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.

Interview at Focus magazine with GA

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:28 am

My friends, this was taken from PFA2, I don´t know when Focus published this interview, all I say is, and I agree with the title of Alibongo: Bluffs, Lies, and interviews:

Focus – You suggest that the little girl was frozen or conserved in the cold. How do you reach that?

G.A. – There is a bodily fluid, inside a car boot, above an "embaladeira" [note: metallic piece of the car that reinforces the lower part of the doors], from a child that presumably died on the 3rd of May. The car was rented 20 days later and was even new. It had been rented two or three times. Taking into consideration the circumstances of the climate, the temperature, the decomposition of a body… A body, in order to leak a fluid in that manner, a body with more than a month of decomposition had to be preserved.

Focus – You state that you have not told everything that you know.

G.A. – And I haven't.

Focus – Why?

G.A. – Because I am a jurist, too. Let's see how the situation evolves.

Focus – But you did start with the abduction hypothesis.

G.A. – If you look closely, right in my first document, the process mentions "abduction" followed by two question marks.

Focus – Then, you were thrown out…

G.A. - … that is a good expression…

G.A. – I don't drink whiskey. I drink beer at lunch time, if they had written that, they would have been right.

And when I left, I was naturally closer to the truth. Two examples: Apart from our need to know who the friends of the McCann couple were, or if they knew anyone in Portugal, or who drove the car… if they eventually visited another apartment, if they used to meet someone, if they deposited someone… just for us to understand. Towards the end, I was informed that they had visited people at a villa in Praia da Luz. We went to check it out. Then, we were informed that the McCanns had visited an apartment block near the cemetery. And we were working on that, in order to confirm whether it was them or not. This was how we were trying to understand where the body was. And there are many persons who were not investigated, who were not in the process.



That Maddie's mother is the only person who says that the window was open. When she calls to the other members of the group, she goes out leaving her twins, exposing them once again, to danger. Further proof is Kate's finger prints that describe the movement when she opened the windows – we know that the window was cleaned the previous day -. However, Kate says she never opened the window. And most importantly, there were no signs of breaking in.

There were never any motives to question the Catholic church. There is no indice that points towards the child being there, at least up to the moment when she was transported in the car. Even because there are no freezers there, or cold spots that would allow for the body to be kept at that location.

Was no cadaver odour or other indicia ever found on the father's clothes? (identified reader)

No. We don't know what he was wearing on the night of the disappearance. If it was him who was seen carrying the child, those clothes may even not exist anymore. He went to London and he might have washed it. As a matter of fact, we never knew what anyone of the group was wearing on the evening of the facts.

Don't you regret that you did not go to the location [on the night of the events]?

There are several ways to coordinate. And one of them is over the phone. No, I have no regrets.

Don't you think that the result might have been different?

It is possible. At least there would have been someone, and I have a good memory, who would remember how they were dressed that evening.

according to what I have heard, the Irish family to be contacted and the target of coercion. Several people went there and they were not from the police. He even had to get himself a lawyer to try to get things into order. Before the police arrived to hear them, several persons had tried to speak to them. And they were not the only ones.

nobody knows for sure at what time the things happened. The reconstruction was not made, therefore it is impossible to know for certain. The employees do not state that Gerry McCann was in the restaurant. They only say that people were sitting down and getting up from the table.

"Since the day I left I knew the process would be archived"

Paulo Rebelo, his successor, never contacted him to talk about the case.

Have you agreed with the decision of the former director of the PJ, who removed you from the case?

No. It's an unfair and dangerous decision. I was not removed from the investigation due to incompetence. I left because of the direction that the investigation was taking. But the strategy was not decided by me only. It was everyone. It involved the English police and other Portuguese policemen. And what was being investigated, was the little girl's death, even an accidental one.




Do you believe that Madeleine McCann died in the apartment on the evening of the 3rd of May?

Yes. That is what I and other persons believe in. And this is not because we idealised it that way.

Was the investigation's direction, homicide, disturbing the political power?

This case was more political than a police case.

Did any politician pressure you?

I was not pressured, I was removed.

If there was a homicide, where is the body?

That was what we were going to establish next. On the day that I was removed, I was carrying out diligences for a fundamental witness to come to Portugal. It was necessary for the PJ to pay for the trip, to arrange for lodging, and that was being taken care of. But then the important witness never came to Portugal and was never heard.

But why? Why was an exception opened? The English police was used by the McCanns to send the PJ information that often was nothing but noise?

Yes. And the fact that the couple had a press advisor, is a figure that is not even foreseen in the penal process code. In some way, we were all influenced by the campaign that was built, which said that the child is alive and must be found. I don't say that the English police was being ordered around by the McCanns, but it was influenced, like we all were. The PJ should have found a way to protect the investigators from everything else.

That is strange: you say that it was established with the English police that the direction that should be followed was the little girl’s death, that there were enough indices, but there seems to have been an inflexion.

Yes. And I was removed. I don't know whether there is a direct connection. I know that colleagues from the investigation have requested the police's directory for a syndication, to see whether the work was badly done. Whether mistakes were made.

Do you believe that you reached the truth?

I am convinced that we were on the right path and that we might end up knowing everything or not, but a great part. Now, that which we have collected and which we consider to be indices, may not be valued in the same manner.

Did the theory of the death of the child continue to be followed after your exit?

I don't know. I can say that ever since that day I knew the process would be archived.

Who made the decision to constitute the McCann’s arguidos?

Everyone. And the national director was informed of all the decisions.

Alípio Ribeiro agreed with the decision?

Exactly.

But then he ended up saying that the decision was hasty.

Hasty? Four months later? When there were concrete diligences that reinforced some of the indications? While we waited for results of various tests? And beyond that, in our law there exists the principal of no self-incrimination. A person can't continue speaking forever as a witness and providing evidence ("indications"). There is certainly a stigma in the arguido status, but I don't know what is worse. They were made arguidos, this was public, for simulating a crime and hiding a cadaver.

Do you think that you made any mistakes?

I made one. The error of the first hour. There are things about which I still cannot speak. But we know that there are things which could have been done in another way. No one should be shocked if we begin, immediately, to wonder if the parents were involved.

After leaving the investigation, did you ever speak with your successor, Paulo Rebelo?

No. It is an interesting question to consider. If they removed me for the barbarity of speaking to the press, and not for incompetence, it would be normal to be consulted. But this never happened.

Archival is not a declaration of innocence. A process can be archived and reopened. The archival of this case could be the declaration of some incapacity of the police, or it could have a different meaning.



Gonçalo Amaral - I do have that conviction. It is an interpretation in the light of the Law based in concrete elements, with the knowledge that I have of the inquest and of the diligences done. Yes, I am convinced that she died there.



There was an understanding between the Portuguese and British authorities that the girl was dead and that there was a need to solidify the evidences that existed and move forward to try to understand where she could be.




Gonçalo Amaral revealed that the "statement" he gave to Diarios de Noticias – and was the reason for his removal, according to the PJ director – was not correctly reproduced and it was not a statement to a newspaper, but just an informal talk with a journalist from Faro, "very close to the family, a friend of my wife", who called him to ask about the email sent to the web site of Prince Charles, denouncing a former employee of Ocean Club as the kidnapper. "What I said, talking not to a journalist, but with a friend, a personal talk, was that Police should concentrate in what was the common conclusion of British and Portuguese Police: the child was dead and it was necessary to consolidate the existing evidence and move forward, to find where she could be and what happened." At that moment, the kidnapping line of inquiry was "already closed", and "another door was opened", Mr. Amaral said. When asked about the existence of political interference in the investigation, is answer was short and clear: "I think there was more politics than police."

The evidence that we had gathered by the time I left the case pointed to the girl being dead and having died inside the apartment. I don't know what happened next

The little girl died in the apartment. Everything is in the book, which is faithful to the investigation until September: it reflects the understanding of the Portuguese and the English police and of the Public Ministry. For all of us, until then, the concealment of the cadaver, the simulation of abduction and the exposure or abandonment were proved.

Jane Tanner is not credible: she identifies and recognizes different people



What about Maddie's bed?

It carries no signs that anyone was in it. Nor does the chair or the bed under the window. And there are no imprints from strangers.

The reconstruction is missing.

It was not carried out 10 or 15 days after the facts, because the resort was full of tourists. We trusted that it could be carried out at a later date. It couldn't.

Did you request data about the group?

At 8 a.m. on the 4th, the request was made to the English liaison officer, but [the data] never arrived.

What did you want to know?

Who the people are, their antecedents. And the child, whether or not there are complaints against the parents or others. How she behaved in school, to find out if she was the target of abuse.

On the days before I left Portimão we were taking care of that trip to Portugal. Then, the hearing of that witness was requested through a liaison officer from the Irish police in Madrid, which took months. During that time, the witness was approached by persons that are connected to the McCanns' staff, I don’t know with what intention. They felt pressured.

Where and how could they have hidden the body for over twenty days?

That was what we were trying to find out. Searching within their friends, because the couple had a lot of acquaintances. We tried to understand where the little girl could have been during those twenty something days.

There was information that the couple had been seen walking towards a certain apartment block, we were trying to understand which apartment it was. Who had access to that apartment. But everything stopped.

How do you interpret that stopping of everything, when you left?

It almost looks as if the investigation was syndicated.

a brother-in-law and a cousin of Kate said that they had carried steaks in the trunk that had thawed, even garbage, but no. The dogs follow neither garbage smell nor non-human blood. Then there is a witness, that was never heard, a jurist that lived next to the couple, in the second house [villa] outside of the apartment, saying that the car trunk was left open during the night, for airing.

At the time when the Irish tourist reportedly saw Gerry, there are various witness statements that place the child’s father at the Ocean Club.

They are not credible. The employees are unable to tell at what time the persons were there, for how long each one of them stayed away when they say they went to the apartments. And the group is not credible. They say that on the previous nights, every 30 minutes, each one of them went to check only on his own children; but on that night, between 9.30 and 10 p.m., someone curiously goes to check that apartment, almost every five minutes, leaving the rest unchecked.

You admitted the possibility that the children had been given sedatives.

The twins, with the lights on, with the lights off, with a crowd of people going in and out, slept until 2 a.m., when they were carried into another apartment. Even then, they continued to sleep. That sleep is not normal.

But the Judiciária did nothing.

Once again, we were inhibited. We thought about asking the parents to test their hair, in order to understand whether there were sedatives, but as soon as it was found out, it would be said that we were suspecting the parents, and it was being avoided at all costs that it became public that those suspicions existed.




The speculation is done by the scientist who performs the test. He starts out by saying, in his preliminary report, that it was easy to say that it was Maddie. Then he raised other questions. Of course nobody can be accused, based on that data alone.

Everything indicated that the body, after having been at a certain location, was moved into another location by car, twenty something days later. With the residues that were found inside the car, the little girl had to have been transported inside it.

How can you state that?

Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time [of the year], part of the ice melted. On a curb, for example, something fell from the trunk's right side, above the wheel. It may be said that this is speculation, but it's the only way to explain what happened there.

If the body was hidden in the beach area first, was it always out of reach for the searches?

The beach was searched at a time when it is not known whether the body was still there. Using dogs, but sniffer dogs have limitations, like the salted water, for example. Later on, it may have been removed.

Did you feel political pressure during the investigation?

G.A. – Inhibition. One of the mistakes was that we did not advance on this group with everything that legally was within our reach: Tapping, surveillance. It was necessary, for example, to recover the clothes that the little girl was wearing when she left the crèche to go home. There, we thought: if we go, it will immediately be said that we suspect the parents. That inhibition happened throughout time.

How does the pressure appear?

Right on the morning of the 4th of May, with a consul calling the embassy and saying that the PJ wasn't doing anything. Then an ambassador. Next, an advisor and the English prime minister.

When do testimonies concerning David Payne's behaviour indicating sexual practices with minors arrive?

Gonçalo Amaral – In May. Something went wrong with that group during a holiday: David Payne made revealing gestures concerning behaviour towards children. Even towards Maddie. We asked for information but it arrived after the 26th of October. They sent the information without giving it any importance.

What exactly did arrive?

A couple of doctors spent holidays in Mallorca, in 2005, with David Payne, the McCanns and another couple. The lady says she saw Payne with his finger in his mouth, making a movement in and out, while rubbing his nipple with the other hand. And he was talking about Maddie, next to her father. Those statements should have been given a different treatment by the police. It was relevant to access the information, about doctors, who are just as credible as anyone else.

The pressures were immediately felt in the morning following the disappearance of the girl. The British consul in the Algarve went to the Judiciary Police to find out about the investigation, which is not abnormal. Shortly afterwards, it was the turn of the ambassador to go there. It is not a normal proceeding with all the English subjects.

But were you prevented from advancing with the diligences that had been planned?

To me no one told me "do not do it". If that had happened the "broth would pour over" [Portuguese idiomatic expression meaning it would be over the top]. There my participation in that investigation would have ended. But we felt constrained.

In what way?

Notice. Soon after the visit of the ambassador, an announcement goes out referring the thesis of abduction.

Was it the ambassador who pressurised the PJ?

It was not that what I said. The pressure was felt in the team of investigators. When, in the heart of the group, if it was discussed the realisation of a determined diligence there was always someone who would say "Oh, oh, we have to be careful".

Who?

I am not going say names.

We felt it was necessary to treat them with ‘tweezers’. I recognise what we were mistaken.




What remained to be done?

Too much. The first version of the rogatory letter, which was changed after my expulsion on 2 October, had several steps that were simply struck out. It was requested that the British dogs be used to search the house of the McCanns in Leicester and also those of their friends and that they smelled their clothes. It also asked to verify the existence of a chart on the refrigerator of the girl's parents, which showed that she had problems with sleep and used to rise several times at night. The chart is referred to by an English police officer. New interviews with the arguidos were proposed but were never done. The charter was amended by the prosecutors.

I can see that there are situations that were unclear. There is a testimony from a couple of British doctors who say that in September 2005, when holidaying with the McCanns in Majorca and other couples, they became aware of behaviours that are not normal for them and that they related to this gentleman. The couple went to British police as soon as they saw them on television and the evidence only came to Portugal on 26 October. They say they saw Payne put a finger in his mouth, and move it in and out, whilst rubbing his nipple with the other hand. And speaking of what Madeleine would do, next to the father, Gerry. These testimonials from doctors, as credible as the McCanns, should have had another treatment by the police.

And what did the PJ do when they finally received this information?

Nothing. Not even included in the letter of any investigation related to this episode.

David Payne, in your opinion, may have something to do with the disappearance of Madeleine?

I do not know why it was not investigated properly as it should, in my opinion, have been. He was the last to see Madeleine alive after 17.30 hours, when she left the nursery. Gerry was playing tennis and asked him to look in on Kate and the kids. Gerry replies that he was in the apartment and she (Madeleine) was there. He returned 30 minutes later. Kate says it was 30 seconds. Something that does not fit together.


In the book you say that he was recognised by a social worker. What did you intend by reporting this episode?

Only that people realised that it is one more situation that was not investigated. The following morning to the disappearance, a social worker of English nationality in the Algarve offers to help, but she was almost ill-treated/offended by the couple, apparently by indication of this man [David Payne]. This man is recognised by the social worker as already having passed in a process, in an investigation, without her being able at the time to tell if it was in the quality/status of a witness or as in another processual figure [means a judicial status like arguido or suspect]. If he has or not some relation with the death, I do not know. But these are situations that could not have passed in clear/without being investigated, as they were. They should have been checked.

But Jane Taner was a credible witness?

Never was. But there were other things. Phone calls from anonymous people who came to mention it as a possible abduction.

These anonymous phone calls took place before or after being recognised by Jane Tanner?

I do not know need, but it was certainly before he was made arguido. Either way, nothing has been found that links Robert Murat in this case.

Recently you said that there is much you know and have not written. Is there something that has been purposely left out?

It is logical that yes.

What and for what purpose?

I cannot disclose it.

the scent and blood, which indicated a partial match to the genetic profile of Madeleine, provides the conviction that she was the one that died there. The closet in the McCanns bedroom was big enough to hide a corpse inside.

The British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown called the police counterpart of Mr.Gonçalo Amaral, in Leicester, to warn him that Gonçalo Amaral had been removed. Gonçalo Amaral was only given notice of his 'removal' from the case two hours after this call was made.

Madeleine's Right Arm and the Strange Mark

The issue was raised by Mr. Hernâni Carvalho. Madeleine's right arm has a strange mark, a mark which, according to what Mr. Carvalho has learned with Doctor Natália Vara, a forensic psychologist is not a sun burn - in that case more parts of her body would show signs of sun burnings and it has the signs of a hard slap or similar. The point here, is that interviews were conducted with the baby sitters at the Ocean Club crèche and none of them remembers this very visible mark on Madeleine's arm. There wasn't any statement from the parents regarding this fact. Therefore, the conclusion is that this was made after 17:30, after the parents picked Maddie up from the crèche on the 3rd of May 2007

A question regarding the tapas friends and how many people were seated at the table dining when the girl disappeared was put to Gonçalo Amaral. He stated: 'It is not known'.

We should have continued investigating the parents in order to either charge them or rule them out as suspects. If I represented this couple, I would have insisted that police investigations continue. Not everything we do is to incriminate a suspect. Often a phone will be tapped in order to obtain information that will clear a suspect.

I found the intervention of the [then] British Ambassador strange, as besides the British Consul in Portimão already being involved in the case from the first morning of Madeleine's disappearance, all diplomatic channels had been opened and were functional. With the arrival of the Ambassador, my colleagues and I thought it was odd, and to a certain extent made us feel limited in our investigations.

TPN: Did you ever receive orders to investigate in a certain manner?

GA: No we did not receive any orders. I don't like talking about orders. But we felt limited.

When did the police first learn of the intention of the McCanns to leave Portugal?

GA: With the arrival of the sniffer dogs, I think back in August, the couple started showing a keenness to leave the country. As for these dogs, I have not seen or heard any scepticism in Britain, contrary to Portugal.


A bodily fluid was detected in the trunk of the car which was similar to that of Madeleine McCann in 15 of the 19 indicators of her profile.

TPN: Has this evidence been investigated further?

GA: No.

TPN: Why not?

GA: You will have to ask my former colleagues that question.

What would you say to Madeleine's parents?

I have nothing to say. My overriding preoccupation is with the little girl, not the parents.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Guest on Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:49 am

Archival is not a declaration of innocence. A process can be
archived and reopened. The archival of this case could be the
declaration of some incapacity of the police, or it could have a
different meaning.

There we have the fundemental prejudice that eats a positive and fair search for truth by the standards a democratic society should uphold.

That prejudice is the Kate and Gerry are held guilty until proved innocent.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:54 am

GA, you say "There is a bodily fluid, inside a car boot, above an "embaladeira" [note: metallic piece of the car that reinforces the lower part of the doors], from a child that presumably died on the 3rd of May. The car was rented 20 days later and was even new. It had been rented two or three times. Taking into consideration the circumstances of the climate, the temperature, the decomposition of a body… A body, in order to leak a fluid in that manner, a body with more than a month of decomposition had to be preserved", I ask this, how can be that in a boot of a car rented 25 days after the abduction, a corpse had been there? No way. GA, you don´t convince me.

GA you say "there are many persons who were not investigated, who were not in the process". I wonder if those many persons were not questioned because they didn´t shared GA´s unproven theory.

GA you say "There are several ways to coordinate. And one of them is over the phone. No, I have no regrets". Strange way to coordinate. Of course you have no regrets, because you are a cold-hearted person.

GA, how can you talk about death, when you don´t have any shred of evidence to prove your unproven theory.

Jane Tanner is not credible. In my opinion, she is credible, of course that for GA it´s not because jeopardizes is unproven theory.

GA, you say about "Where and how could they have hidden the body for over twenty days?" I say this, how can someone that is the first time at Praia da Luz (PDL) without knowing any person there, without knowing the geographic situation of PDL / surrounding areas, under heavy observation of the press worldwide, tourists, residents, expats, PJ, at summer time, dispose a body without being seen? No way. GA, you don´t convince me.

About sedatives, it is well proved that no sedatives were given to neither Madeleine nor the twins.

GA, you say "if the body was hidden in the beach area first, was it always out of reach for the searches? The beach was searched at a time when it is not known whether the body was still there. Using dogs, but sniffer dogs have limitations". The dogs have nothing to prove GA´s unproven theory.

GA, you say "I would have insisted that police investigations continue". If the investigation about the parents continued it would end like in the Cipriano case.

GA you say "My overriding preoccupation is with the little girl", we know exactly what is your main concern, because if you had showned much commitment in finding this little girl (who is probably somewhere out there waiting to be found) as you showned much commitment in writting books of lies, to gain fame and fortune, to sign autographs like a Hollywood celebrity star, etc..., this little girl could be found in a few days, instead, three years have passed. Shame on you GA.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Guest on Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:57 am

Human rights don't invite a declaration of innocence from the police before considering innocent until proved guilty.

How arrogant to blatantly go against the basic human right of innocent until proved to declare the McCanns guilty and then uphold, rather twisted, the free speech human rights to declare them guilty of gagging those rights.

For someone to show such ignorance of human rights, leaves themselves open to accusations of being in contempt of them.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Guest on Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:53 am

Pedro I Googled it and found this as a source with date and translator. It's quite old.


Gonçalo
Amaral admits that investigators protected the McCanns
,
27
July 2008





Gonçalo
Amaral admits that investigators protected the
McCanns Jornal de
Notícias




By Marisa Rodrigues

27 July 2008

Thanks to Joana Morais for translation
[/size]


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id139.html

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by vee8 on Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:01 am

ModNrodder wrote:Human rights don't invite a declaration of innocence from the police before considering innocent until proved guilty.

How arrogant to blatantly go against the basic human right of innocent until proved to declare the McCanns guilty and then uphold, rather twisted, the free speech human rights to declare them guilty of gagging those rights.

For someone to show such ignorance of human rights, leaves themselves open to accusations of being in contempt of them.

avatar
vee8
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3113
Location : suffolk
Registration date : 2008-06-24

http://www.madeleine-adestinybegun.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Guest on Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:54 am

Reading that interview makes me again to want to pull my hairs out.
How can anybody be that stupid. A professional Police Officer? kma
Can't read all that rubbish. How anybody can conduct an interview with that man and keep a straight face, I'll never understand.

It had been rented two or three times.

Didn't take me long to find out it's been 7 times rented before the McCanns' rented it.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:00 am

Yes, its old my friend, but some parts of the text, at this topic, are the same translated to English.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:11 am

Mod my friend, here is the translation about the old source from Diario de Noticias:

Gonçalo Amaral admits that investigators have protected McCann
For the first time since he began speaking publicly about the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, Goncalo Amaral, the coordinator of research, examine their own responsibilities in the outcome of the case and conduct of all work of the Judicial Police.
Pressures and constraints that sensed more than felt, the almost unlimited autonomy in the conduct of investigations and even the mistakes that he will now have made, particularly regarding the care that was put initially, by decision of the group of researchers in all what he said about Kate and Gerry McCann. For fear of public reaction. Today, I would not agree with decisions that helped the group of investigators to take. In the book "Maddie True Lies" does not tell everything you know. A second book is not out of question.
Journal News | Who pressed the Judicial Police (PJ) that did not proceed with steps?
Gonçalo Amaral | The pressures felt in the morning soon after the girl's disappearance. The British consul in the Algarve was the Judicial Police to ascertain the research, which is not abnormal. Soon after, came the ambassador who was there. There is a normal procedure with all British subjects. At least, I had never seen a similar situation.
But was unable to move forward with steps that had been planned?
To me nobody told me "do not". If that happened was the spilled juice. There ended my participation in that research. But we feel uncomfortable.
How?
Note. Immediately after the visit of the ambassador, leaves a statement referring to the abduction theory.
He was the ambassador who pressed the PJ?
That's not what I said. The pressure felt in the team of imvestigators. When, within the group, is discussing the establishment of a particular investigation, there was always someone saying "oh, oh we have to be careful."
Who?
I will not mention names. If the book I'm careful to never mention names, also I will not now. It's one of those things are stored. But the group made it into seven, eight, ten people, including engineers, managers ... When we raised the question of the need to do a certain step, everything was discussed, in particular, how important the goal to be achieved and what the consequences. And when there were issues that need to get closer to the couple and the group of friends had been careful not immediately be considered suspect at that time, not to be accused in the public square in the face of this media pressure that existed
Are you saying that was the very PJ decide to protect them. Why care so much? It is normal to have suspects in a criminal investigation.
Because at that time would be immediately crucified in the public square.
Were afraid of the media pressure ...
No. We felt it was necessary to treat them with tweezers. I acknowledge that mistakes.
If he believed in the theory of accidental death and the involvement of parents why not insisted that certain representations were made?
At the time that have been suggested, the arguments against were considered valid for the whole group. It was the same group that said "let's not there."
If you do not agree why not hit the door? It was his image as coordinator, who was involved.
There was time for rebellion. I've always worked in groups. If the arguments were valid, had to respect them.
Even without agreeing with them?
At the time I agreed because I considered valid. Maybe now, at a distance, I disagree.
What remained to be done?
Too much. The first version of the letter rogatory, which was changed after my retirement, 2 October, several attempts that had just been scratched. It was requested that the English dogs do searches at the McCann home in Leicester and those of friends and sniff your clothes. Also asked to verify the existence of a table in a refrigerator parents of the girl, who had written where trouble sleeping and get up several times at night. Table is referred by an English policeman. The new proposed interrogatories to the defendants who were not made. The charter was amended by the prosecutor.
Why?
Probably the approaches were not considered important after my departure.
He said with another prosecutor perhaps the outcome of the investigation would have been different. With another national director, Alipio Ribeiro not recently criticized by Almeida Rodrigues, research had been conducted differently?
I do not know, but probably not. The National is only one and has a very specific understanding and procedures, no matter who directs it.
Who chose the Birmingham laboratory to analyze the traces?
The PJ has decided that the remains had to be examined by an English laboratory. Given the campaign that already existed at the time against PJ. At that time, we had a perfect consciousness that were tested were positive in Portugal and would be a strong reaction against the competence and capacity of our laboratories. We did so to show confidence in British laboratories. The choice of Birmingham was the British Police.
It was a strategy? Or was afraid that the samples had not been well collected and that they had been contaminated?
It was strategy. We had confidence in the strength of the remains and the expertise of our technicians. It was all taken with the utmost care. At the time of collection, the Portuguese experts were careful to contact the British specialists and followed the instructions given by them to the phone. Including the traces collected in the mosaic of the room so that nothing fail the exam question, from the collection handling and packaging.
But the procedures are not universal? Or wanted to protect your position in case of failure?
Are universal. But we wanted to follow strict procedures of the English police because the remains would be sent to an English laboratory.
Do not trust the Portuguese experts?
Had and still have absolute confidence. But we wanted someone from the British police also agree with what they were doing to that later, no one could say that the remains were poorly collected.
It was a kind of defense before the attack?
More or less.
The line is that advocates of accidental death in the apartment with parental involvement. But the book raises suspicions about David Payne. It seems a contradiction.
Nobody can say that the two are unrelated pending investigation. Do not raise suspicions about this man or against anyone. Just realize that there are situations that were unclear. There is a testimonial from a couple of British doctors who say that in September 2005 when he vacationed with McCann in Majorca and other couples, they realize that behaviors are not normal for them and they referred to this gentleman. The couple moved to British police when he saw that person on television and that the evidence only arrived in Portugal on 26 October. The lady says she saw Payne finger in his mouth, a movement in and out, and rub the nipple with his other hand. And be talking about Madeleine beside his father, Gerry. These statements from doctors, as credible as the McCanns should have had further treatment by the police.
And what did the PJ when I finally received this information?
Nothing. Not even included in the letter of request any action relating to this episode.
David Payne, in his opinion, may have something to do with Madeleine's disappearance?
Do not know why it was not properly investigated as it should, in my view, have been. Have been the last to see Madeleine alive after 17:30 pm when she leaves the nursery. You Gerry playing tennis and asks for Kate and the kids. Gerry answers that are in the apartment and he goes there. He returned 30 minutes later. Kate says she was 30 seconds. Something not quite right.
In the book says he was recognized by a social worker. What did you want to report this episode?
Only people realize it's more a situation that was not investigated. The morning after the disappearance, a social worker from UK citizens to holiday in Algarve offers to help but was almost kicked out by the couple, it seems to indicate that Mr. [David Payne]. This gentleman is recognized by the social worker as it already has spent in a process, an investigation, not knowing at the time she was noted as a witness or any other figure. Whether it has any relation to the death, do not know. But these are situations that could not be passed over in silence, as they were. They have been investigated.
How does Robert Murat as a translator is the defendant?
There were many difficulties in finding translators. We needed a lot because it was a lot of people need to hear. It was the GNR to suggest the name of Robert Murat because he spoke fluent Portuguese and English. The military was known for having helped informally in some translations. Pass the defendant by a set of factors together. There are a testimony of Jane Taner who recognizes when he sees his back and claims to be the man who saw that night with a child in her arms.
But Jane Taner was a credible witness?
Never was. But there were other things. Anonymous phone calls from people who come to refer to it as a possible kidnapper.
These anonymous phone calls took place before or after Jane Taner have it recognized?
No need to know, but it was certainly before it was made defendant. Anyway, nothing was found that relates to this case Robert Murat.
Recently said that there is much you know and who did not write. Is there anything that has purposely left out?
Logically, yes.
The what and for what purpose?
I can not reveal.
Lets for a second book, for example?
Maybe. Let's see.
----------------------------------------------------------------
I have to say, everything GA says is: lies.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Guest on Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:23 am

Regardless of the time and source of the interview.

Amaral has been very open and revealing about his reasoning. Very questionable reasoning it is.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:22 am

Do you think that you made any mistakes?

I made one. The error of the first hour. There are things about which I still cannot speak. But we know that there are things which could have been done in another way. No one should be shocked if we begin, immediately, to wonder if the parents were involved.


And what a blundering error that was! It was the BASICS of all police practices

_________________
'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: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by whymadeleine on Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:15 pm

ModNrodder wrote:
Archival is not a declaration of innocence. A process can be
archived and reopened. The archival of this case could be the
declaration of some incapacity of the police, or it could have a
different meaning.

There we have the fundemental prejudice that eats a positive and fair search for truth by the standards a democratic society should uphold.

That prejudice is the Kate and Gerry are held guilty until proved innocent.



My head hurts reading his #####, this has NEVER been about Madeleine for them ..
A Shamed poor excuse for a man & his sponsers have alot to answer for
Still praying for the best news ever x
avatar
whymadeleine
Learner
Learner

Number of posts : 175
Location : uk
Registration date : 2010-04-02

http://www.youtube.com/user/JANETMARIEJAMES

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:18 am

My friends, I have a request, which I also wrote it at PFA2: can someone please get in tiouch with alibongo or hideho, if in any part of MM forum says about the Focus magazine interview with GA, if it says when that interview took place, I need to know this answer ASAP. Thank you.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Mon Jun 14, 2010 1:22 am

My friend Cath, thank you for you kind reply at PFA2 about my request, I really appreciate it. Thank you friend.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Cath on Mon Jun 14, 2010 2:01 am

Glad I could help you Pedro. You've helped me/us on many occasions.
True friends help and support each other if and when they can.

Cath
Star Poster
Star Poster

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

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Mon Jun 14, 2010 3:23 am

Thank you for your kind words my friend, glad to help, you welcome. I agree with you: "True friends help and support each other if and when they can".

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Rosie on Mon Jun 14, 2010 9:43 am

No. We don't know what he was wearing on the night of the disappearance. If it was him who was seen carrying the child, those clothes may even not exist anymore. He went to London and he might have washed it. As a matter of fact, we never knew what anyone of the group was wearing on the evening of the facts.

Don't you regret that you did not go to the location [on the night of the events]?

There are several ways to coordinate. And one of them is over the phone. No, I have no regrets.

Well far be it for me to point the obvious out to the fat headed idiot, but if he had bothered to actually attend the scene of a serious crime, he may have been able to direct people to take photographs pf all the people concerned and what they were wearing! If he had bothered to turn up and do his job, he would know what they were too! But oh no, Amaral would rather stay eating shrimp at his favourite Carvi fish restaurant with his mate who was a Portimao town official and was coughing up for Amaral's night on the town on his expense account. Goncalo Amaral is beneath contempt, it is always the fault of someone else.
NO he should definitely NOT have coordinated this serious crime over the phone, preferring to stay with his mate when a child was reported missing on his patch! It was almost as if he knew Madeleine was going to go missing and she wouldn't be found, so he didn't bother to go.

In fact if I was investigating Madeleine's disappearance I would be wanting to talk to Amaral and his mate and check their alibi out!

_________________
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: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Catkins on Mon Jun 14, 2010 8:44 pm

avatar
Catkins
Grand Member
Grand Member

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

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Pedro Silva on Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:08 pm

Rosiepops my friend, good point, which I agree:

"It was almost as if he knew Madeleine was going to go missing and she wouldn't be found, so he didn't bother to go.

In fact if I was investigating Madeleine's disappearance I would be wanting to talk to Amaral and his mate and check their alibi out!"


Another important thing: I think it is also important to know who was the person who phoned GA, while he was eating shrimps, told that a British little girl disappeared from the 5A at Praia da Luz.

Pedro Silva
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 5571
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-10-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Rosie on Mon Jun 14, 2010 10:39 pm

Pedro Silva wrote:Rosiepops my friend, good point, which I agree:

"It was almost as if he knew Madeleine was going to go missing and she wouldn't be found, so he didn't bother to go.

In fact if I was investigating Madeleine's disappearance I would be wanting to talk to Amaral and his mate and check their alibi out!"


Another important thing: I think it is also important to know who was the person who phoned GA, while he was eating shrimps, told that a British little girl disappeared from the 5A at Praia da Luz.

You are right Pedro, it would be beneficial to know this, in actual fact that call should have been logged in the files. It is important that all records and logs of telephone calls in a case like this are kept.

_________________
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: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

Post by Cath on Tue Jun 15, 2010 5:30 am

It isn't mentioned in any of the statements, is it? I tried to find it, but failed.
Amazing how long it took them to find out exactly at what time the alarm was raised, at what time the GNR was called.
And it doesn't match with the Receptionist's statement.
Of course they could (and apparently did) check with the phone company but it's strange. Don't they keep logs of calls?

Cath
Star Poster
Star Poster

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

Back to top Go down

Re: Interview at Focus magazine with GA

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