Is Anybody In Charge of Portugal?

[SleuthMom]

Is that how an investigation is carried out in Portugal - in the minds of PLE? Well, I guess that would save the expense of actually having to dig up facts. Add seeding the media with supposed information and the PLE can sit on their butts and think all day. Wonder if they can think up a cure for cancer?

An investigation is carried out by evidence, the evidence (so far) leads to the parents (cadaver dog scents, DNA, etc..basically they found things they were not supposed to find in the child's parent's car, clothes, bible, stuffed toy and even car keys) not someone taking Maddie in the middle of the night and taking her to Morocco.

 

[gord]

As I said because of the time the Mc Canns gave it makes it almost impossible.


There was at leasr a 25 minute window from 9,05 when Gerry checked and 9.30 when one of the Tapas went - then another 30 minutes after that


If I am not mistaken, Tanner did not disclose this information but days after the "alleged" abduction. Fishy. Second, another Tapas friend was almost at the same time in the same location and did not see anything or anybody. Does not sound right. Plus, think about Tanner and the Mc Canns for a minute...they are FRIENDS. IF what Tanner said is true and she saw Murrat taking Maddie (she identified him as the person, not sure if she backed off that statement though) wouldn't the Mc Canns be going nuts about investigating Murrat?? But no, they are searching for her in Morocco and other unusual places, it is just so odd.

I think Tanner told police that night - at that stage she would not even know who Murat was - just a description . Murat was first brought to the notice of the Police by a Sky Journalist



And absolutely no cameras, no staff, NO ONE saw anything??? Hmmm not sure, not sure. I don't think so.[


I dont know if there were any CCTV around the area - heck if there was it would have made the job of seeing Maddy being carried out by the Mccans ( if we go with your theory ) I will turn it back to you - noone saw anything of the Mccaans either - no-one saw anything of her being hidden nearbye - nothing no witnesses not even a sniff. At least Tanner saw something unless you think she is lying

/quote]

 

[SleuthMom]

Gord:

heck if there was it would have made the job of seeing Maddy being carried out by the Mccans ( if we go with your theory ) I will turn it back to you - noone saw anything of the Mccaans either - no-one saw anything of her being hidden nearbye - nothing no witnesses not even a sniff. At least Tanner saw something unless you think she is lying

We have cadaver dogs scent all over the Mc Cann's stuff (car, bible, car keys, clothes) We have some sort of "body fluid" from the car and hair which is being tested. And then we have a woman who says she saw someone, interesting enough did not tell the parents that night. I do not think her testimony holds at all.

Plus according to a poster (Irish) they had a FULL view of the room from where they were dining and they did not see anything?? Like I said, someone is lying through their teeth.

 

[gord]

Got to repeat this as I think my last post got mixed up

sleuthmom - you say it was very odd that there was no cameras, no witnesses , no staff sitings of anyone in a possible abduction - well except Tanner

Exactly the same thing can be said about the hiding of Maddy initialy - if we go with the theory of her being killed in the appt and then hidden

no witnesses , no sitings of anything no staff saw a suspicious act , no one saw Gerry or any of the Tapas carrying anything that could look like a body - strange dont you think

 

[gord]

Gord:

We have cadaver dogs scent all over the Mc Cann's stuff (car, bible, car keys, clothes) We have some sort of "body fluid" from the car and hair which is being tested. And then we have a woman who says she saw someone, interesting enough did not tell the parents that night. I do not think her testimony holds at all.

Plus according to a poster (Irish) they had a FULL view of the room from where they were dining and they did not see anything?? Like I said, someone is lying through their teeth.

they had a partial view of the area - not the room or inside . An abductor sneaks in at 9.07 immediatley after Gerry leaves - he picks up Maddy and then hands her out of the window ( opened from the inside ) to a waiting acomplise who then moves quickly to a waiting car and off . The other guy either sneaks back out the door or follows out the window

 

[IrishMist]

Gord:

We have cadaver dogs scent all over the Mc Cann's stuff (car, bible, car keys, clothes) We have some sort of "body fluid" from the car and hair which is being tested. And then we have a woman who says she saw someone, interesting enough did not tell the parents that night. I do not think her testimony holds at all.

Plus according to a poster (Irish) they had a FULL view of the room from where they were dining and they did not see anything?? Like I said, someone is lying through their teeth.

You have a quote where I said FULL view?

 

[Rino]

gord,
I know you asked someone else this question and I know there is a lot of contradictory stuff in the press, but all of us must choose what we want to believe and what we don't want to believe.

Exaclty. Even in the case of what the McCanns have said this holds true. If you can't believe everything they say - how can you beleive anything they say?

 

[IrishMist]

Exaclty. Even in the case of what the McCanns have said this holds true. If you can't believe everything they say - how can you beleive anything they say?

I don't know about anyone else, but I take what I read, look for other information that conflicts or agrees, weigh out in my mind what seems more reasonable, and that's what I go with.

So much of what is being held against the McCann's is hysterical and overblown, IMO, therefore much of what I hear from detractors loses credibility in my mind.

 

[CaliKid]

And then we have a woman who says she saw someone, interesting enough did not tell the parents that night. I do not think her testimony holds at all.

And don't forget that Jane Tanner has changed her testimony about the mysterious stranger many times. She is simply not credible.

1. A tall man she described as an "egg with hair" (because she only saw him from the back) carrying "something" in his arms.

2. A tall man in a jacket, tan pants and dark shoes carrying a blanket with something in it.

3. ... carrying a blanket with a child in it.

4. ... carrying a blanket with a child in pajamas in it.

5. Murat carrying a blanket with a child in pajamas in it.

6. Murat carrying a child in pajamas (no blanket).

Geez, like we're stupid or something.

 

[gord]

And don't forget that Jane Tanner has changed her testimony about the mysterious stranger many times. She is simply not credible.

1. A tall man she described as an "egg with hair" (because she only saw him from the back) carrying "something" in his arms.

2. A tall man in a jacket, tan pants and dark shoes carrying a blanket with something in it.

3. ... carrying a blanket with a child in it.

4. ... carrying a blanket with a child in pajamas in it.

5. Murat carrying a blanket with a child in pajamas in it.

6. Murat carrying a child in pajamas (no blanket).

Geez, like we're stupid or something.

so your saying she made it up out and out lie - or is it just a confusing night struggling to remember in the aftemath . We do not know excatly what she said to the police - all we know is she said she saw someone . Which is a hell of a lot more that anyone saw the maccans or the Tapas hiding/disposing of Madddeline .

if you think she is lying - we are back to the ccomspiracy theory that they are all in it. which is even more unlikely than any of the scenarios

 

[CaliKid]

I don't thing they are all in on it. I think Russell O'Brien, the doctor friend who was missing for at least part of the Tapas meal, is in on it. And Jane Tanner is his girlfriend, so if I'm right, she would have a reason to lie.

 

[PharmSleuth]

CaliKid,
Another description of the mysterious man by Jane Tanner:
[FONT=&quot]http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2005320001-2007420676,00.html
7.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] She later told police she saw a man walking away from the McCanns’ apartment with a small child over his shoulder under a blanket — but thought it was his kid


[/FONT]

 

[SleuthMom]

And don't forget that Jane Tanner has changed her testimony about the mysterious stranger many times. She is simply not credible.

1. A tall man she described as an "egg with hair" (because she only saw him from the back) carrying "something" in his arms.

2. A tall man in a jacket, tan pants and dark shoes carrying a blanket with something in it.

3. ... carrying a blanket with a child in it.

4. ... carrying a blanket with a child in pajamas in it.

5. Murat carrying a blanket with a child in pajamas in it.

6. Murat carrying a child in pajamas (no blanket).

Geez, like we're stupid or something.

:clap:

 

[Rino]

I don't know about anyone else, but I take what I read, look for other information that conflicts or agrees, weigh out in my mind what seems more reasonable, and that's what I go with.

So much of what is being held against the McCann's is hysterical and overblown, IMO, therefore much of what I hear from detractors loses credibility in my mind.

Gut feelings, I guess I can understand that.

We all read what is reported and compare. You admit you decide what works for you. I can only admit that if the truth is not evident, obvious and undisputable I don't know where the truth lies.

Short of repeating, again, all the inconsistancies in their own versions of events I don't need to rely on my "opinions" to decipher the truth, they have made that impossible.

 

[AquaEyes]

Oftentimes, detectives or investigators are removed from cases for various reasons. It seems to me that this Amaral fellow was being too publicly vocal and the PJ couldn't afford for that lack of restraint to jeopardize the case. Amaral wasn't the actual person collecting or analyzing the evidence.

The DNA is being handled through a very reputable laboratory. Anyone who follows in Amara's place will be required to review the same evidence and a determination will be made whether to charge anyone.

Of course, all of this is my opinion only, but it's my penny's worth...

 

[browneyedgirl]

Never said that never thought that. So why you would throw that at me I don't know.

I don't have, and never have had an objection to the McCanns being investigated. Its only right and proper that they are investigated and I have said that many times before.
I would just like to see this case investigated in a professional manner, which it so clearly hasn't been up to now. IMO
I also know it still might not happen...But I think there was zero chance with Amaral in charge...Only time will tell.

What we do know is they have had the very "suspect" Detective, the now sacked lead detective Amaral working on Madeleines case. Even though he himself has been charged with a serious crime involving the mother of another missing child.
Never mind all the admitted leaks to the press of wild rumours, inuendo and smears from the PLE.
Yes it does concern me. Absolutely!!

As I said any cop in the UK charged with a crime would have been suspended "on full pay" until his case was resolved.
Would a cop in the US be allowed to carry on working after being charged with a serious crime?[/quote]

Actually a case here in Ohio in June where a then current police officer, who now stands accused of murdering his GF and unbor daughter is a perfect point. Bobby Cutts, Jr was charged 5 years earlier with a weapons violation charge and he was put on suspension with pay while it was investigated. They found that the felony degree was not high enough and returned him to the force with full credits.
Makes one wonder how in the world can a criminal be hired and paid to serve and protect us.

 

[CaliKid]

CaliKid,
Another description of the mysterious man by Jane Tanner:
[FONT=&quot]http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2005320001-2007420676,00.html
7.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] She later told police she saw a man walking away from the McCanns’ apartment with a small child over his shoulder under a blanket — but thought it was his kid[/FONT]

Yes, I've read it. As many McCann supporters have said, the Sun is a rag.

 

[Bob&Bob]

I just wanted to say that this thread is supposed to
be about Portugal.

http://www.chivalricorders.org/royalty/fantasy/portugal-false.htm

 

[daffodil]

Yes, I've read it. As many McCann supporters have said, the Sun is a rag.

Its got nothing to do with being a McCann "supporter",the Sun IS a rag.

 

[Bob&Bob]

I think it might be time to close this thread.