For what could Murat, or anyone, be charged by now?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Forum Index -> What are you talking about?
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
LogicMan
Joined: 07 Jun 2007
Posts: 3710
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:20 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Madeleine McCann Mystery: Is Madeleine McCann Disappearance A Hoax?
Madeleine McCann Disappearance - Could the abduction of Madeleine McCann be an elaborate hoax perpetrated by her parents Gerry and Kate McCann? As strange as it may sound, that theory is beginning to crop up on message boards across the web.
Back to top
confused
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:25 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="chair13"][quote="confused"][quote="chair13"]murat should be thankful LM didn't think he did it----his details would be all over the net now, along with his inside leg measurements and the details of the strength of his glasses' prescription......i think he's got off lucky[/quote]
Can you maybe for once keep to the subject and question, instead of starting meta communication on every thread, saying basicly the same all over the forum, thereby interrupting communication on the issues?[/quote]
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
people ae forever telling me they are allowed to post what they want when they want....so that's what i will tell you my dear.
if you feel i am "interupting conversations" perhaps you should use the phone to talk to your fellow posters, LM's number is on here somewhere, sure he'd LOVE to talk about it with you.....ooooooops sory i forgot, LM has no interest in Murat, or an abductor cos he's too busy crucifying the parents with his hoax theory [/quote]
Do you have any suggestions or knowledge that would help to answer my questions my dear? I would very much appreciate it. In other words: Do you think and know if by now anyone could be charched of what in this case?
If this isn't the case then all the talk about Murat is nonsense. Whereas considering if McCanns could be prosecuted for neglect is valid, as that is established as fact, even by them themselves. The only question would then be how serious it is rated by the authorities.
Unfortunately I can't remember who it was that mentioned the other case. Please, if you read this, could you tell more about it?
Back to top
jackieL
Joined: 19 May 2007
Posts: 1567
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:28 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably one of the most famous examples of a murder conviction without a body is the murder of Peter Falconio, the British backpacker in Australia....note the crucial evidence was the defendant's DNA found on Joanne Lees.
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:29 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="LogicMan"]Madeleine McCann Mystery: Is Madeleine McCann Disappearance A Hoax?
Madeleine McCann Disappearance - Could the abduction of Madeleine McCann be an elaborate hoax perpetrated by her parents Gerry and Kate McCann? As strange as it may sound, that theory is beginning to crop up on message boards across the web.[/quote]
LogicMan,
What would it need that somewhan could be prosecuted, if that is the case?
That's just really what I try to find out at the moment.
Back to top
confused
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:31 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="jackieL"]Probably one of the most famous examples of a murder conviction without a body is the murder of Peter Falconio, the British backpacker in Australia....note the crucial evidence was the defendant's DNA found on Joanne Lees.
Thank you,
I'll have a look at it.
Back to top
confused
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:33 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="jackieL"]Probably one of the most famous examples of a murder conviction without a body is the murder of Peter Falconio, the British backpacker in Australia....note the crucial evidence was the defendant's DNA found on Joanne Lees.
Thank you.
I'll look at it.
Just know that isn't the one mentioned. It was also about a child disappeared, and parents prosecuted.
Back to top
JimTommo
Joined: 16 Jun 2007
Posts: 1238
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:47 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possible crimes as far as I can see are:
1) Child neglect by the McCanns
2) Child neglect by the Tapas 9
3) Something relating to inconsistent alibis by RM. Maybe if there was intent that could be proved.
4) probably the same for the Tapas 9 who it seems have given new evidence after the event, and held back crucial evidence at the time. Again there would have to be proven intent to divert the investigation
5) Failure of certain parties to adhere to the Portugese privacy laws.
I don't see think any of those five will result in charges
6) murder
7) manslaughter
8 - kidnapping
9) abduction
absolutely no proof that any of 6,7,8 or 9 have happened.
Back to top
confused
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:52 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="jackieL"]Probably one of the most famous examples of a murder conviction without a body is the murder of Peter Falconio, the British backpacker in Australia....note the crucial evidence was the defendant's DNA found on Joanne Lees.
I read the article, and indeed the DNA was very important.
But the difference to Madeleine case is that Joane Lees was an eye witness of the murderer. The DNA proved her account of what happened, as it was "found in blood on her T-shirt and the cable ties used to restrain her, as well as on the van's gearstick"
There was some initial doubt in her identification of the man, because of earlier media reports and pictures of him.
Anyhow. In Madeleine's case there is no eye witness and no factual crime established yet.
Back to top
confused
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:02 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="JimTommo"]Possible crimes as far as I can see are:
1) Child neglect by the McCanns
2) Child neglect by the Tapas 9
3) Something relating to inconsistent alibis by RM. Maybe if there was intent that could be proved.
4) probably the same for the Tapas 9 who it seems have given new evidence after the event, and held back crucial evidence at the time. Again there would have to be proven intent to divert the investigation
5) Failure of certain parties to adhere to the Portugese privacy laws.
I don't see think any of those five will result in charges
6) murder
7) manslaughter
8 - kidnapping
9) abduction
absolutely no proof that any of 6,7,8 or 9 have happened.[/quote]
I agree.
Now, what would be needed to establish 6,7,8 or 9.
The McCann's insistance on abduction, supported by the campaign, will not do.
What would factually be needed to establish any of these?
A witness would help. But there is so far no witness of murder, manslaughter. To find and establish a witness for abduction or kidnapping would not be easy, because how could an abduction or kidnapping (What is the difference please?) be established?
By someone coming out and ask a ransom, by someone leading to Madeleine so that she could be found? But how exactly establish who was responsible, who did it, if so?
Back to top
HAL
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 5537
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:06 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confused, this will not answer your question, but is a bit of background
It has been suggested that the chief investigating officer Guilhermino da Encarna�?may have been too keen to focus enquiries on one man, Robert Murat although the police admit no credible evidence has been found against him.
Parallels have been drawn with the case of disappearance of another child, Joana Cipriano who disappeared on 12 September 2004 from her home in village of Figueira seven miles from where Madeline went missing. Encarna�?was also involved in that investigation which ended with the conviction of Joana's mother and uncle for her murder although no body was found and they never confessed. [85]
?Joana?s body was never found, but the case was solved. Leonor and Joao Cipriano, her mother and uncle, were convicted of killing Joana and sentenced to 16 years and eight months, but they never confessed.
?This is, unfortunately, from the blog of PAULO REIS
1 ? Joana Cipriano vanished from a small place 10 km in the outskirts of Portim�?Last time somebody saw her, she was on her way to a local groceries shop;
2 - Her mother, Leonor Cipriano, only reported to Police her daughter has disappeared two days after;
3 ? After a long and difficult investigation, headed by Chief-Inspector Gon硬o Amaral, Leonor Cipriano and her brother were accused of murdering the eight years old child;
4 ? The body of Joana Cipriano was never found, but samples of her blood were found in her mother refrigerator;
5 ? Her mother justified those samples of blood admitting she had beaten Joana, for some reason, she was hurt and she blooded from her nose;
6 ? Leonor Cipriano and her brother, who had a incestuous relationship, were sentenced to 16 years in jail, for the murder of her daughter and nice;
7 ? Before the trial, Leonor Cipriano accused five CID officers of beating her, trying to extract a confession. She named the five CID officers, and included Chief-Inspector Gon硬o ("Amaral Lector", according to British tabloids?);
8 ? The Public Prosecutor?s Office opened a criminal investigation and ordered a police line-up, with the CID officers named and accused by Leonor Cipriano of beating her;
9 ? The line-up took place with Leonor Cipriano behind a two-way mirror and she couldn?t recognize any of the aggressors;
10 ? The Public Prosecutor?s Office magistrate that was in charge of the criminal investigation decided to accuse the five CID officers, but didn?t mentioned, in the accusation sent to the Court, that Leonor Cipriano couldn?t identify any of the aggressors, in the police line-up;
11 ? Leonor Cipriano never confessed the murder of her own daughter. Her brother, in a letter written from jail, accused Leonor Cipriano of selling her daughter;
12 ? Police is convinced (and the jurors at the trial found enough evidence to pass a verdict of guilty) that Leonor Cipriano and her brother were found, by Joana, having sexual relations, when she came home, back from the groceries shop. As Leonor Cipriano had a lover, at the time, they were afraid she would tell him what she saw;
13 ? So, they beat her, in order to frighten her and keep her mouth shut up;
14 ? Perhaps accidentally, they beat her so violently that they killed her. So, they decided to get rid of he body and cut it in pieces, keeping some of them in the freezer, while they gave the other pieces to be eaten by pigs (this is what police believes is the strongest possibility, because there was no other trace of Joana Cipriano, unless the blood samples in her mother freezer?)
*******************************************************************
The lack of physical evidence "is not an obstacle that cannot be overcome" when attempting to bring criminal charges, FitzGerald said.
In Massachusetts, a 1990 case involving Christian Science church members who allowed their 2 1/2-year-old son to die without medical care was the source of controversy, a conviction and appeal. David and Ginger Twitchell were convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 10 years' probation despite the prosecution's efforts to send them to jail. The state's Supreme Judicial Court upheld the conviction upon appeal.
The Twitchell boy, however, suffered from an illness not caused by his parents, FitzGerald said. In this case, prosecutors will argue that parental neglect of Samuel led to his illness and death.
Back to top
TheAcademic
Joined: 08 Jul 2007
Posts: 4052
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:08 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="confused"][quote="jackieL"]Probably one of the most famous examples of a murder conviction without a body is the murder of Peter Falconio, the British backpacker in Australia....note the crucial evidence was the defendant's DNA found on Joanne Lees.
Thank you,
I'll have a look at it.[/quote]
Note Ian Huntley was also charged with murder before bodies were found.
This was based on what police found in the bins inside the school "hangar"
Back to top
confused
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:15 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="HAL"]Confused, this will not answer your question, but is a bit of background
It has been suggested that the chief investigating officer Guilhermino da Encarna�?may have been too keen to focus enquiries on one man, Robert Murat although the police admit no credible evidence has been found against him.
Parallels have been drawn with the case of disappearance of another child, Joana Cipriano who disappeared on 12 September 2004 from her home in village of Figueira seven miles from where Madeline went missing. Encarna�?was also involved in that investigation which ended with the conviction of Joana's mother and uncle for her murder although no body was found and they never confessed. [85]
?Joana?s body was never found, but the case was solved. Leonor and Joao Cipriano, her mother and uncle, were convicted of killing Joana and sentenced to 16 years and eight months, but they never confessed.
?This is, unfortunately, from the blog of PAULO REIS
1 ? Joana Cipriano vanished from a small place 10 km in the outskirts of Portim�?Last time somebody saw her, she was on her way to a local groceries shop;
2 - Her mother, Leonor Cipriano, only reported to Police her daughter has disappeared two days after;
3 ? After a long and difficult investigation, headed by Chief-Inspector Gon硬o Amaral, Leonor Cipriano and her brother were accused of murdering the eight years old child;
4 ? The body of Joana Cipriano was never found, but samples of her blood were found in her mother refrigerator;
5 ? Her mother justified those samples of blood admitting she had beaten Joana, for some reason, she was hurt and she blooded from her nose;
6 ? Leonor Cipriano and her brother, who had a incestuous relationship, were sentenced to 16 years in jail, for the murder of her daughter and nice;
7 ? Before the trial, Leonor Cipriano accused five CID officers of beating her, trying to extract a confession. She named the five CID officers, and included Chief-Inspector Gon硬o ("Amaral Lector", according to British tabloids?);
8 ? The Public Prosecutor?s Office opened a criminal investigation and ordered a police line-up, with the CID officers named and accused by Leonor Cipriano of beating her;
9 ? The line-up took place with Leonor Cipriano behind a two-way mirror and she couldn?t recognize any of the aggressors;
10 ? The Public Prosecutor?s Office magistrate that was in charge of the criminal investigation decided to accuse the five CID officers, but didn?t mentioned, in the accusation sent to the Court, that Leonor Cipriano couldn?t identify any of the aggressors, in the police line-up;
11 ? Leonor Cipriano never confessed the murder of her own daughter. Her brother, in a letter written from jail, accused Leonor Cipriano of selling her daughter;
12 ? Police is convinced (and the jurors at the trial found enough evidence to pass a verdict of guilty) that Leonor Cipriano and her brother were found, by Joana, having sexual relations, when she came home, back from the groceries shop. As Leonor Cipriano had a lover, at the time, they were afraid she would tell him what she saw;
13 ? So, they beat her, in order to frighten her and keep her mouth shut up;
14 ? Perhaps accidentally, they beat her so violently that they killed her. So, they decided to get rid of he body and cut it in pieces, keeping some of them in the freezer, while they gave the other pieces to be eaten by pigs (this is what police believes is the strongest possibility, because there was no other trace of Joana Cipriano, unless the blood samples in her mother freezer?)
*******************************************************************
The lack of physical evidence "is not an obstacle that cannot be overcome" when attempting to bring criminal charges, FitzGerald said.
In Massachusetts, a 1990 case involving Christian Science church members who allowed their 2 1/2-year-old son to die without medical care was the source of controversy, a conviction and appeal. David and Ginger Twitchell were convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 10 years' probation despite the prosecution's efforts to send them to jail. The state's Supreme Judicial Court upheld the conviction upon appeal.
The Twitchell boy, however, suffered from an illness not caused by his parents, FitzGerald said. In this case, prosecutors will argue that parental neglect of Samuel led to his illness and death.[/quote]
Thanks a lot, Hal,
that gives me something to read tomorrow.
(Huu, just remember I had asked earlier on here on some thread, if freezers were searched. That was when a man had been found in Galway in a fishmongers freezer, who must have been there for about 4 years. And later there was the woman (in Germany?) who after a party at a friends place wanted to put left over food into the freezer of that household, and found the man's wife and daughter there????!!!!)
Back to top
bb2002
Joined: 17 Jul 2007
Posts: 2001
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:17 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The very last paragraph says it all really...
Joined: 01 Jul 2007
Posts: 517
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:28 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="bb2002"]The very last paragraph says it all really...
Well spotted.
I think it should be quoted here:
"Dr. O'Brien, Fiona Payne and Rachael Oldfield were allowed to challenge Murat's version of events and accused Murat of lying. They also claimed that they recognized him from his "lazy eye." It is difficult to understand exactly where police are going with this latest line of questioning and it smacks of desperation."
Back to top
HAL
Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 5537
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:37 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote="confused"][quote="JimTommo"]Possible crimes as far as I can see are:
1) Child neglect by the McCanns
2) Child neglect by the Tapas 9
3) Something relating to inconsistent alibis by RM. Maybe if there was intent that could be proved.
4) probably the same for the Tapas 9 who it seems have given new evidence after the event, and held back crucial evidence at the time. Again there would have to be proven intent to divert the investigation
5) Failure of certain parties to adhere to the Portugese privacy laws.
I don't see think any of those five will result in charges
6) murder
7) manslaughter
8 - kidnapping
9) abduction
absolutely no proof that any of 6,7,8 or 9 have happened.[/quote]
I agree.
Now, what would be needed to establish 6,7,8 or 9.
The McCann's insistance on abduction, supported by the campaign, will not do.
What would factually be needed to establish any of these?
A witness would help. But there is so far no witness of murder, manslaughter. To find and establish a witness for abduction or kidnapping would not be easy, because how could an abduction or kidnapping (What is the difference please?) be established?
By someone coming out and ask a ransom, by someone leading to Madeleine so that she could be found? But how exactly establish who was responsible, who did it, if so?[/quote]
*******************************************************
Leaving emotion out of this, it is extremely unlikely that an almost-four-year-old knowingly ran away from home.
There is apparently no physical evidence of forced entry (nor should there be, IMO, as the doors were left unlocked).
There is unidentified DNA from the apartment, which presumably is to be expected in a high-turnover vacation rental, likely with only perfunctory cleaning between rentals.
Tracking dogs followed a spoor; but it led to nowhere where the child had not been before and, if she awoke and wandered, looking for her parents, would she become confused and take that route to the supermarket in the pitch dark? We don't know.
There is a witness (a member of the group who was wandering around) who claims that she saw a blanket-wrapped child being carried away from the location during the time in question.
Her story was refuted by another witness who was in the area at the time, and talking with Gerry McCann.
Her story was not supported by other group individuals who were in the area around the same time. She chose not to mention what she saw to the group when she rejoined them, prevanishing.
All five group members who were within/around the McCann's apartment around the time odf the vanishing give conflicting timelines, and three of the group, three months later, had a revelation and identified the unknown (and seemingly previously unseen-by-some) child-carrying individual.
Remove the comment from the involved group members (which relies upon conflicting timelines, the ignoring of an unbiased witness's refutal of the sighting of the child-carrying individual, and a miraculous memory restoration) and there is no real evidence to indicate anything other than that the parents reported the child as missing from an unlocked apartment some time around 10:00 pm on May 3, 2007.
You can see why the police are puzzled.
Last edited by HAL on Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:51 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First
Forum Index -> What are you talking about? All times are GMT
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
First 