Kate demanded Amaral be removed from case

http://duartelevypt.wordpress.com/2009/05/11/maddie-entrevista-a-oprah-foi-operacao-financeira/

http://tinyurl.com/omcxkz
Maddie: interview with Oprah was financial transaction
2009 May 11

Google translation

The presenter of television north star American Oprah turned out to be a real financial transaction success with immediate results to the fund created by the couple nine days after Madeleine disappeared have been given as in Praia da Luz in May 2007.

According to the latest data available, the amount in the reserve fund has grown considerably thanks to the large number of donations from the United States.
A source close to the direction of the Madeleine Fund "Leaving No Stone Unturned" confirmed that "one of the objectives of the couple" to accept the interview on "Oprah Show", which previously had rejected, was precisely to get fresh money to finance the search for child as in Europe, nobody contributed financially. "
Gerry McCann, as well as their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, had already alerted to the fact that private body is left without the financial capacity to continue the campaign of the couple.
The website of the Madeleine fund "Leaving No Stone Unturned" underwent some changes easier now that the gifts from the American continent: the system of payment "Paypal" for England, was now added to its American version, which increases the speed with that transfers are made to that body. Also, the virtual store of the fund is now proposing new t-shirt with the lettering "Do not give up on me" and "Never give up" accompanied by a picture of Madeleine.

Relaunched Oprah sightings
Another consequence of the "Oprah Show", where the McCann presented a new image of something that would Madeleine today, over thirty new witnesses now claim to have seen the child in the American continent.
Although Kate and Gerry McCann are only using the services of two former British police, Clarence Mitchell, the spokesman of the couple, has said that "all are to be found and where there is a fragment of hope the calls are being investigated. "
As the PJ and the British police feared the transmission of that program caused a new wave of evidence that, for now, focus on the American continent, but are expected to "Maddie fever" would spread to the whole world already the Oprah Show is broadcast in 144 countries.
"I do not know how two former policemen, without any help, will be able to control or investigate the evidence that will now appear ... if in fact they are investigating what it is, is not it that will help," stated a responsible Police in Leicester.

"Madeleine was here" the McCann also
"The documentary of McCann has nothing new to allow relaunch the investigation to the disappearance of the child," said one of the inspectors of the PJ to the Algarve, in May 2007, participated in the investigation officer.
Although the new documentary has not yet been broadcast in Australia - is scheduled for tomorrow in the CIS - the inspector can view a copy of the issue of Channel 4. The documentary, entitled "Madeleine was here" (Madeleine was here), is based on little more than 4,800 pages of the process that the prosecutor released and given by the nine English versions of the so-called "group of Tapas." The footage was also addressed by the Gerry McCann with the help of Matthew Oldfield and Jane Tanner who were in Praia da Luz in early April.
Questioned about the new "suspect" revealed by the documentary, the inspector was limited to confirm that "there are many individuals who were investigated and away from any suspicion whose identity is not known the couple and their researchers" which is explained by the need to "safeguard the security and the identity of innocent people."
Dave Edgar and Arthur Cowley, two retired police officers, investigators are chosen to succeed the Spanish detectives and men of hand employed by McCann, as the above, do not speak Portuguese and their expertise has never been the abduction of children.
"If in fact the McCann couple want to move the investigation to the disappearance of her daughter, the only suggestion I can do is to request the reopening of the case and cooperate with the PJ," said the inspector adding "never did. They depart by Gonçalo Amaral of PJ as Ms Kate was required, I see now that other object that may have to continue our work. "

Duarte Levy

How on earth does that work? The McCann - quite rightly IMO are the prime suspects in there daughters disappearance. Firstly none of there stories added up and then there friends accused an innocent man. Then the mother washes the toy of the missing child as the pj comes..and refuses to answer questions when asked them. And because the detective in charge of the case happens to think shes a liar she gets him replaced? This is the weirdest case ever when they go on to let the friends read each others statements at Leicester.

Somehow it seems that Kate is totally in charge of this show..

Absolutely UNBELIEVABLE!

i dont think kate mccann was in any position to demand the removal of a police officer from the case when she refused to answer all the police questions, so much for leaving every stone unturned

refused to cooperate with police
refused to do a reconstruction
did not look for her daughter at all on the night
left her other two babies alone once alledgedly discovering madeleine was missing
doesnt look good does it
imo she knew she was dead and everything since that moment was damage limitation only it has failed and backfired imo big time

She did not require he was removed. He was removed after he received a suspended prison sentence for fabricating evidence.

The outpouring of help to the McCanns by the rich and powerful of Britain had an effect on this case. They had Richard Branson, J.K. Rowling, and the Prime Minister pressuring the government and providing money to them.

Rowling's oldest child is half-Portuguese and she used to live in the country. She helped Kate write a book and raise millions. She denied it, but they have the same publisher who was JKR's private agent at the time. Also her husband is a Scottish doctor just like Gerry.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Cann-write-book-Madeleines-disappearance.html

As for Branson, owner of Virgin Airlines, many of the British articles about his involvement have been scrubbed from the Internet. But here's one from BBC about Branson giving them 100,000 dollars, and somewhere there is also a quote that he believed they were innocent.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6990000/newsid_6997400/6997492.stm

brit1981 said:

She did not require he was removed. He was removed after he received a suspended prison sentence for fabricating evidence.

Click to expand...

Nope not true.

That happened after he was removed from the case. That wasn't the reason he was removed and Kate had nothing to do with it.

whats wrong with rich people donating money to help fins a missing child. When two girls went missing in Soham plenty of celebrities gave money to the fmailies, and made appeals. I do beleive I read that the families were able to use this money to go away for a few weeks after the children had been found murdered (and I fully support them in doing this). And this case only lasted two weeks but still caused a huge media hoopla - the shrine to the girls became a tourist attraction with people being bused in to get their photo taken in front of it, the media were camped out with 24 hour rolling news, when they finally charged someone and had a trial, people could actually sign up to get updates on the case sent to their mobiles. It seemed people got so caught up in the hoopla they forgot it was about two little girls who lost their lives in a violent and terrifying way. I suspect if the girls from Soham (holly and jessica) had not been found it would have turned out to be a similar scenario to the McCann case.

Amaral also pops up in the 2012 Amensty international report for Portugal. apparently the courts did rule that the mother of Joana Cipriano was tortured, and their ruling was upheld in a higher court, and Amaral was convicted of giving false evidence in the torture case. the reason why no officer was ever convicted for the torture was because she had been hooded and could not identify individuels.

brit1981 said:

Amaral also pops up in the 2012 Amensty international report for Portugal. apparently the courts did rule that the mother of Joana Cipriano was tortured, and their ruling was upheld in a higher court, and Amaral was convicted of giving false evidence in the torture case. the reason why no officer was ever convicted for the torture was because she had been hooded and could not identify individuels.

Click to expand...

After what she did to that child, she's lucky she wasn't killed by the public or someone else.
No empathy here.

rpgman said:

After what she did to that child, she's lucky she wasn't killed by the public or someone else.
No empathy here.

Click to expand...

I am sorry are you advocating police torturing women in order to get a confession?
She confessed only after being tortured, and retracted it as soon as she could. There was never any evidence against her accept a confession which the courts have ruled was gained following torture. If your child disappeared would you think the police were correct to hood you and torture you rather than actually investigate? Do you think your country should adopt the hooding and torturing of people in order to get confessions so as to save money by doing an actual investigation.
Like the Mccann case there was very little time, about two hours from when she was last seen by someone outside the family (as shopkeeper) to when the police were called. In that time Joana had to get back from the shop, for some reason be murdered by her mother, according to amarel chopped up and stored, and then either fed to the pigs, or stored and moved to Spain, then the scene fully cleaned so no trace of blood could be found, then the mother had to be seen looking for her, and go down to the shop from where she called the police. All in a space of a couple of hours.
The fact is there is no escaping the fact the police hooded and tortured a woman on her own, after which she confessed. And as soon as she was no longer alone with these big brave police officers she retracted the confession. There was no other evidence given apart from the confession.

brit1981 said:

I am sorry are you advocating police torturing women in order to get a confession?
She confessed only after being tortured, and retracted it as soon as she could. There was never any evidence against her accept a confession which the courts have ruled was gained following torture. If your child disappeared would you think the police were correct to hood you and torture you rather than actually investigate? Do you think your country should adopt the hooding and torturing of people in order to get confessions so as to save money by doing an actual investigation.
Like the Mccann case there was very little time, about two hours from when she was last seen by someone outside the family (as shopkeeper) to when the police were called. In that time Joana had to get back from the shop, for some reason be murdered by her mother, according to amarel chopped up and stored, and then either fed to the pigs, or stored and moved to Spain, then the scene fully cleaned so no trace of blood could be found, then the mother had to be seen looking for her, and go down to the shop from where she called the police. All in a space of a couple of hours.
The fact is there is no escaping the fact the police hooded and tortured a woman on her own, after which she confessed. And as soon as she was no longer alone with these big brave police officers she retracted the confession. There was no other evidence given apart from the confession.

Click to expand...

Oh please...
She's as guilty as get all.

Oh yeah...she retracted ...

She was there in the same home as all this was going on and I'm sure she knows what was happening or was involved period.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

So as far as you are concerned putting a bag over a woman's head and torturing until she confesses is a perfectly valid way to get a confession, and you believe that in your country confessions gathered under torture are sufficient evidence to prosecute. remember there was not one bit of evidence except the torture gained confession. If it was so obvious she was guilty then perhaps the police should have actually investigated, instead of torturing the mother and claiming case solved as soon as she confessed. If they were so right in what they did, why did they not admit who did the torturing, and why lie about it? Brave and rightous enough to torture the mother of a missing child, but so so brave and rightous that they were prepared to own up!

Amanda Knox falsly accused someone of being involved in murdering Meredith Kercher, but she also claimed it was due to the behaviour of the police, and everyone accepted that. yet if we follow your line of thinking not only should we accept the idea that she accused him to simply cause him trouble rather than it being coerced out of her, it would have been perfectly acceptable to put a hood over her head, and then torture her until she confessed, and then claim that confession was a good one despite the torture. I cannot really see that one going down well with anyone.

brit1981 said:

I am sorry are you advocating police torturing women in order to get a confession?
She confessed only after being tortured, and retracted it as soon as she could. There was never any evidence against her accept a confession which the courts have ruled was gained following torture. If your child disappeared would you think the police were correct to hood you and torture you rather than actually investigate? Do you think your country should adopt the hooding and torturing of people in order to get confessions so as to save money by doing an actual investigation.
Like the Mccann case there was very little time, about two hours from when she was last seen by someone outside the family (as shopkeeper) to when the police were called. In that time Joana had to get back from the shop, for some reason be murdered by her mother, according to amarel chopped up and stored, and then either fed to the pigs, or stored and moved to Spain, then the scene fully cleaned so no trace of blood could be found, then the mother had to be seen looking for her, and go down to the shop from where she called the police. All in a space of a couple of hours.
The fact is there is no escaping the fact the police hooded and tortured a woman on her own, after which she confessed. And as soon as she was no longer alone with these big brave police officers she retracted the confession. There was no other evidence given apart from the confession.

Click to expand...

Your post contains countless errors. The first being that the police were called two hours later. It was two days. The receipt from the shop was found in the house which proves she went back there. The mother confessed in the prescense of her lawyer who saw no torture. there is no proof any police beat her up at all, that is not what the courts decided. Everyone knows her inmates did her in after her confessioj. Pls stop spamming these boards which are about the alledged abduction of MM with other cases. Deflection, obfuscation, detraction, farming out the guilt? Thanks.

Well the Portugues courts do not know as they held that she had been tortured. In fact two Portugues courts ruled she had been tortured. The prosecuted two officers including Amaral for lying about it. But if you have evidence she was not tortured then I suggest you go to the PJ about it. Her lawyer also says she was tortured, and no prison guards or inmates have ever claimed to have witnessed her being tortured in prison.
can I just as when you decide if the courts are correct or not? What is it that makes you certain the courts get it wrong?

wrong again, poor you

No I am right the Portuguese courts have twice said she wa stortured, and two officers including Amaral received convictions for lying about it. But, honestly, if you have evidence that contradicts the courts then you really should think about going to the PJ and tell them about your evidence that it was inmates in a prison that "did her in". If you want to support Amaral I am sure it would help him if a court saw your evidence.

no court said the pj police tortured her, link?

the inmates beat her up dear get over it now stop spamming the madeleine case

saggymoon said:

no court said the pj police tortured her, link?

Click to expand...

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/portugal/report-2012

Amnesty international 2012 report

"In March, the Court of Appeal of Evora confirmed an earlier ruling that Leonor Cipriano had been tortured while in police custody in 2004, but that it could not identify those responsible. Leonor Cipriano had yet to receive compensation from the state. Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral and António Fernandes Nuno Cardoso, senior officials in the judicial police, had been sentenced to 18 months’ and 27 months’ imprisonment respectively, for falsely claiming Leonor Cipriano had fallen down the stairs. However, both sentences were suspended on the grounds that the officers had no previous criminal convictions. "

brit1981 said:

So as far as you are concerned putting a bag over a woman's head and torturing until she confesses is a perfectly valid way to get a confession, and you believe that in your country confessions gathered under torture are sufficient evidence to prosecute. remember there was not one bit of evidence except the torture gained confession. If it was so obvious she was guilty then perhaps the police should have actually investigated, instead of torturing the mother and claiming case solved as soon as she confessed. If they were so right in what they did, why did they not admit who did the torturing, and why lie about it? Brave and rightous enough to torture the mother of a missing child, but so so brave and rightous that they were prepared to own up!

Amanda Knox falsly accused someone of being involved in murdering Meredith Kercher, but she also claimed it was due to the behaviour of the police, and everyone accepted that. yet if we follow your line of thinking not only should we accept the idea that she accused him to simply cause him trouble rather than it being coerced out of her, it would have been perfectly acceptable to put a hood over her head, and then torture her until she confessed, and then claim that confession was a good one despite the torture. I cannot really see that one going down well with anyone.

Click to expand...

It worked for Bush getting info to find Osama.

But are current Pres takes all the credit.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2