1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

Update: Moita Flores Translation

Link to Translation by JH:

rough translation of Moita Flores' comments about the CBS McCann program on SIC Jornal da Noite:

Criminalista Moita Flores na SIC 18/11/07


What stands out from this work is the lack of credibility of the statements made.

First because the detective hired by CBS starts with the recognition of what is in fact an evidence — that the McCann's are lying when they said they were checking on their children, that they had not abandoned their children, that they were controlling the room — and that’s an unquestionable evidence, you just have to go to the Ocean Club — and then proceeds to a completely delirious theory of an abductor who came in through some sinister pathways — incidentally following a theory of the couple’s friends — crossing some very sinister pathways that would take him to the child.

Well, it should be said that he invokes the element of pattern behavior. No abductor at the end of two or three days watching a family, wanting to kidnap a child…No one has a pattern behavior, and there are no pattern behaviors when we’re talking about the first days of a couple’s holidays. Additionally, he had a deficient knowledge of the premises. Additionally, he wasn’t familiar with the house. Then the house had the doors open, which was a miracle for this invented abductor in order for him to be able to get out immediately through that labyrinthic pathway with the child without anyone seeing him.

Well, as for the lady’s [Jane Tanner] testimony, it’s something so vague and so inconsequent that it has no foundation at all.

As for the Spanish detective, the theory he comes up with is that of a crook, a crook without conditions to be taken seriously. Because he denies the first rule of criminal investigation, which is not to believe in absolute truths. and he considers as an absolute truth that the little girl was abducted, he knows who the abductor was, and where she is. Well, this is false. And this is so false one realizes it's a way of making money and not of bringing us the truth.

In a synthesis, what we can say is that those 90 minutes that are being discussed for so long, the secrets that are in those 90 minutes, between the discovery of the disappearance, or of the news of the disappearance and the dinner, that’s something still to be explained.


No comments:

Powered by Blogger.