Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

O Crime interview with Ameral

View previous topic View next topic Go down

O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by jean on Sat Mar 20, 2010 7:55 am

Gonšalo Amaral: "The McCanns did not oppose the archiving of the process", 25 February 2010

Gonšalo Amaral: "The McCanns did not oppose the archiving of the process" O Crime (appears in paper edition only)


25 February 2010


Interview: Carlos Saraiva / Oscar Queiroz

The former head of the investigation into the disappearance of Maddie considers it advantageous to reopen the process and admits that this approach may shed light on the fate of the English child.

"O Crime" - During the trial of the temporary injunction of your book, the existence of a confidential report from the National Policy Investigation Agency was cited. Is it the same as mentioned in the "Maddie process"?

Gonšalo Amaral: It is. It is one of several British police agencies, but with a particularity: the NPIA, is the one which has behavioural analysts.

This is a private agency?

No, it is not a private detective agency. It's as official as Scotland Yard. Moreover, they had already said that this report existed; realized on the advice of the police.

Under what circumstances and what emerges? Who commissioned the report?

No one ordered it, I think. It was their own initiative (the British), initiated as soon as they arrived, shortly after the disappearance of the girl.

And what does that report say?

It speaks of several hypotheses but, as you know, I cannot speak, I have been banned.

It was annexed to the investigation based on the assumption that some of the information was relevant? Which?

I do not know if I can respond to that. I think this report is important, it concludes by saying that you cannot set aside the hypothesis of... And it is true that whilst there is no evidence of the involvement of certain people, the fact remains that there is no evidence of an abduction. And indeed, no one has ever presented proof of the abduction. I recall that the facts in the book relate to the first 6 months of the investigation, while I participated. It was a situation where we had the support of the MP [Public Ministry]. In other words, until that time, the status of the investigation was in accordance with the Public Ministry. Later there was a change of mind, so it seems from the archiving despatch. The despatch is just an opinion of the Public Ministry, not a declaration of innocence.

Why do you think that the ruling banning the sale of your book was somehow unfavourable to the McCanns?

Because, basically, what the lady Judge said in her statement is that the book "The Truth of the Lie" tells facts, though, she says, out of context; they do not coincide with the final opinion of the Public Ministry. Apparently, the opinion of the Public Ministry is sacred. Though only in my case. In the "Hidden Face" case, the public prosecutor's opinion of Aveiro did not even serve to open the investigation. This country is a disgrace!

Generically, what could be argued in the appeal?

I am not going to answer that, obviously. What I can advance is that my lawyers say there is sufficient material for recourse.

There is news of a criminal complaint by Robert Murat against Jane Tanner, one of the friends of the McCanns. She was questioned at the time of the investigation?

That process exists, yes, I was even heard as a witness. Tanner was questioned in the Maddie process yes, as a witness. First she said she saw Murat at the scene, recognized him by the way he walked. And then she said other things, later on. Besides there was a diligence in which she said that yes, it was him, and there were later recognitions and a witness confrontation carried out between them, with Murat, in which they said it was him.

Who are they?

Those who I remember, besides Jane Tanner, were her husband and the wife of Oldfield. They faced a confrontation with Mr Murat.

And how would you evaluate her testimony [Jane Tanner]?

As I said, she, at first, said she saw him at the scene. Then she began to retract it, saying that, after all, she had recognized him through an Indentikit picture. For several months, she came to recognize a number of people, through Identikit pictures. This speaks for itself about the credibility of her statements. Yet in the investigation there is a moment, a confrontation between the people previously mentioned, who say that Murat was there at the time the alarm was raised. That, and other things, is what has motivated the libel suit that Murat has brought against Ms. Tanner.

Do you agree with the possible reopening of the "Maddie process"?

That is what I have advocated since it was archived. Now, they do not advocate that. If they wanted, they have ways of opposing the archiving, specifically calling for the reopening of the investigation. What they want is that the police (here) follow the leads, sightings that are sent from England. They act as if the girl was a Portuguese citizen and not a British subject.

Do you fear for your heritage, given the possibility of a civil conviction for 1.2 million that the English couple demand?

I do not think compensation will be paid. Anyway, what little I have is embargoed.

Do you think this case will, over the years, become a mystery without being solved?

I think it can be solved. When they reopen the process and the trails which are there are investigated, I think it will be solved.

jean
Master
Master

Number of posts : 474
Location : knutsford cheshire
Registration date : 2008-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Rosie on Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:14 am

jean wrote:Gonšalo Amaral: "The McCanns did not oppose the archiving of the process", 25 February 2010

Gonšalo Amaral: "The McCanns did not oppose the archiving of the process" O Crime (appears in paper edition only)

Er how does he know? He was NOT present, he was nothing to do with the investigation at this point he had been sacked, thrown off of it for gross professional misconduct, so this is something he should not know! For the bent corrupt lying cop's benefit, they did actually oppose the shelving of the case, on the grounds that there would NOT be an agency officially looking for their missing daughter. As Amaral knows perfectly well, it was the removal of the arguido status they did not oppose. Amaral is such a liar!

25 February 2010


Interview: Carlos Saraiva / Oscar Queiroz

The former head of the investigation into the disappearance of Maddie considers it advantageous to reopen the process and admits that this approach may shed light on the fate of the English child.
Liar! He only said this when he was caught on the hop outside the court after the ban on his book of lies was upheld. Pity he did not conduct a proper process when he had FIVE MONTHS worth of chances, instead of stuffing cakes and coffees in two hour coffee breaks and then taking 3 and 4 hour lunches and getting drunk and blabbing off to all in the Carver restaurant ie like the Portuguese ex F1 driver and anyone else in the restaurant.

"O Crime" - During the trial of the temporary injunction of your book, the existence of a confidential report from the National Policy Investigation Agency was cited. Is it the same as mentioned in the "Maddie process"?

Gonšalo Amaral: It is. It is one of several British police agencies, but with a particularity: the NPIA, is the one which has behavioural analysts.

This is a private agency?

No, it is not a private detective agency. It's as official as Scotland Yard. Moreover, they had already said that this report existed; realized on the advice of the police.

Never heard of it! Unless you count India as Britain, yet again we have this man stating factually incorrect comments in his book, which are now deemed as libellous!

Under what circumstances and what emerges? Who commissioned the report?

No one ordered it, I think. It was their own initiative (the British), initiated as soon as they arrived, shortly after the disappearance of the girl.

And what does that report say?

It speaks of several hypotheses but, as you know, I cannot speak, I have been banned.

Perhaps he can't speak of it because the report doesn't exist? Liar! This man is nothing but a liar! One more reason to state why this "book" should remain banned!

It was annexed to the investigation based on the assumption that some of the information was relevant? Which?

I do not know if I can respond to that. I think this report is important, it concludes by saying that you cannot set aside the hypothesis of... And it is true that whilst there is no evidence of the involvement of certain people, the fact remains that there is no evidence of an abduction. And indeed, no one has ever presented proof of the abduction. I recall that the facts in the book relate to the first 6 months of the investigation, while I participated. It was a situation where we had the support of the MP [Public Ministry]. In other words, until that time, the status of the investigation was in accordance with the Public Ministry. Later there was a change of mind, so it seems from the archiving despatch. The despatch is just an opinion of the Public Ministry, not a declaration of innocence.

So let's get this straight, no one ordered this report, so the British must have done it, who paid for it then? And how come a report that no one has commissioned found its way into the liar's book and has suddenly become relevant? Amazing how him being banned from speaking does not stop him mentioning this "report". Amaral is intentionally misleading people, this is NOT an official agency in Britain.

Why do you think that the ruling banning the sale of your book was somehow unfavourable to the McCanns?

Because, basically, what the lady Judge said in her statement is that the book "The Truth of the Lie" tells facts, though, she says, out of context; they do not coincide with the final opinion of the Public Ministry. Apparently, the opinion of the Public Ministry is sacred. Though only in my case. In the "Hidden Face" case, the public prosecutor's opinion of Aveiro did not even serve to open the investigation. This country is a disgrace!

Amaral is now putting words into the judge's mouth, she did not say that it "tells facts" if it did, then she would have lifted the ban. It does NOT state facts and it cannot prove anything it states and therefor it is libellous end of story, hence why the ban was upheld and why the ban will be made permanent.

Generically, what could be argued in the appeal?

I am not going to answer that, obviously. What I can advance is that my lawyers say there is sufficient material for recourse.

Nothing can be argued, it is quite simple. Amaral has presented unsubstantiated comments as facts and he cannot prove a single thing of what he has said and written, therefor his comments are legally libellous and defame the McCanns and harm their integrity and the integrity of their family, which is nothing what-s-ever to do with "free speech" and everything to do with behaving like a spiteful fat lying corrupt ex cop, which is why he hasn't a hope in hell of winning this libel case and soon every penny he has disgustingly made off of the back of an abducted child will be taken away from him .

There is news of a criminal complaint by Robert Murat against Jane Tanner, one of the friends of the McCanns. She was questioned at the time of the investigation?

That process exists, yes, I was even heard as a witness. Tanner was questioned in the Maddie process yes, as a witness. First she said she saw Murat at the scene, recognized him by the way he walked. And then she said other things, later on. Besides there was a diligence in which she said that yes, it was him, and there were later recognitions and a witness confrontation carried out between them, with Murat, in which they said it was him.

How would Amaral know? He wasn't there! He has never spoken to Tanner, never been present when she was questioned, too busy in the bars drinking!
If Tanner was questioned as a witness, she is giving a report of what she thought she saw and she did NOT ever say she saw Robert Murat, it was the liar Amaral who said this - again he is intentionally misleading people.

Who are they?

Those who I remember, besides Jane Tanner, were her husband and the wife of Oldfield. They faced a confrontation with Mr Murat.

And how would you evaluate her testimony [Jane Tanner]?

As I said, she, at first, said she saw him at the scene. Then she began to retract it, saying that, after all, she had recognized him through an Indentikit picture. For several months, she came to recognize a number of people, through Identikit pictures. This speaks for itself about the credibility of her statements. Yet in the investigation there is a moment, a confrontation between the people previously mentioned, who say that Murat was there at the time the alarm was raised. That, and other things, is what has motivated the libel suit that Murat has brought against Ms. Tanner.

Complete and utter waffle from a man who knows he has lost. Tanner gave an identikit description, she never said it was Murat, she could not even say what the man's face looked like because she could not see his features, so how could she say it was Murat. Liar! If Murat wants to bring a libellous suit he should bring one against Amaral for what he has written in his book about him and he should bring one against Bennett for outright accusing him of being involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. How the hell can Murat bring a libel case against someone who has said that she did NOT think the person she saw was Murat?
I believe in my opinion that Amaral has put Murat up to bringing this action, the whole thing is totally off the wall!

Do you agree with the possible reopening of the "Maddie process"?

That is what I have advocated since it was archived. Liar no you haven't. Now, they do not advocate that. Yes they do and not only that the McCanns want a complete and comprehensive review of the whole case. Why is Amaral lying? What is he hiding? If they wanted, they have ways of opposing the archiving, specifically calling for the reopening of the investigation. What they want is that the police (here) follow the leads, sightings that are sent from England. And why the hell wouldn't they? their daughter was abducted for her bed on Amaral's patch and he (Amaral) preferred to stay drinking in a bar rather than attend the scene of a serious crime! They act as if the girl was a Portuguese citizen and not a British subject. Just what the hell is that supposed to mean? You mean they have no right to ask you to do the job you were paid to do? You pathetic fat liar! If a Portuguese child went missing in the UK she/he would have received exactly the same treatment as any missing child and the lead detective would have attended the scene to organise and put in process the recognised procedure as set down by Europe, a procedure that Goncalo Amaral totally ignored and stayed drinking and getting drunk in a bar with his mates, rather than turn up and do his job! The McCanns had every right to expect that the leads and sightings were followed up you great big fat lump of lying rancid fetid lard!

Do you fear for your heritage, given the possibility of a civil conviction for 1.2 million that the English couple demand?

I do not think compensation will be paid. Anyway, what little I have is embargoed.

Sell the Jag, that's worth at least ú40.000 and then there is the large house, with swimming pool and grounds, that should be worth a few bob. Have no fear compensation will be paid by Amaral.

Do you think this case will, over the years, become a mystery without being solved?

I think it can be solved. When they reopen the process and the trails which are there are investigated, I think it will be solved.

It will be solved, but not by you and your mate Ricardo Paiva, who have frustrated this investigation at every possible turn, you bet it will be solved, so Amaral had better start worrying now!


Last edited by Rosiepops on Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:47 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Pedro Silva on Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:29 pm

I agree completely with you Rosiepops.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5566
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

The Strange Oddity That Is The Murat Vs Tanner Debacle!

Post by Rosie on Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:50 pm

There is news of a criminal complaint by Robert Murat against Jane Tanner, one of the friends of the McCanns. She was questioned at the time of the investigation?

That process exists, yes, I was even heard as a witness. Tanner was questioned in the Maddie process yes, as a witness. First she said she saw Murat at the scene, recognized him by the way he walked. And then she said other things, later on. Besides there was a diligence in which she said that yes, it was him, and there were later recognitions and a witness confrontation carried out between them, with Murat, in which they said it was him.

Isn't it a strange coincidence that Amaral appears as a witness FOR Robert Murat, at a time when he (Amaral) is being widely discredited?

Isn't it strange, that if Antonio Cabrita, Amaral's lawyer's secretary had not been in contact with "swine flu" and this bizarrely lead to Antonio Cabrita being quarantined, (why?) giving him the excuse NOT to attend court and getting the whole hearing adjourned, the the Murat Vs Tanner oddity would have happened at another time when Amaral's hearing was INACTIVE.

Call me cynical, but Amaral obviously knew of the Murat hearing as he was going to appear as a witness, he knew the dates of the hearings, so he managed to get his own book ban hearing adjourned. As it is, this along with everything else that Amaral touches these days blew up in his face.

I think Amaral is suffering with "reverse Midas touch"

How odd is this Murat vs Tanner thing? It is patently absurd!

A run down....

A child is abducted from her bed.....

The PJ coordinator decides to stay drinking with his pals rather than attend the scene of a serious crime to actually do his job and "COORDINATE" it.

A witness who believes she may have seen something comes forward and reports what she has seen to the police.

The coordinator (Amaral) still nowhere to be seen does NOT interview her or even speak to her , even though we know he speaks fairly good English.

This witness is then taken to a van with blacked out windows and asked to observe Robert Murat walking along the street.

The coordinator, "coordinating" the investigation into a missing child, is still NOT present in this van (despite giving the impression to certain newspapers that he was)

The witness categorically states that Robert Murat was NOT the man she saw walking along with a child in his arms that night of Thursday May 3, 2007.

The witness then repeats this testament in her witness statement (where again the coordinator who was supposed to be "coordinating" was not in fact coordinating and was NOT present.

The said "coordinator then gets sacked from this investigation after five months of not coordinating it, (five months of NOT doing his job properly) five months during which he has not even bothered to speak to the parents of the missing child, (despite speaking fairly good English)

The non coordinating "coordinator" gets the sack for serious professional misconduct. He then takes early retirement from his non coordinating "coordinator's" position and has a grudge against the parents of a missing child.

The now sacked non coordinating "coordinator" decides to write a book, where he blatantly libels the other argudio in that investigation Robert Murat.

Robert Murat seemingly ignores the Portuguese press attempts to assassinate his character of which the non coordinating "coordinator" Goncalo Amaral was responsible for the lies and leaks that appeared in the press in Portugal and were the basis for the British press reports.

In 2008 Robert Murat successfully sues the British press for libel and defamation, while ignoring the the true source of the stories. The non coordinating "coordinator" and the Portuguese press! (still with me?)

We then hear absolutely nothing from former arguido Robert Murat until 2010. Murat was actually made an arguido (suspect) in Madeleine's disappearance under the instructions of (wait for it....) the non coordinating "coordinator" Goncalo Amaral himself.

Meanwhile the non coordinating "coordinator" Goncalo Amaral has landed himself in all kinds of bother, he has been convicted of a criminal offence, perverting the course of justice, concealing a torture, convicted of perjury and just plain lying all over the place. He has been exposed as the main protagonist in other controversial investigations and now there appears to be some kind of link, "linking him in with Casa Pia". (Casa Pia is the Portuguese orphanage at the center of child pornography and abuse allegations embroiling many police, doctors and judiciary, politicians etc.)

Not only the above (there is much more still to emerge) but the non coordinating "coordinator", decided to make himself an obscene amount of money off of the back of an innocent missing child, who's investigation he did not bother to "coordinate" by accusing her parents of murdering her and concealing her body and writing this all down in a book, a book which has now been banned and the ban upheld twice. These are the self same parents Goncalo Amaral, despite being the non coordinating "coordinator" NEVER bothered to meet and talk to NOT one single time, despite him (Amaral the non coordinating "coordinator") speaking fairly good English!

However in the non coordinating "coordinator's" book, he also accuses outright one Robert Murat, which Murat completely ignores and decides instead to accuse a witness who was only giving a statement to police, of saying that she saw him at the scene!

Bizarre? Yes it certainly is!

Even more bizarre when you realise the witness has never once accused Murat, in fact she said the man she saw was NOT him!

So now we are at this strange place of Murat after being silent for all this times, suddenly decides to register a case against a witness, who was only doing her civic duty and reporting to police what she saw, or she thought she saw.

Murat ignores the outright accusations of Amaral the non coordinating "coordinator".

Murat ignores all the other people that are in the official files as saying they thought him and his behaviour very odd.

Murat ignores all the other eye witnesses who have no axe to grind when they reported as seeing him outside the apartment where the child disappeared from.

Murat totally ignores a police sworn and signed statement of a person who maintains that he Murat, behaved oddly, by throwing things out of an upstairs window into the street below where he could have hurt or killed passers by, (including children) ignored that this witness said that Murat tried to have sex with animals, has killed animals and tried to rape his cousin.

Murat has totally ignored reports that he has changed his alibi several times (It is all there in the official files)

Yet bizarrely he files an intention to sue Jane Tanner for libel, because she said she did NOT see him that night.

Now you can call me cynical if you like but look at the timing.

How convenient was it that this story emerge now right in the middle of the non coordinating "coordinator's" unsuccessful attempts to have the ban on his book overturned?

Amaral non coordinating "coordinator" knew of Murat's intention, he had to as he himself said he was called as a witness!

The non coordinating "coordinator", knew of the court dates set.

The non coordinating "coordinator" has a grudge against the McCanns and their friends, he blames them for him losing his coordinating position despite never actually bothering to do his job and coordinate!

Odd? More than just a little odd, this is the non story that will suddenly sprout legs and do "completely" for Amaral, like no other story has yet done for him completely.

The truth about Murat and Amaral will come out when Murat is questioned over why he decided to bring this action against Jane Tanner.

Mark my words, do you honestly think that her legal team will allow this to slip through the net?

Who put Murat up to trying to prosecute Jane Tanner for simply being a witness and telling what she thought she saw?

Why did Murat ignore all those other appalling blemishes on his character, reported by other people and decide to prosecute JT for saying she did NOT see Murat?

This is one "witness interference" that Amaral is going to wish he stayed well clear of.

Remember my words "from little acorns, mighty oaks do grow"!

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Pedro Silva on Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:58 pm

Jean my friend, thank you for your post. Excellent posts Rosiepops my friend, which I completely agree with them.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5566
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by bluj1515 on Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:49 am

This is totally disgusting. If an American cop said this I would be enraged. A crime happened on your soil, it's your responsibility, it's your job. Isn't this what the Portuguese posters on 3As and elsewhere said forever and ever? Now Amaral says this:

Do you agree with the possible reopening of the "Maddie process"?

What they want is that the police (here) follow the leads, sightings that are sent from England. They act as if the girl was a Portuguese citizen and not a British subject.

But she's missing in YOUR country, you arrogant sack of sh!t. A crime was committed on YOUR soil under YOUR command.

Gonc
avatar
bluj1515
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1017
Location : United States
Registration date : 2009-06-30

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Pedro Silva on Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:52 am

You arrogant idiot, it is obligation from any police (PJ included) to follow any leads which helps find an innocent girl who is still out there waiting to be found, because it is PJ┤s duty. It was your obligation to help find an innocent child, but for you GA, it was more important beers, shrimps, a jag, books of lies with disgusting smears, dirty money, disgusting fame, then help a family to become a complete happy family again. But, know this GA: you cannot intimidate any of us, you don┤t fear us, we will not let this to slip way, no way. We are right here behind what is right, behind a lovely family who loves this little girl a lot. So, neither you GA nor any TB or any freaks / antis can intimidate us. Because, the more the antis stinks, the more determined we are in finding this little girl, the more determined we are in bringing her home. Of this you GA, TB /antis, can be certain of. I┤ve said it before, I say it again: UNITY IS STRENGHT. Also. if in the middle of all this, positive actions can be done to help find other missing children / people, even better.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5566
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Rosie on Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:59 am

And Bluj he did naff all to resolve it.

Isn't this one of the most despicable things that pig has has ever said? And what is he saying anyway? That a Portuguese child's life is worth more than Madeleine's or any other child from any other country?


What pity he did not think the same when he was investigating the disappearance of Joana Cipriano, when he set her mother up for her child's murder, when he sent her to prison to be separated from her other PORTUGUESE children for 16 years!

FOR SOMETHING THE POOR WOMAN DID NOT DO and something Amaral KNOWS Leonor Cipriano did NOT do.

That man is evil and the Portuguese government have to do something about him.

Perhaps his wife may like to tell a judge what she knows about her husband, apparently it is something that could put him in prison!

What the hell passes for justice in Portugal? How many "Amarals" are there running around, threatening people and setting people up?

How did Portugal become a member of the EU?

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Rosie on Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:08 am

Pedro Silva wrote:You arrogant idiot, it is obligation from any police (PJ included) to follow any leads which helps find an innocent girl who is still out there waiting to be found, because it is PJ┤s duty. It was your obligation to help find an innocent child, but for you GA, it was more important beers, shrimps, a jag, books of lies with disgusting smears, dirty money, disgusting fame, then help a family to become a complete happy family again. But, know this GA: you cannot intimidate any of us, you don┤t fear us, we will not let this to slip way, no way. We are right here behind what is right, behind a lovely family who loves this little girl a lot. So, neither you GA nor any TB or any freaks / antis can intimidate us. Because, the more the antis stinks, the more determined we are in finding this little girl, the more determined we are in bringing her home. Of this you GA, TB /antis, can be certain of. I┤ve said it before, I say it again: UNITY IS STRENGHT. Also. if in the middle of all this, positive actions can be done to help find other missing children / people, even better.

Pedro, you are completely correct, unity is strength and we will beat Amaral, his days are numbered have no fear about that. He knows this, it is why he travels the TV studios trying to put right the damage that has been done to his reputation.
Goncalo Amaral is now widely discredited, he knows this, his followers know it, we know it and now the Portuguese authorities know it.
Amaral may have some judges in his pocket, he may have some willing to rule on technicalities, but he by no means has them all and no matter how long it takes, one day he will come up against a judge he cannot sway and when he does, true justice for Madeleine, her parents and Joana and her mother and Leandro will be done, take my word for it, this day is a lot closer than you may think.

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by dianeh on Mon Mar 22, 2010 9:08 am

bluj1515 wrote:This is totally disgusting. If an American cop said this I would be enraged. A crime happened on your soil, it's your responsibility, it's your job. Isn't this what the Portuguese posters on 3As and elsewhere said forever and ever? Now Amaral says this:

Do you agree with the possible reopening of the "Maddie process"?

What they want is that the police (here) follow the leads, sightings that are sent from England. They act as if the girl was a Portuguese citizen and not a British subject.

But she's missing in YOUR country, you arrogant sack of sh!t. A crime was committed on YOUR soil under YOUR command.

Gonc

The PJ were in charge of the case, so the British police follow protocol and give all information to the PJ, and then wait to be asked to investigate further. The British police would have investigated if asked, but they were NEVER asked. (now I dont agree with this, the BRitish police should have investigated anyway, as Madeleien is a British citizen, but protocol demands that the PJ maintain control over the case as it is in their jurisdiction).

So PJ are in charge, they ask for no help, do not ask for anything to be further investigated, and now Amaral accuses the British of not investigating.

Bizarre to say the least.
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Pedro Silva on Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:13 am

I agree with you my friends Bluj, Dianeh, Rosiepops.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5566
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:09 am

"Later there was a change of mind, so it seems from the archiving despatch. The despatch is just an opinion of the Public Ministry, not a declaration of innocence".

So he assumes there was a change of mind because the case was archived. Of course it couldn't possibly be because he had lead them up a blind alley and they had nowhere left to go other than to try and save face!


Last edited by Tinkerbell43 on Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:41 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________
'The motives of those who have tried to convince the world that Madeleine is dead, and who've disgracefully and falsely tried to implicate us in her disappearance, need to be seriously questioned.'
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Pedro Silva on Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:37 pm

GA, TB, all the antis are living a sick phantasy.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5566
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Catkins on Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:37 pm

Tinkerbell43 wrote:Later there was a change of mind, so it seems from the archiving despatch. The despatch is just an opinion of the Public Ministry, not a declaration of innocence.

So he assumes there was a change of mind because the case was archived. Of course it couldn't possibly be because he had lead them up a blind alley and they had nowhere left to go other than to try and save face!

avatar
Catkins
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1829
Location : UK
Registration date : 2009-02-11

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Cath on Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:03 am

Before making silly statements like that, GA should read what the Judge wrote when she decided to uphold the Injunction.

Cath
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 722
Location : Holland
Registration date : 2009-04-10

Back to top Go down

Re: O Crime interview with Ameral

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum