NPB! Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 It's funny how we've all suddenly become police investigative experts ,and some can critise the police investigation when really they have no knowledge or experience of how a police investigation really works, other than that gleaned off TV detective shows and the media. How many other criminal cases have ever gotten this much attention by the world's media, where every little thing the Portugusese police do or don't do gets scrutinised, by largely a public that has no inkling of what the Portuguses police have been facing or the legal restrictions that they have had to comply with. How many other cases have those that make the "keystone cops" allegations ever followed? Much of the critism of the Portuguese police have come from the media and they have been happy to peddle stories of Portuguses police incompetence, because it sells papers. People need to understand that not every major crime ever gets solved, and not all missing people ever get found, we all remember Ben Needham, but also there are other high profile cases with Genette Tate, Suzy Lamplugh and even Lord Lucan, with the latter 3 the British Police were at the helm of those investigations, but I don't think people ever called the police "keystone cops" in those particular cases. Unforunately the media has turned this case into a distatesful reality soap opera, but the simple fact is that this isn't a TV show like CSI or Inspector Morse where the case is neatly wrapped up by teatime and the culprits taken away to be charged, this is real life! Whilst no police force is 100% perfect, if they were we wouldn't have any crime, it is totally unfair to suggest the Portuguese police are "keystone cops" particuarly as none of us have been privy to the inner workings of the Portugusese investigation or what information they have been privy too or what restrictions have been placed on them. As to this latest evidence, well perhaps the Portugusese police may or may not be on the wrong trail, but if they have evidence that suggest that Madeleine was at some point in the vehicle that the Mccann's hired out, then you can't really expect the Potugusese police to ignore that evidence either. It was merely an opinion based on what I've seen on the TV, and an opinion I stand by despite my lack of expertise. I was also critical of the media, again I'm no expert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinklady Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 all i can say is ..... that poor family, both mum and dad must be going through hell ..... In this country they are innocent until proven guilty, yet this forum is divided between people who want the family ripped apart (charges brought for neglect and the removal of the twins ... or charges for maddies murder) ... and those who believe they had nothing to do with little maddies disapearence. They have been hounded by the press .... photographs taken of them on the plane, in the airport ... stepping into their home, is there no privicy in the world ... they are not celebraties who use the press for financial gain then cry wolf because the have no privacy, they are a normal couple .... who begged for help to find their child .... and now are being hunted like animals by the media and judged by everyone. I lost sight of my daughter in debinhams for a whole 5 minutes this weekend .... 5 minutes seemed like a decade, first annoyance, then thinking 'i'm going to go mad with her when i get my hands on her' to sheer panic ......... she was found looking at toys!!! i cant even imagine the pure hell the MaCanns are living in right now; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 They don't have to prove their innocence..... The Portuguese Police seem to think otherwise. It will be down to a prosecutor to decide if they need to prove their innocence in a Court. Obviously that will be expensive, neither of them seem to be working at the moment so I guess that they don't have much income, so why shouldn't they use the million quid to defend themselves against the allegations? The million quid won't help to find the girl if they are both in jail. Dilemmas, dilemmas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiffRaff Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 The Portuguese Police seem to think otherwise. It will be down to a prosecutor to decide if they need to prove their innocence in a Court. Obviously that will be expensive, neither of them seem to be working at the moment so I guess that they don't have much income, so why shouldn't they use the million quid to defend themselves against the allegations? The million quid won't help to find the girl if they are both in jail. Dilemmas, dilemmas! No - it would be up to a Portuguese jury to prove guilt, not for the McCann's to prove innocence. A not-so-subtle difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyesey Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 No - it would be up to a Portuguese jury to prove guilt, not for the McCann's to prove innocence. A not-so-subtle difference. Pedantry alert! It is for the prosecution to prove guilt; the jury merely decides if they have done so. They don't try to prove anything. But essentially, you're right. In Portugal, as here, unless and until you've been convicted in a court of law, you are an innocent man. Or, in their case, an innnocent couple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingmaker2 Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Quite simply from: 1. Not long ago the local police issued a statement they were going nowhere 2. Suddenly sniffer dogs' evidence warrant the McCanns to be questioned and formally suspected, but clearly nothing but weak circumstancial evidence was uncovered, thus even the most inept of lawyers would have pushed to convince the police that the McCanns can fly home yesterday. 3. Early border patrolling was just inept, when they fully went down the route of abduction. But got nowhere, so scratched their heads and eventually, they issued statement ( see point 1. ) 4. World press uncvering their "own" way of policing and investigating with previous allegations of interrogations and beatings to submissions to confess. 5. Im 2007, if a Met chief detective or any lead investigators were seen drinking hard spirits during a working lunch and laughing loudly at the sight of the parents of the child they are investigating, they might as well hang up their career. But as I've said before, because it's the " done thing " over there, it backs up the fact that over time they just hit a dead end and lets go back and re-assess the file intoxicated with 45% proof. Oh dear, balderdash, with all due respect you seem to have fallen for the " let's critises the Portuguese Police" argument, perpetrated largely by the agenda driven press, hook line and sinker! Let's address your points, 1) The Portuguese police have never issued a statement saying the investigation is "going nowhere". It has been certainly been reported by some media as "going nowhere" but these papers have been woefully inaccurate about reporting any real facts about this case. 2) Only the Portuguses police and the forensic lab know just what the "evidence" actually is. Again the media have speculated what it might be, but there is no way, you or I could say it is "weak" evidence as we are not privy to exactly what the Portuguese police have to go on. 3) Just how can you say the early bordering control was inept? Again a lot of this has been peddled by the media with very little thought about what restrictions the Portuguese police were working with. Think about it for a second, police were called at around 10PM in the evening. The police don't know anything about the Mccanns, do you really expect the Police to suddenly issue an order, closing their borders for a child who has just been reported missing? Of course not! Closing of a border is NOT something that is done lightly or on a whim. Police that were originally called to the scene most likely didn't have the athourity to close off the border and given the time of night it was closing the border simply wasn't an option. 4) Again the media have uncovered these previous stories which they most likely have potrayed the PJ in the worst light possible to further their stories of Portugusese police corruption, These stories are largely unsubstatiated and even if true doesn't mean that the Portugusese Police are corrupt to the core. If you did enough digging you would probably find plenty of unsavoury stories about how the British police have operated in some cases, that doesn't mean to say that we can never trust the British police though does it? 5) This is the most laughable of all the stories that was peddled by the media. The original story actually was of some Portugusese police being witnessed taking a 2 hour lunch and enjoying their lunch break. Why on Earth was that ever reported at all! Good grief the actual report tells us rather more about the personality of the person who bothered making a big story out of this than it does the Portuguses police! So the Portugusese police aren't allowed to take lunch breaks now? They certainly aren't allowed to enjoy themselves when Madeliene remains missing, perish the thought. It really begs the question if the person who was so concerned about Madeline, then how come he or she was sitting in the exact same restaraunt for 2 hours, why were'nt they themselves getting off their own butts to look for Madeleine rather than spending 2 hours watching Portuguese detectives in the restaurant ,that they themselves probably took enjoyed some food or alchohol at. Also the story about the detectives laughing when the case was mentioned on the TV, again how does the "witness" know exactly just what the Portugusese police were laughing at? Again it's easy for someone to make far too much of this, and I have said already the fact that the media even made a story about this, or that this person even reported it is franky rather pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanman Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 so why shouldn't they use the million quid to defend themselves against the allegations? IF you have donated to this fund and IF they are proved to have something to do with the child's disappearance and IF they used money from the fund for their defence what would your feelings be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingmaker2 Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 It was merely an opinion based on what I've seen on the TV That's says it all really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyesey Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 IF you have donated to this fund and IF they are proved to have something to do with the child's disappearance and IF they used money from the fund for their defence what would your feelings be? The fund's there to find out what happened to Maddie. If it gets spent in finding out that her parents are responsible, then it served its purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiffRaff Posted September 10, 2007 Share Posted September 10, 2007 Pedantry alert! It is for the prosecution to prove guilt; the jury merely decides if they have done so. They don't try to prove anything. But essentially, you're right. In Portugal, as here, unless and until you've been convicted in a court of law, you are an innocent man. Or, in their case, an innnocent couple. Point taken! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.