2 November 2008

El Patio: Do you think Madeleine’s parents are guilty? - Full Interview

With Pilar Cambra and Carmen Candela. Includes the interview with Gonçalo Amaral, ex Inspector of the Portuguse Policia Judiciaria/ Author of “Maddie. The Truth of the Lie” (Ed. Esquilo).

Audio Extract in Spanish


Cristina López Schlichting - C
Carmen Candela – CC
Pilar Cambra - PC
Gonçalo Amaral - GA

Cristina López Schlichting: It was a tricky affair because the McCanns - Maddie's parents, as you know, launched an international fund raising appeal, have appeared in all the media, they put obstacles in the path of journalists and finally, they insulted the Portuguese police. The person in charge of the Maddie case, former inspector of the Portuguese PJ, was removed from his job and is now retired, precisely because of this case, an individual who had a brilliant police record behind him and who had solved all the previous cases that ended up in his hands.

Now he has revealed all that he knows in a fascinating book, 200 thousand copies sold in Portugal, " Maddie: The Truth of the Lie” (Esquilo ed.).

C: Gonçalo Amaral, good afternoon

Gonçalo Amaral : Thank you very much

C: Thank you very much for being here with us today.

GA: Its my pleasure.

C: Well, in effect you tackle the principal aspects of the Maddie case and have a very bold thesis: do you agree?

GA: Well, I do not have a thesis, the thesis is that of a team of investigators, composed of Portuguese and English police officers, who in September of last year prepared a report that is included in the investigation files, which says that the girl died on May 3rd in the apartment, that the body was concealed and that a crime scenario was simulated, that of abduction.

C: That’s clear. The commissioner says the little girl died on the same day she disappeared, on May 3, 2007, the body was concealed and abduction was simulated. Pilar Cambre has a question concerning this.

Pilar Cambra: I have a question, because you state that the parents gave the girl a sedative, Calpol, because she had problems sleeping …

GA: Yes.

PC: … of insomnia, and that this medication probably led to her death, and that from that point … or that it is possible that the girl, upon getting up from her bed under the effects of this medicine, could have sustained a heavy fall, which caused her death. You deduce as proof, that her siblings who were sleeping in the same room, even when the room was full people, did not wake up when the investigation began. My question is: how is it possible to state that the girl, Maddie, Madeleine, died as a consequence of consuming a sleeping draught and that she died from a blow, if the body has not been found?

GA: It is in the book and is in the indictment, which points to death by accident, it was accidental. Death because cadaver odour and human blood were found behind a sofa, that is why it is considered that an accident could have happened.

C: In other words, there was blood and cadaver odour.

GA: Exactly. This is what we had in October of last year when I left the investigation. Also, in addition to this, it was considered that the girl had a problem with falling asleep and with sleeping and whether the parents, like other parents in England were giving her Calpol to sleep. It is said that there is a Calpol generation in England, because the mother says that it is a medicine, paracetamol and there are experts who say that it is an antihistamine with sedative effects.

It is true that we did not find the body, but it is certain that those children were sleeping, it is true that they did not wake up during all that noise and it is also certain that the mother, according to a witness, Fiona Payne, held her hand under the twins’ noses to see if they were breathing - what was going on there? She could have been worried about the fact that the children were still asleep.

C: Surely she was checking to see if the other two children were all-right?

GA: We do not state that it is due to the Calpol, because the body has not been found, but it is a hypothesis, a thesis that has to be worked on. What cannot happen in a criminal investigation, is that course of the investigation is cut off when we think about death, if there is the thought of death, it is not possible to continue to think about abduction, this is not possible. If we had continued with the investigation, we and other persons who came to this conclusion, surely would have been able to arrive at a point of inflection, and have looked at the thesis that the parents could have had some responsibility in this and concluded it was impossible, because now we have found this or that, but we needed to investigate the death.

C: Concerning the Calpol perhaps Dr Candela can tell us more.

Carmen Candela: Well, I think … really what struck me most, as I was saying to you earlier, is the lack of breaking down, in the statements, when the father and the mother had to give statements, this struck me … this is perhaps part of the structure of a certain personality, which will not give way to anything, or, in other words, the lack of breaking down by a mother with all the drama that these parents have had to experience …

C: The coldness...

CC: The coldness, or rather, the emotional detachment from what was happening to her as regards her daughter, that has made an impression on me, from the maternal point of view, or, in other words I think as a mother. It is true that I am a mother of six children, I am a doctor and I have given my children sleeping draughts, and I being a doctor and knowing how to administer sleeping medicine, the anxiety that Pilar was mentioning, of placing your hand to see whether the child was breathing or not, always stays with you. I remember when my children were babies, and they would sleep for two hours longer before waking up for their bottle and you would get full of anguish. In other words this hypothesis, for me, is very credible, very credible. Above all, what has had impact on me is that in a determined moment, because of all the evidence I have read about, what has had most impact on me, was the search of the car by the sniffer dogs... …

PC: on the clothes, on the cuddly toy …

CC: there were accurate tests, or rather, they exist and everything else are hypotheses without any proof. And what really annoys me is that with all the means that exist, at the level of the police, which I do not know about, is that he has been taken off the investigation, really that just seems surreal to me.

I do not know if there is a real greater power, interests, I get lost in this world, but really the accounts of the officer make sense to me.

C: What explains that they should have removed the officer from this investigation? What is the power?

GA: In the book I say that in this case there has been more politics than police …

C: More politics than police …

CC: … it is the only thing that makes sense.

GA: As police officers, we must always work in an objective manner, we base ourselves upon the facts and try to understandthe facts and what could have happened. We do not worry what is politically correct, in this case there have been many political pressures, there has been an implication on the part of the British government, I do not know if this is the same in other cases in England, a Prime Minister is concerned about some parents who have lost a daughter and I do not know if he does this for all children and all parents who lose children, it is a domestic problem in England. I do not know why with …

PC: … why they got so involved …

GA: … why a spokesman of the British government, leaves his position to become the spokesman of a couple}, why does he not work as spokesman for another couple, why an Ambassador in Lisbon does not remain in Lisbon and speaks to the National Director of the Police. Why does he have to speak 24 hours later with the police officers who are working on the case? Why does he have to speak with us later? Why do we have to come out later with a press release saying that there has been an abduction, when we did not even know if there was an abduction? All this is very complicated.

C: Or, you practically …

GA: … this questions the objectivity.

C: Practically you were forced to say that there had been an abduction, without your having any certainty …

GA: Yes, we had to form a strategy, well, we are going to prove that there was no abduction and next we will think about death. When the death thesis began to be discussed, well, then the parents said … we’re leaving. They decided to leave on the day that the dogs, the English dogs who are only used as a means to locate cadavour odour (were brought in).

CC: and another (for detecting) blood …

GA: … and another for blood and they left on the first day …

CC: I get lost when it comes to Madeleine's mother. I imagine, as a mother, that if a child of mine disappears and that the police accuse me, that this is the most serious, it will destroy me and will annoy me, but I would say, all right I am the guilty one, let’s see it through until the end, what i would not do is to would be to leave the story incomplete …

PC: No Carmen, but look, I wanted to ask the ex-commissioner, for me he is the commissioner, because I believe that it is something that is not lost, the investigator's character, which, Carmen was commenting about before saying that they have never broken down …

C: The McCanns.

PC: The McCanns. I noticed, when they were declared suspects or charged …

GA: Yes …

PC: … their entrance into the police station, I did notice from the news images, a certain collapse, or, rather an insecurity, in the sense that up to this moment they had been the stars of this terrible drama, and in this moment even if just by the way they walked, by the way they hid, yes I did perceive that to be a definite change of attitude, do you agreet?

GA: Yes, this began on a day when a colleague of mine went to the Mccanns’house where they were living in PDL and notified them of the date when they had to go to the police to be constituted arguidos, to be questioned. The mother said, and it is written in the indictment, what she said was this: “what will the press say? what are my parents going to say”? Well, this is not a normal reaction.

But we do not work with reactions of this type …

C: I have not understood this: have you understood, Pilar?

PC: what was she going to say to the press and what she was going to tell her parents?

GA: … what the press was going to say and what her parents would say.

CC: Ah yes,

GA:... That is what the mother said when the police notified her of the day they would have to go to the police station to be constituted arguidos and to be questioned: what will the press say and what are my parents going to say?

PC: what are they going to say?

C: … the press and my parents.

GA: We do not work with this type of attitudes, we work with facts. There is a very important issue in this, we investigated the abduction thesis and all the other theses, and when we came to the hypothesis of investigating the death, the parents said that they were leaving …

CC: that they were going away …

GA: At that moment they removed themselves from the case, because a criminal case, everybody knows it, all the police officers know it, we can think things like that, but tomorrow or the following day something else may turn up. Why did we have to be maintain the abduction theory? This was not possible.

CC: No, it is necessary to investigate another possibility…

C: And that a father should bear, as Carmen says, being charged with murder himself whilst the case of his child is solved. Therefore leaving the country, saying I’m going, because they are going to investigate the hypothesis of murder …

CC: One of them could say, I can not bear it, can not take it, emotionally this seems to me super cruel, and the other, because of course …

PC: I do not know if you remember, Carmen, the interview in Antenna 3 with the two of them, with the father and the mother in the moment in that he, who is the coldest person of the couple, she is more vulnerable, you say very well he is a surgeon, he is a man …

GA: Yes …

PC: … accustomed, to taking decisions, he, when the camera is about to continue filming, says to her that she has lost her composure and started crying, “do not say another word”, that is to say that in this couple there is also … commissioner, if the girl is dead, where is she, buried on land or at sea?

GA: Well, this is speculation, we do not speculate, they removed us from the case on October 2 we were working on all that, trying to understand how the death has occurred, in what circumstances and what happened to the body, now in these moments I cannot tell you, the most difficult thing this is …

PC: Of course, and why did they remove you from the case, what did they say to you when they told you: withdrawn from the case.

GA: Before withdrawing me from the case, a director came to see me, who knows me and who tells me, look you have to think that there are cases that have no solution

PC: but it seems to me incredible …

PC: but it seems to me inconceivable …

GA: … I have already said no, we will arrive to where it is possible to arrive, this has not finished for us, later it turned out that I did not give an interview that was attributed to me at a given moment, it happened in an interesting moment, when we were trying to bring the Smith family to Portugal, who said that they saw Gerry McCann, with a possibility of 80 % of having seen Gerry McCann carrying an inert girl towards the beach.

C: An Irish family that seems that they saw the father …

PC: The Smiths …

GA: It was part of the investigation and they removed me, and three or four months passed until the Smith family speaks for the indictment, and this procedure occurs in Ireland, not in Portugal as we had wished. During this time, it is said that this family has been the object of several visits, I do not want to speak about pressures, there have been the object of visits by persons who …

PC: two or three months passed, these Irish...

GA:---had to change their phone number, it is said that they had to move house and resort to the services of a lawyer.

PC: as if they had received pressure …

GA: to avoid these persons … It is sad that this has happened this way, that souldn’t have happened … and now it has been withdrawn from the investigation.

PC: Well, that’s the point I wanted to arrive at.

GA: In the book, the book begins by saying that the indictment was going to be filed, and I do not mean that this was when the case has been already filed, but at the beginning, months earlier, because we knew that it was going to be filed.

CC: It was known that it was going to be filed … because you saw that you would not be conclude.

GA: Yes, and because of facts …

PC: because of political pressure …

C: It is incredible, because it is also an insult to the skill of the Portuguese police, the McCanns in a certain moment say that they are not capable of solving it, an insult to Portugal and in this sense the book is a real apology, or rather I believe that Gonçalo Amaral has done very well in putting in white on black or black on white all that is known about the case and that now all our listeners can know.

We have asked this evening’s listeners to make their opinion about whether the parents are guilty or not, if they were involved in the disappearance of Maddie’s body and 36 % of our listeners say that they are not guilty but, listen to this: 64 %, a large majority of listeners, say that yes, Maddie's parents are involved, the thesis you have already heard, the other two children had been conceived by IVF, the McCanns had had reproduction problems for a long time, it had been difficult for them to have children and the British authorities are very tough on parents who commit negligence in the case of having given sleeping draughts to the children and would have taken the children away, withdrawn custody of the other two ...

PC: and they were doctors …

CC: I find that hard to believe, I don’t know about the legislation over there …

C: Its very tough in Great Britain …

CC: … but even so I can’t imagine it …

GA: only a minute is necessary, not hours … in one minute …

PC: it is possible to demonstrate that, with them both being doctors …

GA: It is negligence …

CC: but it is possible to prove it, it is not negligence the fact is that we are not machines, from the medical point of view, that is very easy, we are not machines.

C: Yes, but in Great Britain …

CC: the same medication, for one person …

PC: no but, but what the inspector says is that a minute is enough, then it is possible to demonstrate that it was an accidental death, but with the sole fact …

GA: They are English …

CC: if they administered a sleeping draught to the children and that as a consequence of this medicine, British legislation would take the children away in a minute, as he says, the paternal custody and the children would be taken away.

GA: but you do not even need the medicine, it is enough to leave them alone as they did …

CC: that is, that they went for dinner and left them alone …

GA: … another thing, its all of the children, not only Madeleine who has disappeared, but the twins who also left alone, all the children of other friends also. They were all left alone.
And it is not possible to say that these children were not at risk, that there was no danger, because if they had not been in danger Madeleine would not have disappeared.

CC: Of course.

C: Certainly, and it is even possible that the McCanns might have been helped by this group.

CC: No, what the inspector says is that all the other couples who went to have dinner with them did the same. They left the alone children and they could also have the custody of their children taken away from them.

C: Therefore the group of British couples who met for dinner leaving their children alone, very probably could have helped the McCanns to make the body disappear, of course there are so many people involved.

GA: I do not say to make the body disappear, but at least to invent the story of the checking, to give the impression that the children and Madeleine were safe. It is said that they went every five minutes …

CC: they went …

GA: but that night, only that night, they all went to see the girl. This is interesting because the McCann couple never went to check the others’ children

C: OK

CC: They were going to see Madeleine, all of them, every five minutes and why not the others’ children who were also sleeping alone.

PC: As the commissioner says, it seems to be of a crushing logic

C: OK. Everything seems quite logical and clear, in this sense, 64 % of our listeners say they have clear criteria

Anyway, we now thank Gonçalo Amaral who at least tries to clean the reputation of his country and of the police of his country, I believe that this is a very noble desire and a very noble motive, to explain…, to write the book and in any case he has provided this text from the publishers Esquilo: Maddie: The Truth of the Lie, which as I say has sold more than 200.000 copies in Portugal.

Many; thanks for being with us.

CC: congratulations

GA: Thank you very much.

C: Thank you

Source: Full Audio Interview [link to download mp3] to Radio Cope - La Tarde con Cristina

Thank you Ines for your wonderful help. Gracias.



22 comments:

  1. Calpol is NOT a sleeping draugh, nor is it an anti-histamine. The idea is simply ridiculous. This allegation is doing more harm than anything else to his reputation. And before people start going on about Calpol Night, that was released to the market in September 2007.
    Really, if such a simple, checkable thing is being touted as fact then I utterly despair.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nothing more to say on all this, its all aleady known all it does for me is to depress the fuck out of me that they are never going to face charges and Madeleine is consigned to an unmarked grave for eternity.
    I still think there is more than medication administering being covered up here, that does not explain the assistance of Gordon Brown.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "The person in charge of the Maddie case, former inspector of the Portuguese PJ, was removed from his job and is now retired, precisely because of this case, an individual who had a brilliant police record behind him and who had solved all the previous cases that ended up in his hands."

    Not that brilliant as he is up in court at the moment in the Joana Cipriani case if I'm not mistaken. Never solved that case either did he?

    You getting a cut from the book Joana?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Whilst British and Portuguese police found Kate in a state of mourning, reportedly seeking solace from biblical text, her husband displayed symptoms of psychosis. He took to the tennis courts and left others to search like 'headless chicken' on the basis of his abduction story. Some may say he's "criminally insane".

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just you keep the good work going girl ,you have a fantastic site ,ignore the do gooders ,thank god there is people like you out there to keep this case alive ,and not put under the carpet like the parents would hope for.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Gotta agree with anonymous...calpol is not a sleeping draught, in fact children quickly become immmune to the3 effects of it.
    There is a medicine in Britain called medised, it does assist sleep aswell as pain killing, thta would be far more effective. Thats just off the top of my head, being doctors they would know far more.
    The blood behind the sofa suggest a fatal accident or manslaughter perhaps from a too heavy blow to the head.
    The way gerry was acting in the mobile phone footage and the way they acted in the first few days niggles away at me and I keep wondering about premeditation.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous 02/11/08 17:04:"You getting a cut from the book Joana?"

    Do you see a paypal button in this blog? No.

    Do you see an on-line shop selling Merchandise? No.

    Do you see my name as co-author in any book about Madeleine Beth McCann? No.

    Do you see me giving interviews, selling them to the Britsh media like other do and did for vast amounts of money? No.

    What I do in this blog has to do with principles, morals and ethics.

    What I do here is with the conscience of being a citizen and within the full rights of the Portuguese Constitution (articles 37 and 38 - Rights, Freedoms and Personal Guarantes).

    I can and I shall use my right as a Portuguese Citizen to share and divulge freely information relative to this case and others that I find relevant.

    I will keep translating articles from the Portuguese/Spanish and French Media and Blogs in order to keep others informed of what is going on in Portugal and in the UK, and on the entangled web built by unscrupulous men and women over the deaths of children.

    Anything else you imply in your comment is not worth of an answer.

    Joana Morais

    ReplyDelete
  8. To the Anonymous who says Calpol is NOT a sleeping drug,

    It is not a sleeping drug but helps the child relax and sleep and like any drug, sleeping or not, given in excessive amount, it can be lethal.

    Just imagine both Kate and Gerry tried to ensure Maddie would go to sleep so they could go out with their friends. Both gave her the maximum dose, by mistake, one parent not realising she had already been given the maximum dose by the other parent.

    Also Calpol might not have been the only cause of death. The child, drowsy under the effect of Calpol, might have climbed on to the sofa perhaps trying to reach the window and might have fallen.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The Truth never was with these people.

    The only truth here, in this sordid entangled case is the death of a little girl, a three year old girl, Madeleine - and another eight year old girl, Joana, and before Mari Luz: all dead, all abused, all of them never allowed to be more than a tragic memory, all of them never allowed to dream , to grow, to become.

    All of their memories usurpated and villanized by people who have forgotten themselves as children, and have sold the memories of this dead children as a trade card for business and political interests.

    How? How can we let this happen? For how long? I say it's enough. I had enough!

    The time has come to do something, anything. Write blogs, emails, spread the word, no longer we will tolerate the abuse of dead children in chess political games. Fu.ck the Law, Fu.ck the politicians, we want Justice.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Notice that CALPOL® Night* also contains a sedating antihistamine called diphenhydramine as one of the two main ingredients, the other being Paracetemol.


    So what is exactly Diphenhydramine?

    From the Wikepedia, again, we can read the Side Effects and that one of the uses is a recreational one.

    Diphenhydramine

    Recreational use

    Diphenhydramine is used both clinically and recreationally in conjunction with opioids to relieve itching and act as an analgesia potentiator [9] in a dose of 100-800 mg depending on body size and length of diphenhydramine use. It is used recreationally as a deliriant, depressant, or booster for alcohol. Mixing medications with sedating antihistamines other than under medical supervision can be quite dangerous.

    Those who use diphenhydramine recreationally take a higher dose than recommended. In smaller recreational doses (100-250mg) the side effects are mild and are mainly limited to sleepiness and labored breath. The mental effects of higher doses (250+mg) are described by many as "dreaming while awake"[10] involving visual and auditory hallucinations that, unlike those experienced with most psychedelic drugs, often cannot be readily distinguished from reality. People who consume a high recreational dose can possibly find themselves in a hallucination which places them in a familiar situation with people and friends and rooms they know, while in reality being in a totally different setting.

    Many users report a side effect profile consistent with atropine intoxication.This is due to antagonism of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors in both the central and autonomic nervous system which inhibits various signal transduction pathways. In the CNS, diphenhydramine readily crosses the blood-brain barrier, exerting effects within the visual and auditory cortex.

    Other CNS effects occur within the limbic system and hippocampus, causing confusion and temporary amnesia. Toxicology also manifests in the autonomic nervous system, primarily at the neuromuscular junction, resulting in ataxia and extrapyramidal side-effects, and at sympathetic post-ganglionic junctions, causing urinary retention, pupil dilation, tachycardia, irregular urination, and dry skin and mucous membranes. Considerable overdosage can lead to myocardial infarction (heart attack), serious ventricular dysrhythmias, coma and death. Such a side-effect profile is thought to give ethanolamine-class antihistamines a relatively low abuse liability. The specific antidote for diphenhydramine poisoning is physostigmine, usually given by IV in hospital.

    Side effects

    Like many other first-generation antihistamines, diphenhydramine is a potent anticholinergic agent. This leads to profound drowsiness as a very common side-effect, along with the possibilities of motor impairment (ataxia), dry mouth and throat, flushed skin, rapid or irregular heartbeat (tachycardia), blurred vision at nearpoint owing to lack of accommodation (cycloplegia), abnormal sensitivity to bright light (photophobia), pupil dilation (mydriasis), urinary retention (ischuria), constipation, difficulty concentrating, short-term memory loss, visual disturbances, hallucinations, irritability, itchy skin, confusion, erectile dysfunction, and delirium. Some side effects such as twitching may be delayed until the drowsiness begins to cease and the person is in more of an awakening mode. Diphenhydramine also has local anesthetic properties, and has been used for patients allergic to common local anesthetics like lidocaine.[6] Severe, prolonged twitching and muscle spasm have also been experienced.

    The most common cardiac dysrhythmias associated with diphenhydramine overdose are sinus bradycardia, elongated S-T segment interval, and premature ventricular contraction.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Joana,

    Your patience with retardness astounds me.

    Textusa

    ReplyDelete
  12. I still think two doctors could get their hands on a more potent drug than calpol and if their only motive was sedation knowing the danger of too much paracetemol its an unlikley choice for doctors to have used.
    And if we are going with sedation at what point do we beleive she met her demise because given that the alarm went off at 10ish, there was a lot to be done during that time?
    Another thing that irks me is given the assistance of Grodn Brown and I beleive the samples at the lab were tampered with why could the McCanns not have had help in passing her death off as some kind of unforseen illness or condition such as sudden death syndrome instread of the fiasco that ensued??....;I still think there are more serious issues being covered here.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thank you for posting this interview, Joana. It is amazing to me that some people are more interested in 'shooting the messenger' than understanding the message!

    Can I just point out that Medised has the same formula as Calpol Night - paracetamol and diphenhydramine. The different names are because they are produced by different drug companies, - they are the same medicine.

    Also for the record, according the data sheet, - Date of Authorisation/Renewal of Authorisation for Calpol Night was 12th January 2007.

    Whether sedation is involved in Madeleine's 'disappearance' or not the fact remains that cadaver odour and blood was indicated by the dogs in 5A, and blood vestiges were found behind the sofa.

    No alternative explanation for these blood vestiges has yet been found. And a child has disappeared from the apartment.

    Until one or other of these mysteries is satisfactorily explained then it is reasonable to assume that the two may be related.

    Obviously British media and officials do not believe that Madeleine has come to any harm, just as they seem to condone leaving tiny tots unattended and unsupervised, and apparently agree that such behaviour is 'within the bounds of responsible parenting'.

    So you just keep doing what you are doing, Joana. Hopefully through your example, more and more people will be prepared to stand up and be counted for Madeleine's sake and the sake of all 'disappeared' children.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is no way two doctors are using calpol to knock the kids out, the contraindications of calpol only say the following and no where does it mention drosiness or sedating qualities....
    An overdose of paracetamol is dangerous and capable of causing serious damage to the liver and kidneys. You should never exceed the dose stated in the information leaflet supplied with the medicine. Immediate medical advice should be sought in the event of an overdose with this medicine, even if your child seems well, because of the risk of delayed, serious liver damage.
    So there!

    ReplyDelete
  15. ''It is not a sleeping drug but helps the child relax and sleep and like any drug, sleeping or not, given in excessive amount, it can be lethal.''

    Do you know what the lethal dose is? Or even an overdose? Bottles of the stuff.
    And Calpol Night was NOT AVAILABLE in May 2007. End of. You can speculate to your heart's content, but it's rubbish. The prosecutors thought so too. Amaral damages himself by clinging to this discredited interpretation of what few facts we have. Some of us know what ordinary Calpol is and what it can and cannot do. It has no sedatives, no antihistamines. It is paracetomol in a sweet suspension, that's all. Clutching at straws will not save his reputation, only damage it further.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Textusa, why is it 'retarded' to point out that Calpol is NOT a sleeping draught, but simple paracetomol?
    Why is it 'retarded' to point out that Calpol Night was released to the market in September 2007?
    You are big with the insults but short on common sense and manners.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous said: "Why is it 'retarded' to point out that Calpol Night was released to the market in September 2007?
    You are big with the insults but short on common sense and manners."

    You are wrong! It was first authorised/released in the UK on 12 January 2007.

    See this link: http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/DisplayDoc.asp?DocumentID=20133

    You should check your facts before being abusive to Joana!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I wish the report from the portuguese AND the british police, mentioned by Mr. Amaral and which he says is in the investigation files, would come to the public!
    I'm puzzled by how little of the files have been made public by the press. I mean, if so many have requested copies of the DVD, what for, if no one seems to be revealing what is in it?

    ReplyDelete
  19. "...sleeping draught..." what?!

    Sleeping DRUG, maybe?

    ReplyDelete
  20. calpol night and calcold both have diphenhydramine, a anti-hystaminic.
    And though it was aproved to be sold to the public only in Sept. 2007, its 1st authorisation is from January 2007 ( see http://emc.medicines.org.uk - and search for calpol or calcold).
    And the Mccaans, as doctors could have had acess to samples long before it was on the market.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Bravo!, Joana on your reply to anonymous, 2nd November!
    Thank God Portugal despite our many shortcomings is a democracy and gives its citizens the right to free-speach. The portuguese media and the portuguese "Zé- Povinho" would never accept gag orders from the portuguese government as the british do from their "Nu-labour". Remember the infamous "D-notices"?
    The poor inhabitants of the U.K. are so used to trash journalism that they judge all by the same standards! But with you, Joana, they are barking at the wrong tree!
    Congratulations and thank you!

    ReplyDelete