General Chat

Not just for that he was already under investigation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1564913/Madeleine-McCann-chief-detective-sacked.html

For goodness sake, how pathetic.

I was obviously replying to Rose about the conspiracy theorists.

Anyone like to admit to reporting my post and apologise?

The former detective, who worked on the four-year-old's disappearance case in the opening days, claimed the McCanns "covered up Maddie's death by faking her disappearance".

He was taken off the case for criticising British police.

His book, which he made £286,000 from, is due back on the shelves in Portugal next week.

The McCanns now face a series of hefty legal bills to challenge the decision in Portugal’s Supreme Court.

Their fund was down to its last £750,000 in October, with few new cash donations coming in. The Home Office this month stepped in to provide £95,000 to maintain it for six months.

A source close to the McCanns said: “They are seething over the ruling and fear Mr Amaral may now repeat all the slurs. It just drags on and on

(Taken from a British comic )
;-) ;-) ;-)

Me to Stray
or read both sides and make my own mind up ;-)

Im not a big fan of conspiracy theory's i prefer facts,

I don't think Guinevere was suggesting that interest in this particular case was weird... she was responding to my comment re some conspiracy sites which ARE weird in content eg google 'Reptilian conspiracy' or "david-ickes-theory-of-the-reptilian-human-hybrid-apocalypse/"

Stray :-D :-D :-D ;-)

Haha maybe I should write, read, edit,edit, edit...... Oh no my ways sometimes so much more fun, sometimes even I'm surprised what comes out,

;-)

Amaral was not removed from the case due to incompetence
He was removed because he went on record criticising the UK police
Then he was vilified by the British press

Show me a Policeman who has never been falsely accused of something

Nipper Reed and George Oldfield for two instances
Where good British Policemen they themselves more than once in their careers
where falsely accused of messing up an investigation
or some form of misconduct
But when they got it right where made hero's of the hour
All Problems from their past forgotten

ALSO regarding people who are interested in this case being "weird" at least they have taken the time to make an informed decision based on the official police files rather than just swallowed the MSM bilge like 90% of the population informed decision based on fact is better than refusing to see or hear the other side...we have no choice but to read the propaganda from the McCann side...taking the time to level it isn't weird...it's informing oneself

Can i give my really good friend the credit forr most of this post as
She pointed out so may facts and knows far more about this subject
Than i ever will :-D <3

lol Stray but what you see is never my first attempt ;-) This is why my book is taking me so long, edit, re edit, delete, retry, delete again.... :-)

ah rose you put things so much better than I can lol <3

and I totally understand that also Gwynne :-D

I suppose that is one of the downsides to the internet in particular, we can now spread information so fast, news as it happens, and find sites which support what ever our particular theory is, as per the 'New world order/ Cameron is a reptilian alien' type of thing as well as the various conspiracies on everything from Diana's death to 9/11.

I understand that, Rose. I really do.

But conspiracy theory can hurt innocent living people. It's one thing to gossip about it in the pub but quite another to publish a book or set up a website etc. etc.

And it's a bit creepy as well.

I was going to mention that case Gwynne, but couldn't remember the relationship of the initial suspect ( memory is shot :-0 ).

Set against that, we have all done it, looked at someone on tv in an appeal for information on a crime and thought 'You're guilty as hell' before there was any evidence ( available to the public at least) to support it.

It's a double edged sword this interest in what makes people tick, the legal system must rely on evidence, concrete and indisputable proof which is as it should be, and yet it is the human instinct to speculate that keeps people looking long after the event when a crime has not been solved.

I don't like press speculation about open cases either, Rose. Remember that poor neighbour of a murder victim who was pilloried in the press but was proven to be completely innocent? His life was ruined.

Speculation where there is no evidence is distasteful and can prevent a proper investigation.

I imagine there will be an appeal. If you skate along the line of libel laws you can expect to land in deep water.

Every media article. every withheld answer, or incomplete testimony has muddied the water in some way Gwynne. As it does with many a case I guess if you look at the speculations made in criminal cases here that make the press before an investigation has barely begun?

As said I haven't read the book so I don't know whether he has made a direct accusation, or presented the facts as he knows them (or perceived them) and suggested a possible scenario that he genuinely believes to be correct. I wouldn't dispute a level of incompetence from the outset of the case.

But I would hesitate to say that being a scumbag or being incompetent is a good enough reason to ban publication of any book, at least in its entirety.

I see your point, Rose, but when the case is open and the author was demoted for his incompetence in dealing with it and other cases, then I'm not sure he's the right person to write a book about the case. Especially when he accuses living people of a crime.

Were the man reputable and had a proven "good" detection history I may feel differently. But this man doesn't and seems to want to deflect criticism from himself. Of which there has been a great deal.

I think the term is muddying the waters.

A well rounded View there Rose
well done :-D :-D

I haven't read any of the books, but as a general observation I think it's important that publication of a book concerning an unsolved case is not banned, even if it's 'wrong' in its conclusions. Because there will be someone reading it who disagrees, who decides to challenge the info therein and the conclusions made and that 'might' ultimately lead to the truth.

Whether the author in this instance makes a case or not, he is a policeman and may ( or may not) be going with his gut, on the grounds that while nothing can be proved either way all options must be looked at again and again. he wouldn't be the first ex policeman involved in a case to not 'let it go' . That's not to say he is right, not to say he is a nice man, but his motives may be more than just making a quick buck.

Different circumstances but I read a lot at one time about the Lindbergh baby abduction, the various authors have made a good case that the person executed for the murder of the child was not the man who did it, likewise there is a site online ( just found which insists the right man was executed).

Comment from that site seems to sum up why cases like this stay with us and will be discussed over and over again:

"The issues raised then are still hotly debated today because of the timeless nature of the crime and the all-too-human participants. "

I found them most helpful as my son was a bolter
But always found the straps to short

So we extended them :-D