When noone has yet been charged with any wrong doing, how is Manuel Catarino allowed to publicly says such things?

I must say that if this is the way Portugal deals with crime and legal issues, it is pretty scary and disgusting at the same time.

How many more mistakes do we have to read on the news that the Portuguese police committed during this investigation?

They failed to seal the apartment, they invented the most ludicruous stories about Maddie’s disapparance, they have placed Maddie’s parents as “arguidos” and now they even trust a Portuguese waiter as the key witness in the case, and they are hiding this person?

This is a very sad situation, Maddie’s abduction, however maybe a terrible case like this was necessary to happen for all of us Portuguese and foreigners to have our eyes opened of the reality of Portugal, Portuguese Police and Justice system. I must confess that as a Portuguese-Canadian I am seriously embarrassed and disgusted to read what the Portuguese Police have come out about Maddie’s case. I have lost completely my trust in any system in Portugal, in fact I think the way the Portuguese Media, Portuguese Police and now Manuel Catarino with his book, have done an excellent job to damage the Tourism Industry in Portugal. Who in their mind who would even think of going to spend vacations in Portugal in the nearest future?

Let’s all hope that Maddie be found fast and save and may be reunited with her family. Unfortunetly we all learned a very hard and sad side of Portugal. Afterall the sun is not as bright over Portugal and the sky is not as “azul ferrete” as Eca de Queiros writes, when a child goes missing and the police of the country commits so many disatrous mistakes.

“The habit that has been on here of calling the McC’s Mc killers would be seen as libellous.”

I doubt it. Personally, I thought it meant that Gerry was a good-looking “lady killer”.

lady-killer
A gallant who captivates the hearts of women. “A renowned dandy and lady-killer.”

Source: Websters Dictionary

—————————-

Mods and Admin

You can post links, one per post.
Libel is the problem, say for instance you said outright I stole your car, if I were a known car thief it wouldn’t harm my reputation and therefore libel wouldn’t have been.However as I am not a car thief Icould sue you for libel forsayingthat. Its a matter of what is true and hurts the reputation of whoever it is said about.
The habit that has been on here of calling the McC’s Mc killers would be seen as libellous.

It could be that because Mr Murat is half Portuguese he may not need UK assistance, but questions are being asked by MP’s about that, and until the situation is resolved , its better not to speak of it

AGW is composing something to go up over the next few days which will detail how you can safely say what you want to say, and also what we can edit out and what we cannot

INFANTICIDE
1.51 Where the offence of infanticide is concerned, the problem is not so much the
definition but, rather, the procedure for ensuring that evidence of a mother’s
mental disturbance at the time of the killing is heard at trial. A mother may be ‘in
denial’ about having killed her infant. She may, therefore, be unwilling to submit
to a psychiatric examination if the point of this examination seems to her to be to
find out why she did it. This is because she cannot accept that she did do it. In
such circumstances, she is unlikely to have another defence and is, therefore,
likely to be convicted of murder. This is not in the public interest.34 However, this
is not an easy problem to solve. We recommend the adoption of a post-trial
procedure designed to do justice in these cases.

Mods and Admin

Lilith( and others)

In the interests of liability of libel we are having to edit posts where there are obvious allegations/accusation, and have restored the names of the good Doctors to that of MCCann.

We have discussed Gordon Browns’ involvement , and do feel it must not be mentioned as though it were a favour to the McC,but a normal reaction to any Briton in trouble abroad, and therefore must not be brought up again

“Premier Brown would not under, any circumstances, be so foolish as to pressure the police or politicians of another state. He is well-aware the British are not the most highly regarded of nationalities and would not leave himself open to any risk of being seen to be partial in this case. Unless there is proof, by way of direct witness account or publication in another newspaper, we would be reluctant to allow the discussion to continue on these lines”.

And about time too.

“Justic will prevail, dna and sniffer dogs do not lie”

I note that you do not even know how to spell the word justice.

You are right though, justice will prevail. That’s why the parents have not been convicted and never will be.

———————–

Mods and Admin

People do make spelling mistakes from time to time, or even leave off letters from words, in this case the meaning has not changed, and your remarking on it is nit picking, especially in view of your use of the the ‘Moda’

Just goes to show you know nothing about children and that you are not suitable to be a teacher at all. (If you even are one, that is).

it seems awful fantastical, to say that a child as young as Maddie, who was not four when she went missing, “loved” Harry Potter. As a teacher of young children, I can’t see how a child who cannot read, can “love” a character they cannot read, understand or even relate to…Perhaps Barney, but not Potter. It all seems to be a fantasy of what the parents had hoped or wished had been the case…when it fact, from the diary of the mum, the child while seeming to be a smiling little kid…was a holy tyrant and ultra difficult to deal with…would love to see her pedicatrician’s records and see what kind of visits the child had, also did the child ever go to a counselor or child therapist…??? Many unanswered questions for the pj, wish I could help, with all my insights into kids, lol.

Perhaps the folks are trying to be smarter than they appear to act…and perhaps they hired certain detectives agency, and then instructed them to make daily news releases to the world press…has anyone checked what their instructions were to this agency? Did it say, “Proclaim every step…” if so, it would fit into the hoax theme…there is a reason that a detective agency acts so irresponsibly, perhaps they were told to do so…to perpetuate, and lead the trail to the body…

at any rate, the police are slowly unwinding the rope. Justic will prevail, dna and sniffer dogs do not lie, for they have no agenda.

December 16th, 2007 at 11:16 am
547
chenier Says:
December 16th, 2007 at 11:12 am
“‘But Brutus is an honourable man
So are they all; all honourable men’”
—
Excellent reference!

“Et tu Brute” (translated as “You too Brutus”, “You too my son”, or “even you Brutus”)

—————————————————

I like it; Shakespeare knew how to put the boot in with style…

‘But Brutus is an honourable man
So are they all; all honourable men’

And, for the benefit of the mods and admin, that is taken from ‘Julius Caesar’ by William Shakespeare.

—————-
M&A , I know , and he’s not around to sue for copyright!

—————————————————–

I know you know, but with the driveby traffic I was also a little apprehensive about being required to produce the evidence supporting the identification of Brutus as the Tenth Tapas nibbler.

As for copyright, we should be ok if we stick to very dead people, then?

I have to go now too. It’s lunch time over here and hungry people depending on me feeding them …

When you’re back: the U.S Bishop relation is new to me. Who is he?

————————-

Mods and Admin

was just looking before lunch, and saw your defence, Can’t say No.

I recall back earlier in the summer the Portuguese were very reluctant to act on their own without the UK Police being involved as they ( and I hope we) didn’t want this case to turn into a diplomatic incident between our two countries.
Most of the posters on this site do agree there has been far too much political and other high powered sway seemingly involved (see Spudguns post)

I don’t think Chatelaine thinks you are lying at all, but is just asking if you can provide some authoratitive proof to the ‘discussion’ between our esteemed leaders.

I’m going to pass this up to Admin for further advice, please do not feel threatened or your integrity doubted by us.

Ok have heard back from Admin on this matter:

admins’ ruling is:

The Prime Minister of Great Britain would have been considered to have been neglectful if he did not inquire about progress in the case. It would also have been right and proper for him to express the opinion that there was concern of the length of time irt was taking to bring the case to a level where charges were either brought or the Drs McCann released from the suspect status.

Premier Brown would not under, any circumstances, be so foolish as to pressure the police or politicians of another state. He is well-aware the British are not the most highly regarded of nationalities and would not leave himself open to any risk of being seen to be partial in this case. Unless there is proof, by way of direct witness account or publication in another newspaper, we would be reluctant to allow the discussion to continue on these lines