12 September 2010

Never Forget...



«Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.»
Martin Luther King Jr., (1929 - 1968) Letter from Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963
US black civil rights leader & clergyman; Nobel Prize in Peace 1964; assassinated































































































69 comments:

  1. Wonderful to have all these together. Thank you
    Obrigado.
    Peter

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're welcome Peter, some of them were translated to English in this blog, other's weren't. I hope they can give a general idea of both cases.

    Bom Domingo, wish you a good Sunday :)
    beijinhos

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good job, Joana. A lot of material.......for thought!
    E aproveite o Domingo para descansar. Merece.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you Joana & co for all of your hard work, whenever I feel down, I just come on here and it always makes me feel like I have to carry on regardless of how I feel, I will use these video clips to show any of the non-believers not that there is many now.

    Gina.UK

    ReplyDelete
  5. Obrigada Fernis, igualmente, um beijinho :)

    Thank you as well Gina for stopping by, enjoy your Sunday

    ReplyDelete
  6. People I have told about the McCann latest story are appalled.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, thank you again Joana - good to have all these videos together. We do appreciate your hard work.

    Angelique

    ReplyDelete
  8. 8-} Is Alipio Ribeiro trying to confuse us? He says on the one hand (here) that the McCanns' should have never been made "arguidos" and on the other hand - as quoted by former President Jorge Sampaio that the case should have never been archived. Was Alipio under pressure? being misquoted? or worst suffering from mild schizophrenia, for lack of a better metaphor?..

    They should not have been made arguidos and the investigation should have not been archived. Two different cups of tea...re-open the process then but...achtung! only if you intend to keep looking for Madeleine! The McCanns' might otherwise not co-operate. Indeed might sue Portugal for "defamation"...

    ReplyDelete
  9. There we go again...assuming Madame Joana had been tortured by he PJ (and my understanding was Dr. Amaral walked out as innocent of all charges thrown against him on this matter) assuming there was torture (not proven) by the Portuguese PJ of a Portuguese "arguida" the question is: "Why was not Dr. Kate McCann treated likewise?" Wasn't there anyone with enough guts to slap her in the face a couple of times to get her started?".

    I am not condoning such approach, I am only posing a challenging question. I have no doubts the British police would have not hesitated to roughened up (given a good alibi) a Portuguese suspect to facilitate proceedings....

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thank you Joana for all you do to keep us informed. It is very helpful to have this series of videos.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I scanned the Sunday down the pub lunch time. Still nothing about the latest Mcantics, as far as I could see. Now why would that be?

    Many many thanks for keeping us informed in democratic free-press Blighty,Joana.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 9 I think you mean Leonor Cipriano, Joana Isabel Guerreiro Cipriano was her 8 year old daughter, who was murdered according to the Supreme Court by her own mother and uncle. sigh...

    8 Quite clearly, and in spite of all the efforts we have placed in trying to inform others about Portuguese law, you still failed to understand what is to have an arguido status.

    Quick non-legalese recap of what is an arguido - check PDF document for complete law articles (from 57º to 67º); check as well the Portuguese Republic Constitution [Artigo 27.º Direito à liberdade e à segurança & Artigo 20.º Acesso ao direito e tutela jurisdicional efectiva]

    According to the Portuguese Penal Code [Código de Processo Penal] the arguido [arguido - masculine singular; arguida - feminine singular; arguidos(as) plural depending on gender] is the one against whom an accusation is made against or to whom an inquest [interrogation] is made under the scope of a criminal case.

    That is to say if the said "suspect" has to make statements before any judicial or police authority the arguido status should be attributed to him or her, in order to grant specific legal rights, such as: the right to defence, of being assisted both during the inquest phase and after [i.e. in court] with a lawyer, the right to give and request evidence, the right to appeal, and the right to be informed of all the rights inherent to be constituted as an arguido.

    Wikipedia quote
    «The investigating police may ask the arguido more direct accusatory questions (the answers to which would not be admissible in court if possibly self-incriminatory and asked of a non-arguido) but the arguido must be presented with whatever evidence is held against him or her, and unlike a witness has the right to remain silent, not to answer any question that may incriminate the person, and does not face legal action for lying.

    Witnesses in criminal investigations are legally bound to co-operate with the police and do not have the right to silence and face legal actions if they lie. Because of the legal advantages, some individuals apply for arguido status to be given to themselves, e.g. when it would appear that the police suspect them but are trying to use their witness status to extract as much information as possible.»

    ReplyDelete
  13. Side note

    Actually if I remember correctly it was Paula Torres de Carvalho from Público newspaper… - The same who wrote this piece of … unconfirmed news Publico:PJ admits innocence of the couple McCann and whose former director José Manuel Fernandes always expressed his devotion to the McCann couple; just like Henrique Monteiro the current Expresso Newspaper Editor in Chief who, poor thing, would loose his faith in Humanity if the McCanns were considered guilty - obviously both JMF and HM wrote several editorials defending the McCann couple because they are truthfully very kind-hearted men, it has nothing to do with politics or other personal agendas, no.... - as I was saying Paula Torres de Carvalho asked in the final seconds of an interview back in 2008, titled “Diga lá Excelência”, a program simultaneously broadcast by Rádio Renascença and RTP2 to Alípio Ribeiro the (in)famous question to which he replied using exactly the same words.

    From a one-hour interview that focused on several judicial and police issues, what was the singled out phrase broadcast and used politically in Portugal and in the UK media [Team McCann Press Releases], can you guess it?

    I am not excusing Alípio Ribeiro, take notice of that, but he is a very hermetic man when he speaks, and in my opinion, a man that has such complicatedness to publicly convey himself should have been more careful. At the same time, as the National Judiciary Police Director I imagine that he could not simply say no the “Diga lá Excelência” invitation (or to “Prós e Contras”, as matter of fact).

    This incident, plus seeing how PJ Chief Inspector Olegário de Sousa was almost eaten alive by the avalanche of world wide media journalists and hacks thirsty for any information back in 2007, just reinforces my belief that the Judiciary Police should make an investment in organizing a proper and capable public relations office.

    continues bellow

    ReplyDelete
  14. What is interesting is how the UK media and the McCanns who have used Alípio Ribeiro’s phrase, taking it out of context, “forgot” to repeat what he and the Attorney General also said back in May 4, 2008, quote: «In the day that marked the one year after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Praia da Luz (Lagos), the national director of the Judiciary Police (PJ), said to be “very important” the presence of Kate and Gerry in Portugal in case the police decides to take further diligences that involve the couple. Alípio Ribeiro referred that “in the case that more Police diligences are needed that justify the presence of the parents in Portugal it would be very important if they accepted to participate within the Portuguese legal rules”.

    For the responsible of the PJ, the presence of the McCanns would be an important factor in the eventual decision of a re-enactment of the day of the disappearance, an hypothesis that “it is not discarded by the police”. His declarations were made hours before the General Public Prosecutor ensured that the Portuguese police “made what any other police would make” in the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, affirming that if the investigations “were not successful that would be something that would not shame the police”, bearing in mind the difficulty of solving cases of missing children.

    “These types of crimes are extremely difficult to investigate. There are one million of children that disappear every year in the world and not even 20% are found”, underlined Pinto Monteiro to the journalists in Castelo Branco. “It is possible that it is still discovered, let's wait till the end", he added. (…)Pinto Monteiro admits that "we already talked too much about Maddie” and reminds that in "England, her country of origin, there are thousands of cases like this" whilst in Portugal we have 14 or 15 “and the percentage of cases where the children are found in countries like England is 20%”.»

    read as well Clarence Mitchell: The Drama Shark & Former Portugal President believes that if the Suspicions in Amaral's Book are true the McCanns Process should be Re-Opened

    ReplyDelete
  15. pardon the redundancy of the second «again» at the 4th paragraph in comment 12 :P

    ReplyDelete
  16. On March 19th 2008, much before the Portuguese police released 16% of the investigations, we can see Mrs. Healey on an interview(BBC, see above) talking about this case.
    At that moment, Mrs Healey was looking much younger and much better than she was this year, in a church on May the 3rd.
    Imo, on March 2008 she could not believe the McCanns had anything to do with the desappearence.
    After reading the files,(July 2008) she got her conclusions : the girl died and the parents know more than they are telling.
    She saw the dogs, she read about the Gaspars, she read about the inconsistences.
    She must have watched Amaral's DVD and have seen that an abduction was impossible and that the abductor would not have fit behind the sleeping room door.
    And that Gerry's documentary did not show the American actress playing Kate's role.

    By now Kate could have told her the truth.

    Mrs. Healey is destroyed, the poor thing.
    She is now a very old woman.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Wonderful work Joana. After that just come to my mind the image of Filomena Teixeira (Rui Pedro mother). She looks so different then Kate or Leonor, showing how painful is the lost of a child and how destroyed a mother can be when her child was really abducted by a stranger.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Filomena Teixeira, Rui Pedro Mendonça's mum, in spite of everything organized with other Portuguese missing children mum's and various individuals what would later become the basis for the Portuguese Missing Children Association
    Associação Portuguesa de Crianças Desaparecidas. A fantastic and very brave woman, a family that won't quit and who never behaved in greedy manners.

    However, I think that even to compare her to the McCanns or to the Ciprianos is offensive; like it was an offence to use Mari Luz Cortés and Yeremi Vargas... and so many other children just for the sake of maintaining a high media profile for Madeleine, if indeed that was done for Madeleine...

    ReplyDelete
  19. Mrs Healey is not destroyed, no way, she is very well indeed, and lets be honest they are all now well over Maderlaine their only concern now is to get as much as they can, out of Mr Amaral, don't feel sorry for the Healeys, I can assure you there is no need. Its Mr Amaral and his family who are being destroyed, by a pack of wolves.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I don't feel any sorry for any of Tapas or for the MacCanns'family.
    If they are not looking well it is because they are afraid of the truth coming out or afraid of justice.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anon. #9:

    That's exactly what the british police did with Nicholas Bento, a portuguese man suspected and charged with the death of his polish girlfriend and who was completely innocent as proven latter. He was mistreated, insulted because of is nationality and his race.

    ReplyDelete
  22. There is a very tragic story going on in Germany, right now.
    A 10 years old boy desappeared 9, 10 days ago when he was crossing a forest by bicycle, going home. The police found his bicycle and his pair of trousers, on different places, but uptil now no sign of the boy.
    The distance between the village where he comes from and the Dutch border (Venlo) is about 20 km.
    A lady had found his trousers near a container, on a road, she took them to her home with the idea to give them to one of her grandsons.
    Some days later she realised that they could be the boy's pants and she went to the police.

    Dogs identified them as belonging to the boy and I am again impressed how competent dogs can be.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Joana,
    When I compare Filomena Teixeira with Kate was to highlight how different they are, nothing else. Filomena always remember me a symbol of the pain of a mother who lost her child and after many years without knowing his destiny ( he is already a man) she still looking for him and crying like if everything happened just yesterday.
    In the Pros e Contras, about Madeleine, Filomena was invited and the pain on her face was clear. I can't imagine a mother of a missing child going jogging everyday or organizing VIP dinners to commemorate the death of her child, because Kate knows that her child is dead and there is no possibility to find her alive. I don't find any insult on my comparison.
    But, yes, was an insult the way the Mccann's tried to highlight their business using another cases of missing childs, like what they have done with Mariluz Cortez and maybe with Rui Pedro. They jump on any wagon they can, to afford their commitments. Again this shows us their poor ethical skills and works on the opposite direction- raising suspicion on the public, who cements the idea of them being guilt.

    ReplyDelete
  24. What would we do without you Joana. A huge thank you.
    I had forgotten lots of this stuff.
    I continue to be gobsmacked as to how the McC's continue to 'walk on water.'

    ReplyDelete
  25. Good one,thanks Joana

    Now Healy the poor old thing? NO,no in billions years.THEY know what has happened to the poor little child and they SHUT UP
    They can all go to hell where they belong...no,sorry,they dont need to go,they are already there

    ReplyDelete
  26. :)] to Anon 21

    That's right! I was thinking of Bento and of myself. The other day I was crossing a street in London and I saw some police tape all around. I approached the officer closer to me to ask him whether I could just walk across to the bank. He said "NO!" and gave me a brutal push in the shoulder. I nearly fell. Imagine if it had been an interrogation...oh ! and by the way I am "Japanese white". I do look a bit like Jose Mourinho, but still, it was just a polite request for information...

    Anyway, as Joana Morais aptly pointed out, I confused the name of the mother (Leonor) with the daughter (Joana)or vice-versa. Oh my...glad you got the point, though...

    ReplyDelete
  27. Hi Joana!

    I am sorry about the name exchange. Leonor is the mother of course. My brain must have gone into automatic pilot and come up with the twist. Oh my! I have run out of ginkgo biloba!

    I am was aware of what "arguido" meant but now - after your tutorial... I am an expert. Thanks. I mean it...

    I must say in my defence that I was in one of those creative moods when I envisaged the scenario. Blame it on Quentin Tarantino. Of course one could not slap the "mummy faced" persona in the face right in front of her lawyer but...who would have seen a kick in the shin under the table? Ouch!

    "Do you mind answer the questions? What does "ouch" mean? I have asked you if "....". Sorry.

    They needed not have answered but had their staus been upgraded from "arguidos" to "suspects" they would have to answer the questions during court proceedings...

    Alright, alright I stop speculating. For all I know the poor McCanns' could be innocent (sight).

    #9

    ReplyDelete
  28. :p Joana the link to the PDF document you give above (12) is encrypted. My system can't open it.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Thanks for such a helpful compilation it does assist in putting various issues into context and noting patterns.

    The first three videos of Kate, eyes downcast, an inability to even make eye contact has always been recognised in people who are seriously trying to hide something.

    The agonised look on her face with the frown lies deepening at the tip of her nose bely her brave but false words. She was doing something right and positive for Maddie. Her expression to me suggests she is engaged on one of Gerry's "high risk strategies" that actually fills her with fear and foreboding. If she had actually felt the action against Goncalo was going well for them and helping Madeleine I would have expected to see a calm and faintly smiling look from her.

    I do understand Mr Ribeiro's remarks. We have said too much and they should not have been made arguidos. The findings of the dogs could have been maintained on file whilst the PJ continued to kid the McCanns and their friends along and maybe even (although unlikely) got them to do that vital reconstruction. A vast amount of evidence needed to be quietly gathered to nail this lot and the media storm really put paid to that.

    I am always horrified by Gerry's reaction when Paxman is putting a very serious allegation to him, you just used and manipulated the media as and when it suits you and were the author of your own misfortunes "reaped a whirlwind". His reaction demonstrates what a perverse and disordered mind he actually has, his increasing mirth, he just could not hide. He is proud of his ability to con and manipulate. In a perverse way to him, this was an honour, that being recognised by the great and very intelligent Paxman.

    I think it also emphasises Esther McVey has been unfairly maligned. She was stressing it would be dishonest to use the Fund for legal defence costs, that simply was not going to be allowed to happen, there focus was on Madeleine, not her parents, she was a lonely frightened little girl. That is quite clearly true. I believe that from the moment Esther realised, that in spite her honest intentions as an administrator of the Fund, it was going to be used almost exclusively on schemes to defend the McCanns, she did the only honourable thing she could do, she walked, along with another who I believe was a retired coroner.

    I have to say that the East Midlands BBC reporter is one of the most useless and biased twA^s I have ever listened to. It was like she was just reading from a McCann written script. Why cannot they use actors? This was from the starting point that the PJ had made perfectly clear they felt this group were the key to what happened to Madeleine and their stories just did not add up. To any sensible observer it was quite obvious why they needed them their, not actors standing in their place. UK Crimewatch uses actors purely to portray innocent victims and witnesses, this is what she was quite obviously intent on suggesting they actually were. She did not once put the genuine police case across, it was shocking, shame on you BBC!

    ReplyDelete
  30. 17/23 I completely understand and agree with what you have written; I wasn't criticizing you, it was just a recollection of my own thoughts and feelings on what I perceive to be offensive, even cruel.

    I too saw that Prós e Contras with Filomena Teixeira's intervention, it's the same one where Alípio Ribeiro, Carlos Anjos appeared if I'm not mistaken.

    um abraço, J.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Joana,

    Foi esse mesmo, e a D. Filomena era a imagem da dor e da destruicao que a perda de um filho deixa numa mae quando esta nao sabe o que lhe aconteceu e por onde anda. Um beijinho para ela, pela enorme coragem que tem demonstrado no inferno que deve ser viver assim.
    Beijinho para si tambem joana, pelo enorme trabalho e tempo dedicado a separar o trigo do joio e a informar. Um verdadeiro servico publico em prol da verdade e da informacao. Boa noite.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I have no sympathy for Kate McCann whatsoever. She and her husband have demonstrated that the only thing they care about are their reputations, and their bank accounts. What did she say when she was taken in for police questioning, wasn't it: what are my parents going to think? The anguish she experiences is the fear that she and her husband will be exposed for what they really are, and nothing else.

    The Portuguese police tried to get a confession out of them and my understanding is that in Portugal when you ask someone questions pertaining to their direct involvement in a crime you must make them "Arguidos" to protect their rights. I remember way back in September of 2007 watching an FBI profiler declaring that the Portuguese police tried to get a confession out of Kate McCann but that she felt that Kate McCann was the type of person that would never confess. How right she was. The Portuguese police made many procedural errors, but the biggest mistake that was made was allowing English police to accompany them during the investigation. All that the English police and whoever else from Britain that was roaming Portugal did was to keep the McCanns informed as to what the Portuguese police were up to.

    I have a couple of questions. It is my understanding that Madeleine and the children of their Tapas friends frequented the creche daily. On May 3, 2007 what names were registered as being present in the creche and what names were missing if any? Is there also any resemblance between one of the Tapas children and Madeleine?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Obrigada pelas suas gentis palavras, um abraço e um beijinho também para si :)
    J.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Guerra,
    It was reported that Jane T. daughter resembles Madeleine and had more or less the same age.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Guerra let me find the links regarding the Creche records.

    Meanwhile two interesting piece of information

    Forensic News Blog: Guilt by Genetic Association

    Extract: «The controversial genetic analysis procedure called "familial searching" or "kinship searching" recently helped solve the "Grim Sleeper" case involving at least 10 serial murders dating back to 1985. "Familial searching" or "kinship searching" can compare DNA collected from a crime scene to DNA databases of both convicted felons and arrestees whose DNA partially matches the unidentified suspect. In the "Grim Sleeper" case, DNA taken from the suspect's son, who was arrested on a felony weapons charge, lead investigators to discover a partial DNA match to the crime scene DNA that was similar enough to show family relation. This type of DNA analysis can prove to be useful, but many believe it is an invasion of privacy. "Kinship searching" is widely used in England, allowing investigators to interview people whose DNA partially matches crime scene DNA, whether or not they are a suspect's family member or were involved with the crime. In the United States, CA is the only state to have a standard guideline model on how "kinship searching" can be used.»

    And published by Público Newspaper today :«Ricardo Costa will be the next director in chief on the weekly newspaper Expresso, starting from the 1st of January, announced Impresa [Francisco Pinto Balsemão Media group, fondly nicked as our very own Murdoch mogul], holder of the media outlet in a press statement. (...) Henrique Monteiro will maintain his regular opinion column in Expresso and will continue to integrate the editorial board of the newspaper.» - Times are finally changing, and for better (hopefully).

    ReplyDelete
  36. The parent's of Jimmy Mizen (the young lad who was killed in London in an unprovoked attack 2 years ago) are to meet the Holy Father on Saturday in London. This couple are an example of what a Catholic should be The Maccann's are not fit to be mentioned in the same breath as this couple, but Kate Maccann did latch on to them a few months ago
    interesting to see what happens on Saturday. the bishops dare not arrange a meeting with the Maccanns, they just would'nt dare.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Acordão do Processo Casa Pia 1ª Instância: http://bit.ly/d3bwKg

    US Army FOIA labels WikiLeaks an 'extremist' Website http://bit.ly/dabvDC

    ReplyDelete
  38. I think it is in Goncalo's book, a remark from Stuart Prior "I have arrested people for less". But that surely has to depend upon the person. It is just the same in UK, first you have to have reasonable grounds for arrest and if you wish to put specific allegations to them, they must be arrested and given their legal rights, including legal representation and the right to silence - they do not have to incriminate themselves, it is up to the police to gain the evidence and prove their case.

    In relation to the creche, I find it interesting that the holiday only included creche for the morning session. Additional afternoon sessions were chargeable at an extra £150 per child. So the McCanns paid another £450 to get rid of their kids all day every day. Now why did they do that? I believe that Tanner and O'Brien were also getting rid of their child the same age as Maddie during the afternoon also, but the rest of the group, including the Paynes were only putting their children in the creche in the morning.

    Why were Kate and Gerry additionally isolating their children from the rest, mealtimes eaten alone in their room, breakfasts likewise? Some have suggested fear of photographs being taken, that maybe part of the answer.

    Why would Kate make such a heartless remark to Madeleine about missing out on the afternoon at the beach, that very day, I am sure she intended her to miss it.

    I do believe that every single thing that happened on that holiday was planned by Gerry and quite possibly by Kate also.

    If British Police have caught a petty crook driving a stolen car, he is just arrested and taken to the police station, interviewed and then charged.

    But if they are investigating intelligent and sophisticated offenders who may be involved in very serious child abuse, those investigations can even go on for years, until the stage is reached where the police case against them is so overwhelming, no matter how clever and manipulative they are, no matter how good their lawyers, the police got them.

    British psychological profilers were available to analyse the McCanns. This was a very serious crime where it was clear from the very outset, they would leave no stone unturned to cover up. There was no way they were going to admit to anything at all, purely on the basis of the dog video. Why would they do that? The forensic results were unsatisfactory, the gun was jumped IMO, the cat well and truly out of the bag. Far more can be achieved with such an offender by depriving them of what they clearly craved, knowledge and information about precisely what they police did and did not know. Once offenders are interviewed the police have to let them in on that.

    Kate and Gerry have made repeated appeals to the Home Secretaries of both the Labour and Conservative governments. The Home Secretary is the boss of the British Police. What can it be that British Police are doing that Kate and Gerry are unhappy with? Investigating them and ignoring what Gerry admits he wanted to "get into the investigation", his own Metodoed garbage. The Home Office have again just confirmed they will not speak about an ongoing case due to the risk of preventing a prosecution, now whose prosecution do you think they are referring to?

    ReplyDelete
  39. 36, I don't think the Pope would like to meet the McCanns.
    The McCanns themselves don't dare to ask for a new meeting.
    They know the Pope knows the truth.
    They cheated on the Vatican, they cheated on everybody.
    The greatest judgement came from Prince Charles who obviously refused to be photographed at Kate's side.
    It is even possible he did not shake hands with her otherewise we should have known it.
    A great man with a great personality.

    ReplyDelete
  40. The 10 years old German boy who desappeared 12 days ago is not yet found back.
    I fear he is not alive anymore.
    The desappearence happened in a public place, a forest, and not in his bedroom.
    Children's abductions happen in public, everywhere in the world, excepted for in Algarve.

    ReplyDelete
  41. The Pope probably would not want to meet the Maccann's who would but these meetings are pre arranged he may not know who he is meeting untill a few mins before it happens, The Maccann's would meet him they would be delighted, see it as their innocence confirmed. I too hope they don't latch on to the Mizens on Saturday. The Maccann's have ways and means.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Viv @ 38

    Very good post - and agree with you - they certainly didn't want to be bothered with their children on this particular holiday.

    As regards your last sentence :

    "The Home Office have again just confirmed they will not speak about an ongoing case due to the risk of preventing a prosecution, now whose prosecution do you think they are referring to?"

    Can you tell me where the above information is as I would like to read it.

    Angelique

    ReplyDelete
  43. Joana,not a day goes by without me "visiting" your brilliant site,I just wish these videos were made public,as ,in particular Kate Macaans body language speaks "volumns"!!!!and of course they didn,t physically search for their "much loved " little girl,because they already knew where she was,poor little mite,breaks my heart.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Viv @ 38.
    is the first time that I heard about the OC creche payed in the afternoon. Mccann's went to PDL on a cheap holidays with a package of all included. The all meals were included and I read in a Blog ( I don't know if here or in another blog) that a blogger sent an e-mail to the OC asking what was included in the package 'all included'. The answer was 'all meals in the Millennium restaurant'. The Tapas was out of the package and the Mccann's just went there on the Quiz night. They lied about the breakfast in the flat ( was free in the Millennium) and about the Tapas booked every night. Lies on top of lies.

    ReplyDelete
  45. :)] Hello Joana! Thanks again for your informative lecture. So...if as you quote:

    "Witnesses in criminal investigations are legally bound to co-operate with the police and do not have the right to silence and face legal actions if they lie."

    My question is: Was Ms. Tanner lying or just er...elaborating? ;))

    ReplyDelete
  46. Hi Angelique,

    I am not sure Jo would want me to mention the forum where I read this but here is the letter from the Home Office:

    This is the most relevant bit, but you really need to understand human rights and criminal law to completely get the gist:

    Section 31(1)(a) provides that information is exempt if its disclosure would or
    would be likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime, and section
    31(1)(b) if it would potentially prejudice the apprehension or prosecution of
    offenders, and (in both cases) the public interest falls in favour of applying the
    exemption.



    Dear XXXXXX
    Thank you for your e-mail of 24 March, 2010 in which you ask for the following
    information
    1. On what date or dates has the Home Secretary Alan Johnson had meetings
    with one or both of the McCanns?
    2. Who else was present at these meetings: in particular, was any lawyer or other
    adviser for the McCanns present?
    3. On what dates did meetings take place between one or both of the McCanns
    and staff of the Home Office?
    4. Please identify all the staff who met with the McCanns and again identify
    whether the McCanns had legal or other representatives with them.
    5. On what date did the McCanns first approach the Home Office asking for a
    review or re-investigation by a British police force into Madeleine’s
    disappearance?
    6. Is the Home Office carrying out what the Daily Telegraph called ‘a scoping
    exercise’ to evaluate what form any review or re-investigation into Madeleine’s
    disappearance may take’ and, if so, on what date did that scooping exercise
    commence?
    7. Why, according to the press, was Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and
    Online Protection Centre, Mr Jim Gamble, given the role of advising the Home
    Office as to which police force should carry out any review or re-investigation?
    8. On what date did the Home Secretary ask Mr Gamble to perform this role?
    9. On what date did Mr Gamble make his recommendation?
    10. Did he, as reported, recommend West Yorkshire Police to carry out a review or
    re-investigation?
    11. Has West Yorkshire Police, as reported, been asked to carry out a review or
    re-investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?
    12. If so, what is the brief or remit that the Home Office has given to West
    Yorkshire Police?
    Cont'd...

    ReplyDelete
  47. Your request has been handled as a request for information under the Freedom of
    Information Act 2000 (FOI) and we can now provide you with a substantive
    response to your request.
    I can confirm that the then Home Secretary met Mr and Mrs McCann in October
    2009. Also present were two members of the Minister’s Private Office and a
    Home Office Official. There were no subsequent meetings between Home Office
    Ministers or Home Office officials and Mr and Mrs McCann or any representative
    acting on their behalf, between then and the date of your letter.
    I confirm that the Home Office holds some information relevant to remaining parts
    of your request but that, other than the information provided above, we consider
    that information to be exempt from disclosure under sections 31(1)(a) and (b),
    s.40(2) and s36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Act.
    Furthermore, we neither confirm nor deny that we hold any further information by
    virtue of Section 23(5) - information relating to an organisation listed in Section
    23(3) of the Act. Section 23 confers an absolute exemption from our duty under
    section 1(1)(a) of the Act and does not require any further consideration. This
    response should not be taken as conclusive evidence that the information you
    have requested is or is not held by the Home Office.
    The general policy of the Home Office is not to disclose to a third party, personal
    information about another person. Section 40(2) of the FOI relates to the handling
    of personal information under the Data Protection Act. The Home Office has
    obligations under that Act, and in law generally, to protect the personal data that it
    holds. Mr and Mrs McCann would have had a legitimate expectation that any
    meeting with the Home Secretary was a private meeting. We have therefore,
    concluded that such information as you have requested which relates to Mr and
    Mrs McCann’s participation in the meeting and any views or opinions expressed, is
    exempt from disclosure under section 40(2) of the FOI, on the grounds that the
    such disclosure would breach the first Data Protection Principle in that it would
    constitute unfair processing of their personal data. The same exemption applies in
    relation to the details of Home Office officials present at the meeting. Section
    40(2) is an absolute exemption and does not require any further consideration.
    Section 31(1)(a) provides that information is exempt if its disclosure would or
    would be likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime, and section
    31(1)(b) if it would potentially prejudice the apprehension or prosecution of
    offenders, and (in both cases) the public interest falls in favour of applying the
    exemption.
    Sections 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) apply to information which, in the reasonable opinion of
    a qualified person, would if disclosed, be likely to inhibit the free and frank
    provision of advice, or the free and frank exchange of views for the purpose of
    deliberation. Section 36 is also subject to the supporting arguments of a public
    interest test.
    Consideration of the public interest test in relation to these elements of the Act is
    detailed in Annex A.

    ReplyDelete
  48. 8-} I am still puzzled by number 9 rather aggressive and unkind comments. That is no way to treat a lady!

    Consider the following quote and try to guess who wrote it. I must tell you from the start that it is not the author of one of those books on criminal investigation found in possession of the McCanns'.

    "Every police officer knows that there are two classic ways to conduct the interrogation of a suspect. The bad cop and the good cop. The bad cop threatens, swears, slams his fist on the table and generally behaves aggressively with the intent of scaring the suspect into submission and confession, The good cop...offers cigarettes and coffee, nods sympathetically and speaks in a reasonable tone."

    The author advances that "there is a third variant of the police interrogator, the (seemingly) uninterested cop" but fails to clarify its attributes.

    8-} Can there be an "uninterested cop" ? I hear you asking...

    May be. Could it be one who is trying to be politically correct or under instructions to be so? Which brings us to that excellent video/interview with Amaral made by Joana et al in Vigo. Beautiful photography by the way...

    El Mosquito

    ReplyDelete
  49. Thanks for this Joana. We've seen most of it before but this describes the situation in a nutshell and the most salient bullsh#tting comes out.

    The McCanns are always working really hard (doing what?). Over and over they're always working hard. Gerry's we want to 'create' new information. The 'we're not going to comment' then he launches into a series of comments slagging off the press (which he invited into their lives in the first place.

    It's so obvious they are lying through their teeth. But my worst criticism is for the enablers. Clarence Mitchell (he of so many teeth) is positively ghastly. He constantly invokes the 'Kate and Gerry' thing as if they were a royal couple. It's always we, we and we and our, our, our. He must be joined at the hips to this regal twosome.

    Also Laurie Campbell. According to her, among other things, why she became suspicious of Robert Murat was because he didn't want to give her his address. For goodness sake, he lived down the road so it was most likely common knowledge. I wouldn't be surprised if he started feeling as if he was being singled out at that state. What a stupid woman. She and Mitchell are so full of themselves. They call themselves journalists.

    The day the likes of the Campbells and Mitchells of this world became 'journalists' was the day journalism in the UK started dying a slow death. They're not the first and not the last - I shudder what the next generation of wannabe journalists will be like. The trouble is as long as Murdoch has a monopoly, there won't be a change and we'll always be cynical about what we read because we can't trust a thing his rags publish.

    Southernbelle

    ReplyDelete
  50. A wonderful post from Dr. Martin Roberts at Mccannfiles. Have a look. We have to read it with a pinch of salt. Is it, Mr. Mitchell? Time to look into another hypotheses to explain Madeleine disappearance with much more evidences then the fantasist abduction?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Hi 44

    The flights were included in the cost of the holiday too. But we are expected to believe that the man who organised this holiday booked one that did not have convenient flights for him and the McCanns. A read of Payne's rogatory clearly suggests that Gerry paid for flights both for his own family and the Paynes, rather than go to London to take those included in the cost of the holiday.

    Scots men are not renowned for being frivolous and wasteful of cash, but in this instance it has always seemed to me Gerry was very happy to speculate to accumulate, no doubt with his Master Cards. Lots of expensive tennis lessons too, I think it was important that the McCanns were always playing tennis. Part of his overall scheme of things.

    Had UK Police released further vital evidence into the public domain, like Payne's argumentative emails with Mark Warner and Gerry's Mastercard spending a British Judge would probably rule there was too much evidence in the public domain, highly prejudicial to them to make a fair trial possible. The public would have already made up their minds on the basis of what they have seen, hence they get to walk, I am sure this is not what people actually want.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Hi viv 49

    The reason Gerry MaCann paid for his family and the Paynes families flights, was because he is Scot/Irish ,he probably felt he could help out his English friend, as Englisn men are not renowned for being frivolous and wasteful with cash (tight).

    Jimuck.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Maybe Gerry has learned to be a bit more English then, because ever since he has never been prepared to dip into his own pocket for Madeleine, his own daughter, has he. I recall he even complained they were having to spend the Find Maddie Fund, trying to find Maddie or as brother John would put it, "trying to negate rumour and speculation". That must have been just too awful for him! It never seemed to occur to him that Fund was not comprised of his money anyway..well I guess it did, but fraudsters (and worse) do have this incredible sense of entitlement. I mean he does have a huge mortgage to pay off, come on guys, dig deep=))

    ReplyDelete
  54. Maybe Gerry's credit card details were not disclosed to the PJ because deposits could be traced back to the British government and questions would be asked regarding what services Mr. McCann rendered for the payments.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Today the German police informed that besides having found the 10 years old boy trousers, they also found the boy's T-shirt on a car parking, not far away from the container at which side(ground) the pants were found.This happened one week ago.
    This is strange.Why would an abductor leave such a traces, obviously visible, on a public place and why didn't he put those clothes inside of the container?
    Does he want to tell the public that the boy was victim of a sex crime?
    This man is sick, isn't he?

    The boy was visiting a friend, about 30 or 60 minutes away from his village(I forgot it), he started returning to his home by bicycle 24 hours before he had planned, without warning his parents, and he desappeared in a forest.
    His parents noticed his desappearence only 24 hours later.
    Tragic and I think this boy is not alive anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  56. 46 & 47 viv

    Thank you for that - I do see what you mean - read carefully it suggests a prosecution in the future. This actually, was worrying for a while because I thought all "our" speculation would hinder a future prosecution - maybe it will - who knows.

    Thanks again

    Angelique

    ReplyDelete
  57. Hi viv 53, you must also remember Gerry MaCann has an english wife, maybe it is her thats (tight), english women are not known for being frivolous and wasteful with money.

    No further comment on the subject, lets get back on topic.

    Jimuck

    ReplyDelete
  58. hiya again Angelique

    I am hopeful that because UK files have always been kept confidential, as they are in any unresolved case, enough has been kept back from the public to ensure that a fair trial could still take place. But the Portuguese system of opening up the file would have undoubtedly deeply concerned Crown Prosecution lawyers in UK in terms of whether it would be possible to put them on trial here for the homicide or other serious abuse and disposal of little Maddie. I think that is why Stu Prior and others specifically went to Portugal to get some of it held back.

    I think there is much about this case we do not know and actually that just has to be a good thing, so far as Justice for Maddie is concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Hi viv

    This is heartening - thank you for coming back on this point. Let's hope that we do get justice and truth in the end.

    Angelique

    ReplyDelete
  60. Hiya again Angelique

    I think it has been important in the strategy of the McCanns to manipulate themselves into the situation where the Portuguese Police are once more seen to be looking for the (stranger) kidnapper of Madeleine. That would then make them innocent in the eyes of the world and leave them free to conduct any money making scheme they have always dreamed of, like books and films Gerry was talking about with producers in around April 2008 that would reputedly have netted them about £10M.

    To that end Gerry has sought to get into the police files a vast amount of stuff that points away from them and towards gypies and other paedophiles. His reasoning is rather basic, if there is such a dearth of other evidence that does not involve us, that will more than cancel out the evidence there is that is against us. But what he does not wish to logically face is that it is the quality of the evidence against them that will make both British and Portuguese authorities resolute, they are the culprits in the disappearance of Madeleine. He can set Portuguese lawyers onto the Portuguese Police just as much as he likes with files full of faked rubbish. He can demand the very able Ricardo Paiva gets the sack. He can politicise the issues and badger one Home Secretary after another, that can only worsen his situation. It would be an incredible cous for the current Home Secretary if she can preside over a police service who bring to book those who have offended against Maddie, just as Leicester Police have vowed they intend to do.

    To an extent, we already have justice for little Maddie McCann, because all the scheming and bright eyed plans of fabulous fame and wealth, dreamed up by her own father, are utterly thwarted, as is his determination to be seen to be "innocent".

    There are many current indications that we will see justice for little Maddie in the full sense of the word. I have never been able to understand why British Police acting as they always do, means coverup. The fact that they want to keep this case well and truly under wraps is because they know full well if they don't, they will never be able to prosecute them. Kate and Gerry have fostered and encouraged a media scrum, that is another means of "defence". If all else fails I am sure they will rely upon Article 6 European Convention on Human Rights, by insisting too much is in the public domain, this is at least partially why they draw attention to Goncalo Amaral, but of course it is also for what they have always been after, money.

    I believe Goncalo does know real facts about this case but will not disclose them, because he wants the same thing we all do. Justice, but can Kate and Gerry run the risk with what they will clearly see as a loose cannon who knows far more about them than they are comfortable with? Well that depends upon whether they ever learn any basic common sense. I think Sofia Leal just offered them a little warning. They should heed it.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Verdade da Mentira

    "Alias, lanco desde ja um repto aos investigadores universitarios das Ciencias da Comunicacao para se debrucarem sobre este caso e observarem, analisarem e investigarem como um caso simples se converteu no maior case mediatico dos tempos modernos. Ha algo desproporcionado em todo este caso e suramente que o contributo dos academicos podera ser interessante."

    The above is a quote from "The Truth of the Lie." Mr. Amaral basically says: I challenge university researchers in the field of communication sciences to take a hard look at this case to analyse and investigate how a simple case turned into the biggest media covered case of modern times. There is something disproportionate in all this and surely the contribution by academics would be interesting.

    Disproportionate indeed, it could have been a simple case if British politicians didn't stick their noses in it. Political pressure was exerted by England from the beginning; Mrs Kate McCann referred to it, so did Mr. Amaral and even Mr. Socrates. I recall Mr. Socrates, in an interview with a Spanish paper, alluding to the meddling of British politicians suggesting that they should let the Police take care of the matter. Nevertheless, the pressure exerted by Britain became too much for even him to ignore.

    The English police were dispatched to Portugal to protect the couple; that was their directive. Mr. Amaral points out in his book how some members of the English police became troubled when they began to realise that the child had died and that the parents were likely responsible. Nonetheless, they followed their directive, they protected the McCanns, and they even relayed to them confidential information regarding the investigation. And when the exemplary British couple left for England, the English police went with them. Mission accomplished no need to find out what happened to the girl any longer, probably because they already knew. So what exactly did England do to help discover what happened to Madeleine, beside the dogs, very little. What did they do then? Well, many things:

    They launched a worldwide campaign to destroy the reputation of the Portuguese police.
    They portrayed Portugal as a country overrun by paedophiles and they urged everyone not to vacation there.
    They did not heed the majority of requests made by the Portuguese police for information necessary to solve the crime.
    Yes, they did do the Forensic tests but you have to wonder whether all the delays were due to the nature of the testing procedures or due to coming up with what they deemed to be an interpretation of the results that would be accepted by the public.
    The British government, though, did provide astoundingly excellent public relations services for the McCanns. Why, if I restricted myself to following the English media, I too would believe that they are the salt of the earth.

    You must forgive me for not believing that English authorities intend to prosecute the person or persons responsible for Madeleine’s death. I've followed this case long enough to know better.

    Why was it disproportionate? That is the question isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  62. 60 viv

    Thank you for your post -it was heartening to read that we may eventually see a better outcome. It is astonishing how powerful GM has become, he has altered the way investigations of crime are pursued and changed peoples perception of him through the media. Will there be any impetus in regard to the Police in this country forcing an investigation, when all I have read is that "new evidence' needs to found in order for the Portuguese Police to re-open the case. No other Police force can open the case. We, our Police force, may have doubts about his involvement but nothing can proceed without this evidence.

    He may well be considered the most intelligent media manipulator but this is not a crime. : (

    Angelique

    ReplyDelete
  63. Angelique, If I or a representative of mine were able to sit down with the editors of popular so called newspapers and be allowed to "shape the stories", I too would be renowned for being an intelligent media manipulator.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Hi Angelique

    I find it very unlikely that Gerry has changed the way that crime is investigated in either Portugal or UK in its most basic sense. But police forces are always open to learning with the benefit of hindsight. It is difficult to plan for encountering someone quite like Gerry McCann who even got his mates to trample the crime scene and mess with the shutters. I suppose the most obvious learning is, always treat parents from the very outset as prime suspects in a suspicious disappearance of a child, particularly when they claim to be adamant about exactly what happened but say they were not there!!. It is easy for UK officers because we get so much crime from parents for them to learn from, it is far less common in Portugal. I think Goncalo does say in his book that UK procedures should be adopted and much learning in Portugal can be taken from that.

    He has undoubtedly set out to change public perception, not just of himself, but of Portugal and its police officers. I think there will be Sun readers who soak that up like an old sponge, but in the main, reasonable people see Gerry for what he is, cold, obsessed with very large sums of cash, manipulative, odd in his behaviour and therefore highly suspicious. For me, the fact that he feels the need to just keep on doing this, just makes him even more suspect. It is far beyond the norm of what anyone would expect from a parent who lost their child, but actually hopes they may be still alive. As police officers have confirmed his own media seeking activities would have signed her death warrant were she genuinely with a dangerous child kidnapper unknown to the McCanns.

    I think people are confused about the legal situation and the question of overlapping jurisdictions. Given the crime happened in Portugal they obviously had primary responsibility to thoroughly investigate that and try to find out what happened. Whilst they did find quite a lot of evidence, highly adverse to Kate and Gerry McCann and clearly suggesting their involvement in some way, that evidence did not reach the stage of providing any clear trail as to what actually happened to Madeleine sufficient for them to charge anyone with any specific criminal offence. Having taken that investigation as far as they reasonably and economically could with no less than two senior officers heading up those inquiries it was shelved in Portugal. If some stranger took Madeleine from Portugal then only the Portuguese Police have the jurisdiction to take that investigation forward and prosecute the offender. This is why they repeatedly say to Kate and Gerry, bring us further relevant and CREDIBLE evidence of this and we will re-open the investigation.

    But what people wrongly assume is that meant the inquiry in UK was also shelved. IN our own law and procedure that just could not happen where it is felt that British parents offended against a British child abroad in a very serious way. Because Kate and Gerry are specifically living in England and Wales they are governed by the law and procedure in that specific area. That means that if they were responsible for the homicide of Madeleine in Portugal, under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 British Police must pursue for that when they return to the jurisdiction (or they can request their return or the foreign police deal with them) and they must prosecute them for that offence when they have sufficient evidence, even though it happened abroad.

    Likewise under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, if Madeleine was being sexually abused abroad the police in England and Wales have jurisdiction to deal with Kate, Gerry and any others that may have been involved in those offences.

    cont'd..

    ReplyDelete
  65. IMO, this is why the Home Office do not want to say very much other than the case continues and of course Leicester Police have said they intend to bring the offenders to justice. The reality is that if what Kate and Gerry say is true, they have no jurisdiction to do so, only if it was them or their friends that actually offended against Madeleine. Hence we have Gerry, via his lawyer saying they want the case re-opened in Portugal (because that would tend to suggest they are innocent) and he wants a "review" in UK, because he does not want British authorities, including the Serious and Organised Crime AGency specifically investigating him!

    The clue is in the title of the agency that is involved, this was a serious and organised crime, and I think it is quite obvious, one of the prime motivations for it was the huge amounts of money Gerry could make out of it.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Joana when this is all over and justice is served for Madeleine,
    and we all go our own ways in life again, i will never forget your bravery , passion, commitment ,in seeking justice for a child let down by the people who should have protected her the most.

    As years go by ,i will always look for the name JOANA MORAIS on the net, i will always look for a friend.

    Im saying this because i feel the fight is nearly over, the fairytale (lie) is coming to an end.

    Justice is going to be served.

    ReplyDelete
  67. thank you for your kind words Jim, a hug from Lisbon, wish you and everyone else a good weekend :)

    ReplyDelete
  68. Looking at the photos of the two, supposedly, heartbroken Mums above, they look far from being devastated by the loss of a child, but as thought they had taken great pains to make sure they came out good in their photos. If I had lost a child I would have looked many years older overnight and wouldn't have given a damn about how I looked for the camera.

    ReplyDelete