidence confirming precisely what they did with Madleine. Other than possibly Gerry being seen carting her off, there is no evidence of what they did with her. I thnk that was him, but I accept a court would say that as Mr Smith is the only person who says he thinks it was Gerry and he is only about 70 0r 80 (I cannot remember) per cent certain it was him, that would not be enough and he, Mr Smith believes Maddie was alive but deeply asleep, do you not see the problem? This would not provide a conviction for homicide or abduction.

I understand your point Viv, but is this report in the PJ files or not? Are all the working hypotheses in the files?

Jean-Luc wrote:Is the FINAL public prosecutor's evidence published and available somewhere? May I ask to be pointed in the right direction. Thank you.

Hi Jean-Luc

I don't think the whole report has been translated yet but the sections which have can be read here


http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/07/archiving-of-madeleine-mccann-process.html#ixzz0MpQ5JxGj

PJ Final Report
Processos Volume XVII, p. 4526 to 4583

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post324.html#p324

Christine, I think this particular report is important because it is the one that caused the McCanns to be made Arguidos at that point in time. Being made arguido is similar in UK to being arrested. In UK in order to arrest for a serious offence the police have to have no more than a "reasonable suspicion" the person has committed that offence and the purpose of the arrest is to interview them under caution (respecting their right to silence and the presence of a lawyer) to try and gain "further evidence". It is obviously hoped the person will make damaging admissions or fail to properly explain the evidence put to them.

I think that when the further forensic evidence came to light after this point in time it clearly did not corroborate the markings of the dogs and so the case was going no-where. As we know, Rebelo took over and continued to investigate it for a further ten months and where it was made plain he was looking at all options including abduction. Given he maintained the McCanns as the prime suspects throughout that process it seems logical to me he was looking at them as the culprits also for the offence of abduction.

If the PJ were satisfied at the end of this process there was no stranger abduction then it would be felt there was no point them continuing to investigate this because UK have jurisdiction in relation to crimes committed by the McCanns. The only way the Portuguese would prosecute this case is if it was felt a stranger abducted Madeleine, hence we hear Gerry saying he wants them to re-open the case! We are not allowed to see the working hypotheses of UK POlice because they are always confidential. Neither have we been allowed to see the working hypotheses of Rebelo. The inquiry has clearly moved on a lot from the above report and I do not think it is particularly helpful to dwell on it because it was clearly found there was a complete lack of evidence to prosecute the McCanns for the homicide of Madeleine. Whilst I think they were involved in her disappearance I do not believe that is what happened and that is where the case has moved onto and it is confidential. The McCanns went to the High Court to demand the files of UK agencies and found that Madeleine was made a Ward of Court and they were told no way and humiliatingly had to back down. I am sure they would love to know what the police currently have on them, because they have always been in the business of trying to prevent the evidence reaching a stage where they can be arrested.

hiya viv re your above post, i know little of the uk laws and workings, yet i understood that it was the McCanns that asked for Madeleine to be made a ward of court, not that they found that out when they went to UK agencies for information. perhaps i have misunderstood your post.

Kazlux wrote:PJ Final Report
Processos Volume XVII, p. 4526 to 4583

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post324.html#p324

Thank-you Kazlux I thought Jean_Luc was asking for the report of the Attorney General where the reasons were given for the case being shelved despite the report by the PJ.

tanszi wrote:hiya viv re your above post, i know little of the uk laws and workings, yet i understood that it was the McCanns that asked for Madeleine to be made a ward of court, not that they found that out when they went to UK agencies for information. perhaps i have misunderstood your post.

The McCanns originally made applications to the British High Court under the Child Abduction and Custody Act, simply providing that were she to be found in a foreign jurisdiction the McCanns had the legal right to her return to their custody. That was on about 17 May 2007. Madeleine was not made a Ward of Court either of the court's own motion or on the application of the McCanns at that stage. Being a Ward takes the right of custody away from the McCanns i.e. quite the opposite to what they applied for, it means the Judge decides what happens to Madeleine and the McCanns certainly do not have the automatic right to her return to their care.

In April 2008 the McCanns made a further application to the High Court stating that the Chief Constable of Leicester Police and other British Agencies were ignoring the Order Mrs Justice Hogg had made the previous year, that they should provide information to the McCanns about the whereabouts of Madeleine and therefore they wanted to enforce the terms of that Order against them and force them to comply. This was at the same time as the PJ investigation was continuing against them but they knew it was likely to be brought to a close, I would say because they could not find any evidence to back the McCanns claim that she was taken by any stranger. Therefore what the British Police were up to became a major concern to the McCanns because if they killed Madeleine or had her kidnapped British Police can and most certainly will prosecute them for that, no matter it happened in Portugal. The McCanns would have known they could have the PJ file but they wanted the British files also, but our law does not allow that.

On the same date the McCanns made this application to enforce in April 2008 Mrs Justice Hogg says she made Madeleine a Ward of Court. Mrs Justice Hogg went on in July 2008 to reverse her earlier order making it plain that Kate and Gerry were not allowed to have any information from British Agency files. British Police were entitled to continue to investigate them and in accordance with normal procedure criminal suspects are not allowed to have details of the police investigation against them.

Yes I would second that, thanks Kazlux. In that final report it says crime "unknown" and it flags up the discrepancies in the witness evidence of the main parties concerned and how they refused to attend a reconstruction in spite of pressure that was brought to bear by the authorities.

That is really pretty terminal for Team McCann, they refused to go along and act out all of the contradictory lies they had told! That is a fact and it is not libel to say so!

justagrannynow wrote:

Kazlux wrote:PJ Final Report
Processos Volume XVII, p. 4526 to 4583

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post324.html#p324

Thank-you Kazlux

Thank you both very much I appreciate it, I know from previous posts and lurking on the Mirror forum/3Arguidos that some people are reluctant to give info saying one must look for oneself. This forum is so very helpful, even LA is becoming polite Although I sense his underlying frustration and respect his investigative work to try and go forward with this case. Frustrating for everyone who feels that this tiny sweet child has had somewhere, somehow an injustice put on her.

Yes, there are some remarkable turnarounds. A few weeks back Laffin and I were agreeing with each other, slapping each other on the back and getting on pretty good. But I fear laffin is now back to business as usual with me

viv wrote:Yes, there are some remarkable turnarounds. A few weeks back Laffin and I were agreeing with each other, slapping each other on the back and getting on pretty good. But I fear laffin is now back to business as usual with me

This is good somehow viv that we should have a sense of humour At least we know that in spite of the different opinions of what exactly happened that we are pulling together. Please continue because I respect all who give time and have knowledge of legal issues to brainstorm. JE T'ENCOURAGE

JL

Thanks Jean

Legal knowledge and a good sense of humour are two of my strong points. Laffin feels that one of my major failings is being so logical

justagrannynow wrote:Thank-you Kazlux I thought Jean_Luc was asking for the report of the Attorney General where the reasons were given for the case being shelved despite the report by the PJ.

ah okay, you mean the Archiving dispatch - "Legal summary"

Processo Volume XVII - Pages 4592-4649

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post8683.html#p8683

Going off topic a bit,did anyone ever read in an article that was posted on the mirror forum that tavares was in a car crash and was badly injured,cant remember what newspaper it was in, was a portuguese one though.

Several hundred people were heard, formally and informally, whose hearing was anticipated as being of interest for the clarification of the matter, thousands of pieces of information and suggestions were analysed, and tens of sightings and locations that seemed plausible were checked. Telephone interceptions were performed and the traffic data from thousands of telephone conversations was analysed and crossed, and many thousands of diligences of the most diverse nature were developed;

- The obliging cooperation and commitment of Police forces from many Countries, with a very special mention for the British police entities, was counted upon;

- Tests and analyses were performed in two of the most prestigious and credentialed institutions for this effect – the National Institute for Legal Medicine and the British lab Forensic Science Service -, whose final results did not positively value the collected residues, or corroborated the canine markings;

- Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.

But therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann – apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment – or to hold anyone responsible over its authorship.

Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:

a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.


Finally, it should be noted that an archiving decision may be a fair decision, although of the possible justice, and, especially, to underline heavily that the archiving of the present files does not equal a definite and irreversible closing of the process. This process, as long as the prescription deadline for the possibly committed crimes does reach its term, and if new evidence that justifies it, appears, can always be reopened, officiously or through the request of an assistant, again ordinate to a final decision of accusation or non accusation.

So now I understand why the McCanns are so confident. What I still find unbelievable is the fact that they were free to leave the country so many months before on the basis of the intermiediate report which is quite damming. Therefore I can only conclude (and I'm sure allot of you here have already come to this conclusion) that there are higher forces at work here.

I do not know what happened to this little girl. But all my instincts are SCREAMING that the couple McCann are not being honest.

I couldn't agree with you more, but the word 'honest' and 'McCann' shouldn't be used together in one sentence I think.

Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.

So basically confirmation that he believes that she is dead.

Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:

a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.

Finally, it should be noted that an archiving decision may be a fair decision, although of the possible justice, and, especially, to underline heavily that the archiving of the present files does not equal a definite and irreversible closing of the process.

So therefore, the decision to archive arguido status is reversible, just as the case is.

Explains the sad faces at the Rothley press conference after the decision was made.

I just wish someone would come up with something to reopen the case. If the archived file is sprung back into action, are the arguido statuses automatically enforced again?

Sometimes things can be put more simply, if a four year old child has been missing for a long time, she is more than likely dead unless she developed remarkable bush skills of course.

The Arguido status is automatically reinstated if the case is reopened because they were never actually cleared of any involvement when the case was shelved .

I did not want to start a new thread but did find an article (Telegraph).
BÄH!
The McCanns were - in any case - keeping an eye on them???
Here we can read what the McCanns state nowadays. Nothing archieved, the detectives inability and and and...


Madeleine McCann files: Portuguese prosecutors criticise police
Portuguese prosecutors have fiercely criticised the country's police for failing to uncover any clues over Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
Detectives' inability even to establish whether the toddler is alive or dead epitomised the inquiry's shortcomings, said public prosecutors Jose de Magalhaes and Joao Melchior Gomes.
The case against Kate and Gerry McCann, both 40, was dropped last month after it was decided that there was insufficient evidence against the couple.
But details of the 58 page report explaining reasons for shelving the case were only released yesterday.
"The investigators are well aware that their work is not exempt from imperfections," the prosecutors said.
"They worked with an enormous margin of error and they achieved very little in terms of conclusive results, especially with regards to the fate of the unfortunate child."
They went on to say that the disappearance of Madeleine was not a plot from a book, but a serious crime.
"This is not, unfortunately, a police story, a crime fit for the investigative mind of a Sherlock Holmes or a Hercule Poirot, guided by the illusion that the forces of law and justice always restore order."
The prosecutors said despite the huge manhunt and inquiry, little had been achieved.
"No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances (of Madeleine's disappearance). "Including, and most dramatically, establishing whether she is alive or dead, which seems more probable."
Mr Magalhaes defended the McCanns' decision to leave their children alone in the apartment on the night Madeleine vanished.
There was speculation that the couple, from Rothley in Leicestershire, may have ben charged with "abandonment", which can incur a prison sentence of up to 10 years. But Mr Magalhaes said Mr and Mrs McCann did not believe their children were in any danger when they left Madeleine and her younger twin siblings. "It is obvious that neither of the defendants, Gerald or Kate, acted with intent," they said.
"They could not predict that the resort where they had chosen to spend a few days holiday would leave the lives of any of their children in danger. "It was located in a quiet place, where the majority of residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of crime. "Although they left their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment, sometimes for extended periods, it is true that, in any case, they were keeping an eye on them."
Both prosecutors went on to say that they felt the parents had suffered enough.
"We must also recognise that the parents are already paying a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - for their carelessness in monitoring and protecting their children.
"It seems obvious to us that the crimes of exposure or abandonment can be eliminated."
Mr Magalhaes said all the theories – including the possibility that the couple had accidentally killed their daughter and disposed of her body – had come to nothing.
He concluded:"While it is a fact that Madeleine disappeared from the Ocean Club apartment, the circumstances and manner of how this happened is not known."

Re the above report .Amazing what can be achieved and how much money can be fraudulently obtained by expressing things out of context !

Humatic ,The Mccanns can talk the talk but they have prooved they can't walk the walk !

Humatic wrote:

viv wrote: The only way the Portuguese would prosecute this case is if it was felt a stranger abducted Madeleine, hence we hear Gerry saying he wants them to re-open the case!

enigma wrote:The Arguido status is automatically reinstated if the case is reopened because they were never actually cleared of any involvement when the case was shelved .

Confusing....McCanns wants them to re-open the case, even if that includes becoming Arguido's again???
I don't understand?

Where was it said that the McCanns wanted the case to be re-opened? They avoided the answer to that question very nicely when asked in Lisbon.

viv wrote:Sometimes things can be put more simply, if a four year old child has been missing for a long time, she is more than likely dead unless she developed remarkable bush skills of course.

Try telling that to Mr Mc as there apparently is nothing in the files to say she has come to any serious harm.

Even the Prosecutor indicates his thoughts that she's deceased.

Humatic, the McCanns don't want the case open - they had the chance, but chose to allow the case to stay on the shelf.