21 July 2009

The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part I


One year ago today, the Madeleine McCann case investigation was archived, pending 'better' evidence. The three arguidos in the process, Robert Murat, Kate Healy and Gerald McCann, were relieved of their arguido status.

The archiving dispatch, authored by public prosecutor José de Magalhães e Menezes, and joint prosecutor João Melchior Gomes, is the document that analyses the case investigation and justifies the decision to archive the process.

I personally respect, but disagree with the decision that was made on the case one year ago. The archiving dispatch itself is riddled with contradiction and recognises the very significant amount of aspects of this case that remain unclear. How any case can be archived, sustained on a 57-page document that lists nothing but doubts, can only be justified by the need to comply with the new Penal Process Code, which was enforced on the 15th of September 2007. Under the new code, any judicial process starts a countdown on the day that the first arguido is made: after 8 months, with two possible extensions of 3 months each, there has to be a decision to either accuse, or archive the case.

Robert Murat was made an arguido on the 14th of May 2007 - 4 months before the new Penal Process Code was enforced -, and 14 months later, the case was archived, caught in time between two different legal frames.

Nobody wants to believe that Justice could be anything but blind. Personally, I don’t want to believe that this case was archived due to a technicality, at a time when there were still diligences to be made, leads to be followed, important details to be clarified.

But that is precisely what the archiving dispatch tells us.

Today, we start the publication of translated excerpts of the document. The full text will be made available when finished

E – About the Interest of the Reconstitution

Taking into account that there were certain points in the arguidos’ and witnesses’ statements that revealed, apparently at least, contradiction or that lacked physical confirmation, it was decided to carry out the “reconstitution of the fact”, a diligence that is consecrated in article 150 of the Penal Process Code in the sense of duly clarifying, on the very location of the facts, the following very important details, among others:

1 – The physical, real and effective proximity between Jane Tanner, Gerald McCann and Jeremy Wilkins, at the moment when the first person walked by them, and which coincided with the sighting of the supposed suspect, carrying a child. It results, in our perspective, strange that neither Gerald McCann nor Jeremy Wilkins saw her, or the alleged abductor, despite the exiguity of the space and the peacefulness of the area;

2 – The situation concerning the window to the bedroom where Madeleine slept, together with the twins, which was open, according to Kate. It seemed then necessary to clarify if there was a draught, since movement of the curtains and pressure under the bedroom door are mentioned, which, eventually, could be verified through the reconstitution;

3 – The establishment of a timeline and of a line of effective checking on the minors that were left alone in the apartments, given that, if it is believed that such checking was as tight as the witnesses and the arguidos describe it, it would be, at least, very difficult to reunite conditions for the introduction of an abductor in the residence and the posterior exit of said abductor, with the child, namely through a window with scarce space. It is added that the supposed abductor could only pass, through that window, holding the minor in a different position (vertical) from the one that witness JANE TANNER saw (horizontal);

4 – What happened during the time lapse between approximately 6.45/7 p.m. – the time at which MADELEINE was seen for the last time, in her apartment, by a different person (David Payne) from her parents or siblings – and the time at which the disappearance is reported by Kate Healy – at around 10 p.m.;

5 – The obvious and well-known advantages of immediate appreciation of evidence, or in other words, the fulfilment of the principle of contiguity of evidence in order to form a conviction, as firm as possible, about what was seen by Jane Tanner and the other interposers, and, eventually, to dismiss once and for all any doubts that may subsist concerning the innocence of the missing [child’s] parents.

In this sense, the legal procedures were followed, according to the norms and conventions that are in force, and the appearance of the witnesses was requested, inviting them to be present inclusively appealing to solidarity with the McCann couple, as it is certain that since the beginning they adhered to that process diligence.

Nevertheless, despite national authorities assuming all measures to render their trip to Portugal viable, for unknown motives, after the many doubts that they raised about the necessity and opportunity of their trip were clarified several times, they chose not to attend, which rendered the diligence inviable.

We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified."

in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4636-4638 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)

Related:

The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part I
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part II
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part III
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part IV
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part V
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VI
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VII
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VIII

PDF File via Expresso


26 comments:

  1. http://news.webshots.com/photo/2188918830064924833OyWOzw

    Interesting link...GOLDILOCKS...where did maddie sleep...



    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kate McCann hid behind her arquida status when she refused to answer 48 questions put to her.Why does she not answer these questions now in order to clear her name? She was not found guilty BUT she has not been proved innocent either

    ReplyDelete
  3. Qualquer pai ou mãe de uma criança desaparecida, particularmente aqui em Portugal, levantaria as mãos para o céu em sinal de agradecimento se a PJ lhe pedisse uma reconstituição do dia em que o seu filho desapareceu.Qualquer pai ou mãe ficaria aliviado com a possibilidade de poder de uma vez por todas desfazer todas as dúvidas da polícia sobre o que se passou no dia do desaparecimento, de confirmar quem mente e quem fala a verdade e de dissipar todas as possíveis suspeitas que possam recair sobre esse pai ou essa mãe.
    Estes mccann não.Não só não ficaram agradecidos como demonstraram que não tinham mesmo qualquer interesse em que esta diligêcia fosse feita, levantando uma série de obstáculos (indirectamente, através dos amigos, é claro) e estabelecendo um conjunto de condições para a realização desta reconstrução.Porquê?O que temiam estas pessoas?Não seria a possibilidade de se avançar mais na investigação sobre o desaprecimento da menina mais importante que qualquer questão burocrática,logística ou judicial?Pelos vistos não.Ao recusarem a reconstituição dos factos, o cruzamento dos testemunhos e o testar da hipótese de rapto, sempre por eles ferozmente defendida, demonstraram que sabiam que tal diligência não iria atestar a inocência dos envolvidos e a veracidade dos depoimentos iria, isso sim, confirmar as suspeitas da polícia, ou seja,que todos mentem, que não houve raptor algum e que a hipótese mais plausível é, indiscutívelmente, a da morte da menina.Todos aqueles que são tão rápidos a acusar quem afirma que a menina morreu e que os pais estão de alguma forma envolvidos de estarem a impedir que a menina seja procurada e encontrada e que estão a pôr em perigo o seu futuro deviam parar para pensar.Não foi precisamente isso que os pais e o seus amigos fizeram?Não foram eles a selar o trágico destino da criança?

    ReplyDelete
  4. To 'Anonymous' who commented on my language skills - I have corrected my introduction - indeed it's not 'facts' that remain unclear.
    Thank you for pointing out my mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you Astro for doing another "herculian job"! It will be a very interesting reading and will help us understand the circumstances of how this archival came about and refresh the memories on many shady aspects that many seem to conveniently have forgotten.
    Thank you for all the trouble and time you put into this (and Joana too, of course), it shows your commitment to the tragic fate and the memory of a little girl called Madeleine and the quest for justice. Afterall,
    you could very well be enjoying the glorious portuguese Summer sunbathing on a lovely algarvian beach instead.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Remember this....


    McCanns ready to take lie detector test
    By staff writers
    NEWS.com.au
    September 21, 2007 11:02am
    Lie detector ... Kate and Gerry McCann, both 39, want to show they have nothing to hide over Madeleine's disappearance / AP
    McCanns ready to take lie detector test
    Want to prove they didn't kill daughter
    Desperate for police to continue search
    THE parents of missing British girl Madeleine McCann say they will take a lie detector test to prove they did not kill her.

    Friends said Kate and Gerry McCann, both 39, wanted to show they had nothing to hide over the disappearance of the four-year-old, who went missing on a family holiday in Portugal in May.

    It is the latest move in a fightback led by family and friends against police suspicions the McCanns killed Madeleine and covered it up.

    Official suspects

    The McCanns, from Rothley in Leicestershire, were declared "arguidos" or official suspects by police in Portugal two weeks ago after DNA traces in a car hired after her disappearance were used to suggest the vehicle had been used to carry Madeleine's body.

    The couple returned to Britain last week after four months in Portugal and have been told police do not have enough evidence to justify interviewing them again.

    But they remain suspects and say they are determined to clear their names and continue the search for Madeleine who they believe may still be alive.

    Series of details

    Friends have revealed a series of details in recent days which could form part of their defence if they are ever charged over Madeleine's death and disposing of her body.

    Yesterday, an witness to the events of May 3 spoke about the McCanns' visible horror at Madeleine's disappearance, something the witness said could not have been faked.

    The couple's demeanour in recent months has been the subject of intense scrutiny, with some criticising them for their calm public persona.

    The hoped taking a lie detector test would eliminate any doubt about their innocence, the British Press Association reported.

    "If they are asked to take a lie detector test by police they would. They have said all along that they want to co-operate fully with the Portuguese police, but as of today they have received no such request from the Portuguese authorities," a friend said.

    "Kate and Gerry are happy to do anything that will help clear their names."




    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  7. scroll down to IF IT DOES'NT WORK....



    http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/tag/mccann/

    ReplyDelete
  8. Quanto ao processo que os ex do Ocean Club vão fazer contra os Mccanns sugiro o seguinte.
    O Gerry espalhou na Inglaterra que há um grupo de pedófilos em Luz, que sequestram crianças.
    O Gerry terá que informar de onde ele tirou esta informação, quem lhe disse isto.
    A pessoa que lhe dise isto terá que ser interrogada também e fazer um depoimento na polícia.
    Sabe-se que na noite do desaparecimento, o Gerry foi ouvido a falar ao telefone, referindo-se aos pedófilos em Luz.
    Ele terá que provar de quem ouviu isto.
    A pessoa que lhe disse isto terá certamente o maior prazer em repetir a história para a polícia a fim de fazer-se justiça à Maddie ou a Luz.
    O que os Mccanns declararam à imprensa inglesa deverá ser analisado.
    E fazer-se comparação entre a percentagem de turismo em Luz e o resto de Portugal. O que é crise econômica e o que é consequência de mentiras espalhadas.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I will tell in English what I wrote above in Portuguese.
    The Mccanns did spread around that there is a group of paedophiles in Luz/Praia da Luz, who took Madeleine.
    I suggest the ex employes of Ocean Club will process the couple, asking them to prove who informed them about this gang.
    On that evening, somebody heard Gerry on the phone, telling about the abduction by local paedophiles.
    Gerry will have to explain where he got this story from and the person(s) who told him this has to be interrogated by the police.
    The lawyers of the ex-employes have to collect all interviews gaven by the parents, where they talk about those paedophiles.
    If Mitchell said the same, he has to be sued as well, proving where he got this story.
    There must be analysed the percentage of British tourists in Algarve right now, what is consequence of the crisis and what is consequence of the McCanns'and the Mitchell's lies, in Luz/Praia da Luz.
    And I insist all Portuguese and British tourism offices advise clients to watch Amaral's documentary on Youtube or on Joana or McCannfiles.
    And read Tony Bennet's letter to Brown (Madeleine Foundation).
    They can see there were paedophiles,not from Portugal but travelling with the little girl.
    .

    ReplyDelete
  10. Taken from an ex policemans blog called 200...Not all cops are on the mccanns side.


    Posted in Other Stuff by 200
    I was in the newsagents today and I saw one of the headlines which went along the lines of ‘9 day’s later the Police still haven’t got a clue who took her’ or words to that effect. I’m referring to the awful situation in Portugal of the missing child, Madeleine.

    I was instantly reminded of that spoof American Police Department voicemail message which starts off "Please select one of the following options: To whine about us not doing anything to solve a problem that you created yourself, press 1." *; It’s often easier to blame the police than the real cause of the problem, that being the parents of 3 children under 4 who thought it acceptable to leave the children unattended in a hotel room in a foreign country while went off to share a meal at a nearby restaurant. So they returned every half hour to check on them, as if that makes leaving the kids unattended somehow OK. I’m a parent, a lot can change in two minutes let alone 30, especially with toddlers.

    Am I the only one getting fed up with all the hand-wringing in the media about how brave the parents are being and how caring they are? Is it, I wonder, anything to do with their ‘middle class’ social & financial standing that they are not being criticised more for what, had it happened down the street in one of our own towns, have probably have led to an arrest for child neglect? (oh yes, I can quote several jobs where parents have been nicked for leavig their kids unattended) I wonder if a single mother from the local scum estate had left her kids alone while she went up the road for a swift few halfs of white cider would be subject to quite the same amount of support.

    I can’t believe any parent would think it OK to do this, even at home, let alone in a holiday home in a foreign country where you haven’t got the first clue about who might have access to your flat while you’re out. If you’re thinking I’m being harsh just ask yourself this, how much cash would it take for you to not want to leave it unattended in a hotel bedroom? £100, £500, £10,000? And how much is a child worth?

    It’s like those people who wouldn’t dream of driving home with a brand new 8 piece crockery set costing £150 loose on the back seat of the car but think nothing of allowing the kids to jump around without a seatbelt.

    Isn’t it about time we learned what is really important in life?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm not making things up. The information that Amaral was keeping company with Levy came from this blog. Are you suggesting people don't know what they're talking about on this blog?

    ReplyDelete
  12. To the person who wrote a post in Portuguese and translated it for us in English. You should be more careful what you write - you can't make the comment that the pedophiles were travelling with Madeleine. That's outrageous and there has been no proof.

    When I go on holidays, I don't want to watch Youtube videos and I certainly don't want to hear or see anything Amaral has to say. Most people go away on holidays to relax.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anon:
    1. Open eyes.
    2. Insert brain.
    3. Read this blog - again.

    I've met Gordon Brown once. Does that mean I 'keep company' with the Prime Minister of Britain?

    LOLOLOLOLOLOL

    ReplyDelete
  14. A Loving Fathers Thoughts




    http://daveross.wordpress.com/2007/09/07/madeleine-mccann-a-parents-view/#comment-715




    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sorry eyes are opened. Brain is engaged and I don't have to read this blog again - perhaps you should listen to your own advise. But instead of opening your eyes,you ought to open your cold, cold heart.

    I certainly don't think it is right to slander people and to judge them in the public arena - that's why we have courts, police officers and lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  16. WHO is slandering WHO?
    WHO is judging WHO?
    Time will tell.
    Meanwhile the McCann's have done nothing to find their daughter.
    WHO has a cold heart?

    WHAT have they done to find Madeleine?

    Her own parents, good grief!!!

    Fled Portugal, turned their backs on the police, their arguido status a greater concern than any LEGAL law enforcement agency looking for their daughter.

    WHY OH WHY didn't they return to Portugal after they got rid of Amaral?! YES why didn't they come running back as soon as he was sacked?

    SURELY then they could have embraced the PJ and cooperated, fully, with an investigation that could have CLEARED them COMPLETELY and could then FULLY have pursued the "abductor"?

    SURELY Paulo Rebelo was a man that they could trust, Kate even wrote him a letter.

    And when the case was SHELVED, their arguido status removed, surely THEN it was high time to come running back and start anew?

    But no.

    Do the pros never wonder...?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Now, why in heaven's name would the McCanns return to Portugal where the people of Portugal made it known they did NOT want them there. Remember the boos and obsenities screamed at them when Kate arrived at the police station to be questioned? That mob was NOT the welcome wagon.

    You can't blame the people either -they were fed up with what had become a media circus.

    And don't lay the blame solely at the McCanns - some of the responsibility has to lay with the person leaking inaccurate information as it turned out to the media and the media itself who acted very unprofessionally and should have ensure their source had the right information.

    ReplyDelete
  18. When Kate could not speak high enough about the PJ..but then she was not a suspect.


    http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/world/173836/kate-mccann-mother-of-madeleine-speaks-to-marie-claire.html


    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  19. anonym at 21/07/09 20:15

    We don't want the McCanns with filming crews parading in Praia da Luz or in Lisbon, no. We don't want the McCanns back in Portugal being hypocrites and faking devoutness to God and mocking the Catholics in our Country, like they did when they went to Fátima, or to Rome. No, we don't want the McCanns defaming our Country, its people, its judicial institutions in every perfidious way possible, when us, the Portuguese, not only paid for the biggest investigation of a missing child but were the ones who infact searched for her in the early hours shortly after her disappearance while her parents stayed inside the apartment. So, no we don't want the McCanns back if that means that they will keep using whatever political connections, fake detectives and media/PR's to obstruct a criminal investigation or a possible court trial.

    A child died in the apartment 5 A of the Ocean Club, on May 2007.

    Whether she was accidentally murdered or not, whether some of the Tapas friends are in a pact of silence with the McCanns or not, all needs to be taken into account and presented to a panel of judges in a court of law; even if there is no cadaver there are some evidences and traces of cadaverine odour and blood in the McCanns car, clothes, apartment and that sustains the prevailing thesis of what happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

    So anonymous, we want the McCanns back, but to face Portuguese Justice in a Court of Law. That is all.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Reading all the comments, like to say that, because of the whole affaire about "our" little Madeleine, a huge lot of people have suffered and still suffer.
    I mean the extremely kind people of PdL, how offended they are because of this situation and Mr. Amaral, only doing his work.
    Am also convinced that looking after the kids every half hour only has been SAID for that evening (the other nights they didNOT) to have an alibi for their
    to fake abduction, that they could not help... and to move "our" little girl from there to another place.
    It is awfull that so many persons had to suffer and that the whole economy of PdL has gone down. All has to be sacrificed to.... hopefully sometime we will know why, what was behind this all.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I think the strategy is:

    Madeleine was abducted- blame the Portuguese.
    Madeleine hasn't been found yet-blame the Portuguese
    Investigation shelved-blame the Portuguese
    Investigation not reopened-blame the portuguese
    People don't believe the mcccanns -blame the portuguese
    kate is depressed-blame the portuguese
    Gerry had a bad day at work-blame the portuguese

    And the mccanns?Oh those poor, poooooor parents...framed by the corrupt police of a third world country....All they wanted to do was to find their lovely, bright and funny little daughter....and pleeeeease give them your money.Pleeeeease.......
    And those who don't believe in the abduction?Oh those cold hearted people, why don't they leave that beautiful couple alone?How can those evil people judge them in the public arena?Not a shred of evidence against them, they were cleared.....
    The dogs?They made a mistake.Their work?It means nothing!!!How can people trust them?!
    The cadaver scent?It was planted by the police!And kate had been in contact with six corpses before she went on to Portugal
    The blood?Who said it was blood?And Madeleine had had a nose bleed.
    Biological fluids in the car?Impossible!It was urine, from the twins!
    Amaral?A convicted felon who beats his wife and who tortures suspects when he is working.
    A monster!Don't need to wait until the trial.He's guilty!!

    ReplyDelete
  22. The report written by the PJ indicate they do NOT have enough evidence to put the McCanns on trial - you want them back in Portugal to hang them without any concrete evidence.

    Maybe you have to quit reading unsubstantiated rumours in tabloids and actually READ the report.

    As for Amaral, I believe the people he surrounds himself with speaks for itself. And IF he did hit his wife - then it's up to her to report him.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anon

    Not enough evidence does not mean innocent.Stop being an arguido doesn't mean you were cleared.
    It is the people who still believe madeleine was abducted and that her parents are saints the ones who haven't read the report.And they are also the ones who have been reading in the tabloids not the "unsubstantiated rumours" as you say, about the mccanns. but blatant lies, fabrications, false acusations and insults about the portuguese people, the portuguese police, the investigation, the parents cooperation with the police, PDL,about the private investigation, the new suspects about amaral and so on.

    And I also believe the people the mccanns surround themselves with speaks for it self too.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Have you not heard of being innocent until proven guilty? Obviously not!

    Where have I insulted the Portuguese people? By not supporting Amaral, it doesn't mean I'm against the Portuguese people or the PJ's for that matter. It means I question one person's integrity and honesty. I wasn't the one to bring up the rumours about Amaral beating up his wife.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anon, so you can question Amaral's integrity and honesty and we can't do the same thing about kate and gerry? Double standards?
    Does "innocent until proven guilty" mean that people have to believe what the mccanns say? Does that mean that we are not allowed to discuss what was done or not done by the police, what was said or not said by the couple and their friends, how they behaved,whether they cooperated or not with the police?Because I have the feeling (and I know I'm not the only one) that Madeleine's parents and the majority of the people around them don't want people to talk about this case unless they believe it was an abduction.Why is that?There was no evidence whatsover pointing to that option....
    And why is Sr Amaral being treated in the english media like a criminal?Why are the english "newspapers" saying the most horrible things about him, insulting him, telling lies about his work?Can they proove what they have been saying?
    He was just trying to find out what happenned to Madeleine.That's what he did, or that's what he tryed to do given the circumstances.Why are the mccanns always threatening him, insulting him?He was getting near the truth.Isn't that what they wanted?Probably not.
    If the mccanns want people to stop suspecting them there is only one way to do it:stop pretending to be investigating men and women who have already been investigated and ruled out by the police and let the real one investigate them without interferences from prime ministers and this time they will have to cooperate.If they really are innocent they have nothing to fear, even if they go to court.Only then will they be able to say they have been cleared.So, what are they waiting for?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anon "I certainly don't think it is right to slander people and to judge them in the public arena - that's why we have courts, police officers and lawyers."

    Yes... their is courts to judge your friends, the Mccann's. But they runaway from that possibility with all the excuses they can, even the most ridiculous... When somebody acts on that way...buys a ticket for a judgement in a public arena. Their fault, their risk... their profite! It works up to now... but will not work forever and people have memory and Maddie injustice will not fade.... We will stand here, year after year in Maddie's memory and on the behalf of all children victims of injustice, looking for the day that the criminous will pay for what they have done. No rest... NO GIVE UP!!

    ReplyDelete