Phew! After the absolute mess I made of my attempted “match report” on the Newcastle game after a few too many shandies, I am relieved to read back and find that I actually managed to put together a pretty reasonable effort at covering the most important bases without including anything that could bring a good old Carter-Rucking up Pap’s metaphorical aris.
Thank fuck for that. Tis why I had to drag myself away, as I was conscious of having to concentrate very hard on each word, to even make my post readable.
Only just managed to have a chance to read through your posts, thanks for the contributions, and I’ll get to some replies shortly.
The ones that need a more in depth response I’ll address in a short while, but for now:
Originally posted by @Intiniki
Yes, it is a bit Niki.
Essentially, it says: The McCanns sacrificed their own right to privacy and having their “theories” of what happened to Madeleine questioned publicly entirely of their own volition, when, in spite of all the immediate advice/warnings/instructions from the Portuguese police NOT to involve the media and turning the case into a publicity frenzy – they did exactly that, to “insert information into the inquiry” and set an established precident in people’s minds that this (staged) "abduction" theory is categorically ‘what happened’. They interferred intentionally with the investigation, to deflect suspicion from themselves.
(It is a fact that the media were already in attendance when the police arrived. Not because the Portuguese police are slooow bumbling fools, but rather – because “Team McCann” had called them first, before even alerting the police to the “abduction” of their daughter).
It concludes and sums up by making it crystal clear, that Gonçalo Amaral’s book, rather than just being his own “opinion” – is simply his own retelling, as the former Chief Detective Investigator of the case – of all of the known facts that have already been made public in the form of the release of the PJ Investigation files. In other words – GA’s book, is a presentation of the facts established by the police investigation, all of which is on the record.
One cannot challenge proven facts in a court of law, with pure ‘speculation’ (lies) for which there is absolutely no evidence to back up the basis of your argument. The facts will always win out, unless proven otherwise by some new, otherwise previously unknown information.
The McCanns attempted to do this – silence facts, with pure supposition – and finally, after a very long process – lost.
Thanks Numtpyboi for your questions. I’ll reply to you when I have some free moments to spend on comprehensively answering your queries.
Bear, as much as I’d love to have upvoted your post for it’s comic value, in this instance – we are talking about the tragic death of a poor little girl, whose suffering must’ve been unimaginable (when you know many of the details which cannot be publicly spoken of at this point without legal action ensuing).
Funny post mate – but Madeleine is sadly the biggest victim in this whole affair, and ultimately this is what this process is all about. Justice for Madeleine.