UK LE request permission to interview 3 suspected burglars!?!

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
brit1981 said:
As for Jedi's post about amarals book, the links are not to the actual court documents but to a website which contains an amateur translation of information given on a blog by a staunch amaral supporter. It is also not from the supreme court which made the ultimate decision.
Click to expand...

WOW !!
" which contains an amateur translation "

So now you are an expert regarding translations !!

That 'blog' clearly states it is a TRANSLATION of 'OFFICIAL APPEALS COURT DECISION

That BLOGGER is also McCannfiles.com, therefore are you saying that we should also disregard all her 'amateur translations' on there ??

You do realise she IS PORTUGUESE ?
And is probably the most credible site for FACTUAL INFORMATION on this case.

Links to the original documents are all on there.

*I posted 2 links by the way

As ORIGINAL documents are in Portuguese I assumed that the rest of us here weren't fluent speakers or readers of the language therefore it wouldn't be very helpful ( unless you feel Google Translation would be more accurate ?!! )

But here you go.......

https://www.google.com/webhp?tab=ww&ei=TsXhUsHJJuiK7AbawYAo&ved=0CBQQ1S4
 
Now the translators are crap too?

What annoys me the most is that there is never any new input or discussion.

The LORs were sent by the CPS so instead of discussion of this new information and what it may mean (IMO arrest is imminent).

No, we just launch into the same old dogs/DNA/amaral sledging.

And now include the translators too.

Yes it is all explained by the wild incompetence demonstrated by every single professional attached to the investigation/s, apart from Team McCann of course.
 
brit1981 said:
I agree the word intruder changes it so much.

But I disagree there is evidence against the mccanns.

Here is a link (scroll down a couple of lines and you will see the PDFs for the report) to the final report by the Portuguese attorney general. It states there is no evidence against the mccanns and states that therefore the aguido status will be lifted. Nowhere does it state it is only being lifted because the case was being shelved. It discusses how the dog alerts could not be verified by forensic testing in the UK and Portugal, and that neither could the samples tested by verified as madeleines or a particular type of material I.e blood.
The report also states that kate was made an aguido because she was presented with evidence that the police believed could be used against her, as far as I am aware this is a legal requirement if questioning a witness, a bit like questioning someone under caution in the UK. But if anyone has a link to the technicalities of the aguido system could they link to it. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm

This link is to a piece in the guardian summing up the issues.http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jul/23/madeleinemccann.portugal
Click to expand...

My understanding is they were not cleared of the crime. The arguidos status was lifted because of inconclusive evidence or lack of evidence. The PJ decided, at the time to shelve the case and not put any other resources. This link explains it further.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id126.html
 
If we believe the Mirror. The first letter sent back in July had to do with the same 3 men. So is this a second request? It appears nothing happened back in July but yet they decided to reopen the case in October. So confusing.

---------
Portuguese detectives acting on a first International Letter of Request sent by Britain last July discovered the men were very close to the scene of Madeleine's disappearance.



Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-first-arrests-move-3056123#ixzz2rJM5uqOh
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
 
SapphireSteel said:
That's the rub.

Its all very well to believe someone innocent, but what if you 100% believe they are guilty and getting away with murder while simultaneously ruining the reputation of others you throw under the bus?

I sincerely wish the Mccann supporters would have more empathy for us poor slow MDIs...what we believe is happening is very stressful to watch and we are aghast and totally over all the libel suits, Carter Rucks, Gypsies and whiteboards which seem to engulf this case like a bad smell.

We honestly believe we are watching a bunch of vile child killers getting away with it. It doesnt make us vile or nasty people kwim?

IDIs believe passionately in their innocence. I believe just as passionately the opposite and its not an easy or comfortable belief, around people who seem to think it makes you a nasty minded pervert.

Put them on the witness stand, someone, please! Its not so easy to keep your story straight when you don't have expensive lawyers and PR to protect you and speak for you.

:please:
Click to expand...

Great post. I too (as I have stated before) believe that the Mccanns were guilty of leaving three small children alone in an apartment in a foreign country and that should most certainly be neglect. Lack of evidence either way it is not enough to release the Mccanns from responsibility for Madeleine's disappearance. I have often read that they should not be prosecuted because they have paid a high price for their neglect. Not as high as Madeleine has paid I would guess. There is not enough evidence to clear them or charge them, but imo they bear the responsbility either way. jmo
 
There are renewed calls for them to be charged with neglect.

A woman was recently charged with neglect for going out leaving her young son alone and her lawyer has asked publicly why his client was charged (no harm came to her son) yet the McCann's were not.

In fact the word "neglect" is rarely uttered at all. They've managed to spin it into Tea at the Bottom of the Garden - accurate only if your garden covers an entire city block and has several structures and view blockers, a swimming pool and God knows how many strangers milling about between it and the house.

Oh and you forgo the tea in favour of 15 bottles of wine.
 
~n/t~ said:
If we believe the Mirror. The first letter sent back in July had to do with the same 3 men. So is this a second request? It appears nothing happened back in July but yet they decided to reopen the case in October. So confusing.

---------
Portuguese detectives acting on a first International Letter of Request sent by Britain last July discovered the men were very close to the scene of Madeleine's disappearance.



Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-first-arrests-move-3056123#ixzz2rJM5uqOh
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Click to expand...

Even the most rabid IDI doesn't believe the Mirror!

:floorlaugh:
 
SapphireSteel said:
There are renewed calls for them to be charged with neglect.

A woman was recently charged with neglect for going out leaving her young son alone and her lawyer has asked publicly why his client was charged (no harm came to her son) yet the McCann's were not.

In fact the word "neglect" is rarely uttered at all. They've managed to spin it into Tea at the Bottom of the Garden - accurate only if your garden covers an entire city block and has several structures and view blockers, a swimming pool and God knows how many strangers milling about between it and the house.

Oh and you forgo the tea in favour of 15 bottles of wine.
Click to expand...

'Maddie's parents were guilty of child neglect': Lawyer's bizarre courtroom speech during case about drink driving mother who left her son, five, alone at night

He told magistrates at Merthyr Tydfil, south Wales: 'The parents of Madeleine McCann were guilty of child neglect for leaving their little girl much longer than my client. They were never prosecuted


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-bizarre-courtroom-speech.html#ixzz2rLpVLbpm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
I'll never understand why they weren't charged with neglect. Not just the McCanns. All of them.
 
The y can massage all they like but the facts are

Thee parents went out boozing night after night leaving their babies alone even though they knew they had woken and cried at least one night previously.

That's neglect no matter what creed you are.

They should be charged.

They have never admitted to feeling a moments guilt at what they caused.
 
~n/t~ said:
Did you send a request to one if the mods to have the general discussion thread reopened? If not I'll submit the request. :)
Click to expand...

No I didn't. Thanks.

I think we need two threads one especially for the IDIs just like Jonbenets case.

The similarities never end between the two cases:cow:
 
Neither the Iran Watkins nor the trafficked runaways have anything to do with this crime. There is zero similarity.

For those who think an intruder did it - why was no intruder seen? Why did he/she/they leave no trace?

Why did the checking system fail?

There were people in and out all night.

Why were the McCann's children the only ones they all checked? No one else's children were checked by the McCann's, Payne or anyone else but their own parents.

The McCann children alone were subjected to scrutiny by several "caretakers" yet still managed to be the only ones "abducted".
 
SapphireSteel said:
There are renewed calls for them to be charged with neglect.

A woman was recently charged with neglect for going out leaving her young son alone and her lawyer has asked publicly why his client was charged (no harm came to her son) yet the McCann's were not.
Click to expand...

~n/t~ said:
'Maddie's parents were guilty of child neglect': Lawyer's bizarre courtroom speech during case about drink driving mother who left her son, five, alone at night

He told magistrates at Merthyr Tydfil, south Wales: 'The parents of Madeleine McCann were guilty of child neglect for leaving their little girl much longer than my client. They were never prosecuted


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-bizarre-courtroom-speech.html#ixzz2rLpVLbpm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Click to expand...

Oh but there's more .......
Not only did she leave her son (who suffers from a quite severe form of Aspergers ??) home alone, she was drink driving causing an accident in which she hit a young girl's car....then leaving the injured girl fled the scene !!

* She got off with it thanks to her lawyers speech & the McCanns

To be honest I'm surprised its taken this long to be used
 
~n/t~ said:
I'll never understand why they weren't charged with neglect. Not just the McCanns. All of them.
Click to expand...

I think PJ weren't going to accept a lesser charge.

Even after archiving the case they could re-open it any time new evidence was found.

I think they have no doubt & are prepared to wait until such a time.
 
SapphireSteel said:
The y can massage all they like but the facts are

Thee parents went out boozing night after night leaving their babies alone even though they knew they had woken and cried at least one night previously.

That's neglect no matter what creed you are.

They should be charged.

They have never admitted to feeling a moments guilt at what they caused.
Click to expand...


^^^ This ^^^

They still refuse to admit any responsibility at all !!
Quite the opposite.
 
Little Jedi said:
^^^ This ^^^



They still refuse to admit any responsibility at all !!

Quite the opposite.
Click to expand...


IMO even an innocent mother, in the home, of a child abducted by a stranger suffers enormous guilt. That's what good mothers do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 91 more.
Total: 1,450 (members: 92, guests: 1,358)

Online statistics

Members online
92
Guests online
1,358
Total visitors
1,450
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,286
Messages
18,093,923
Members
230,841
Latest member
FastRayne
Back
Top