Another bunch of baseless sledging against the investigators...so let's have a closer look at these claims, shall we? Highlights by me in
red.
From chapter 3 of 'The truth of the lie'
"It is midnight when I receive the news about the disappearance of a little four-year-old English girl. The police officer on call was informed about it by the National Guard of The Republic (GNR) At the time of her disappearance, the little girl was supposed to have been sleeping in an apartment while her parents were dining a hundred metres away. An inspector is sent to the scene immediately to establish the initial facts. A forensic expert assigned to security of the premises will join him. All precautions are taken to preserve possible clues and elements of evidence."
As the crow flies it's 50 metres, walking it's 77 metres. Why is he saying 100 metres? That's a basic fact that everyone who follows this case knows. He wrote a book not knowing this basic fact? Or is he exaggerating? Hmmmmm. :
Amaral's 100m counts the steps the McCann claims to have taken to enter the apartment, that is, the FRONT DOOR. The front door is on the street side of the apartment, not the resort side. There is your extra 20m. Of course this changed as the McCanns statements changed so it's hard to be sure which door they actually used.
Let's have a look at the PJ Final report, which everyone agrees is the best record of the investigation so far. What does our friend Gerry originally say about the distance?
Concerning routines, he mentions that on Sunday, they had breakfast, between 7.30 and 8.30am at the Ocean Club, namely in the resort's bar a few metres away from the apartment.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id192.html
Gerry originally claimed the bar and restaurant were "a few" metres away.
Definition of "a few" from Free Dictionary -
Adj. 1. a few - more than one but indefinitely small in number; "a few roses"; "a couple of roses"
Somewhat less than 50, wouldn't you say? "A Few" is usually referred to an amount in the single digits, for example "9 metres" or "6.5 metres" not 50 as later claimed. In actual fact, it is 77 metres away by foot to the back door and obscured from view, again the opposite to the McCann statement.
The question now becomes, why did Gerry and Kate claim to be only a few metres away, and able to see the apartment? This is untrue...and it's Kate and Gerry who's accuracy and statements we are examining here, not Amaral's.
:waitasec:
Then there's this
Vitor Manuel Martins statement
"adding that he arrived on the scene about 30 - 40 minutes after the phone call from the GNR, at about
00.40/00.50.
At the scene, there were already some elements from the GNR and some people walking around the OC grounds, searching for the child.
In the apartment where the family was staying, there were different persons, including the friends of the girls parents, who were immediately invited to leave the apartment, in order to preserve the scene"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR_MARTINS.htm#p15p3862
His timing is considerably later than Amarals?
What is Amaral's "timing"? and why is it "later"? Please provide a link for this claim.
Let's have a closer look at what Vitor's statement -
15 Processos Vol 15 Pages 3862-3864
15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_3862
15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_3863
15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_3864
15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_3865
Witness Statement
Date 04/12/2007 Time: 14H00
Vitor Manuel Martins
Occupation : PJ Officer
He is an inspector with the PJ and currently works at the Porto PJ Directorate.
That he was placed on a service commission to the Criminal Investigation Department in Portimao, for 3 years, from 09 November 2004 to 09 November 2007.
On the night of 3rd May 2007 he was on duty at the Portimao DIC, in the company of Inspector Manuel Queir?, who was acting as head of the station.
When questioned he confirms the integrity of the service information drawn up from the stations inquiries carried out in the early morning of 04/05/2007, adding that he arrived on the scene about 30 - 40 minutes after the phone call from the GNR, at about 00.40/00.50.
In the apartment where the family was staying, there were different persons, including the friends of the girls parents, who were immediately invited to leave the apartment, in order to preserve the scene....After the site had been isolated, he proceeded to make an inspection, together with the inspection and photographic report carried out by Deputy Specialist Joao Barreiras.
He then states that upon leaving the apartment was locked, leaving the space preserved for the GNR elements that were stationed next to the apartment.
Great resource, thanks for that link.
So you understand that Vitor worked for the PJ, and the PJ were the second ones on the scene, right? The GNR were there first, they searched, then they called the PJ? So the timing is exact, what is the allegation here?
Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão Statement
"On 4th May he was called at about 01.15 when he was asleep at home, requesting him to appear at the Lagos GNR post as a small girl had disappeared. After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L.
They arrived at about 02.30"
"
They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed. They began searching with the dogs from the main entrance to the apartment, having given the blanket to his dog Numi to smell and begin to search"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
If Amaral was doing such a good job at preserving the scene then this blanket should have been taken into evidence asap. Nothing in the forensics about the bedding etc being tested.:
The pink blanket could not be tested because it disappeared.
The pink blanket only appears in photos taken by LE the next day, on Madeleine's bed. Kate claimed that it was taken by the abductor, so how did this occur? Perhaps the abductor remembered that he didn't have a blanket, and went back again the next day to get it?
Or, someone else went in again and got it...I wonder who.
The dog handlers were given a blanket and a towel, allegedly used by Madeleine. Why the McCanns didn't provide the clothes she had worn that day is anyone's guess.
Madeleine's blanket was PINK, the GNR officer describes PINK and ORANGE.
There is a strong possibility that this was not Madeleine's blanket, at all...either way, it vanished before it could be forensically tested...oh and don't forget one of Tanner's many descriptions included "bundleman", carrying a child wrapped in a blanket. And then she did a backflip and wondered why she wasn't in a blanket as it was so cold.
Miss Tanner was the key witness who saw a man rushing away from the Ocean Club resort carrying a child wrapped in a blanket.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-deny-links-chief-suspect.html#ixzz2DNHfBXOV
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Then of course we have Kate going on Oprah and worrying out loud if the "abductor" had wrapped Madeleine in her blanket. The blanket that was still in the apartment, that is.
There could possibly be TWO blankets. One pink and orange (given to the dogs, no scent, or Amelie's scent) one pink (later laundered by Kate. As you do).
We also know that, although the apartment was sealed, Gerry and David Payne accessed it, to get "bedding" for Kate and Gerry. No prizes for guessing what colour the blanket was.
'We went back to the apartment about four, four thirty err we slept err you know we’d got err Sean and Amelie err over to the apartment, you know we’d got the bedding done for Kate and Gerry and then we went sleep, we woke up about six,
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id373.html
So, the apartment was a crime scene, sealed by LE, and Payne and Gerry break in and help themselves to bedding. We have proof that these two clowns (who DO know better) breached a sealed crime scene for bedding. In a holiday resort, where one can assume a simple phonecall to reception would be sufficient to access extra blankets. Right.
2+2=4, at least it did back in the olden days when when Amaral and I went to school.
:banghead:
If Amaral was doing such a good job of preserving the crime scene why were the dogs allowed in?
"innumerable tracks [footprints] that were taken to be canine in origin mixed with red- and white-coloured chemical products, as used to see fingerprints, and an enormous quantity of hairs probably of animal (dog) origin that made it difficult to find possible traces, especially in the bedroom of two single beds and two children's cots from where the minor disappeared"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm:
You know that the GNR were first, right? They brought the dogs in first, too, that evening, as they were still thinking she'd wandered away. No one in LE seriously believed these people would hide their child and lie about it, in the early hours. Amaral also admits mistakes were made, because of this erronous belief.
The scene
was secured as forensics could not be completed that evening, yet Gerry and Payne accessed it anyway. How is that Amaral's fault?
So that's 1 paragraph and 2 lots of misinformation already :waitasec:
Yes, as usual, plenty of errors and accusations, but I have corrected them for you.
ullhair:
If you intend to continue posting false allegations against the entire law enforcement of Portugal, can you please start a separate thread as it is getting very tiresome to have to answer and rebutt the same accusations and mistruths on thread after thread.
TIA.
