sábado, 12 de janeiro de 2013

Cork e as ondas de Janeiro






 " Even if the child's body is
discovered that won't lift the cloud over them since, after many years, the
circumstances in which she died may be no more conclusive than the
circumstances of her disappearance...... "


Please question us! Part One

Curiously enough an innocent Kate & Gerry McCann have more to gain from
an extremely sharp and exhaustive Yard review scrutiny of their role and
movements than almost anyone. As we posted here http://
year these two of the three arguidos were released from their status before the
investigation into their activities was anything like complete, while, indeed,
there were serious reservations about the veracity of the evidence provided by
them and their friends. That was why Goncalo Amaral was correct in calling
it the "interrupted investigation" and why we referred to a missing paragraph
in the archiving summary, the one, that is, that would give the reasons behind
such an unusual move.
We promised to look at it some more in the future. As we're always saying,
though, life, if not the McCann case, is short.


It's history now and the likelihood of a reconstruction providing any resolution
after six years is remote. But that isn't to say that an attempted reconstruction is
the only way of ascertaining the truth, nor even the best: not when you've got
teams from both countries reviewing the evidence and able to question
witnesses without going through the rigmarole of letters rogatory or finding
them all beyond reach in another country.
Because that was the problem, wasn't it? The Seven were needed to clarify
what had happened to help find the child but getting them back to Portugal
was like catching greasy piglets on market day. Who'd have believed that
family friends of a child would hire lawyers to avoid returning to help? Even
though the head of the investigation, Rebelo, a man untainted by any suspicion
of anti-Nine bias, personally appealed to them for their assistance. It really
sounds sick to this day. But the piggies stayed home – and brought the
investigation to an end.
For Rebelo was stuck. The prosecutors had made it clear that the investigation
couldn't go on for much longer, if only on natural justice grounds to the three
arguidos; but out of the thousands of sightings and possibilities in the files the
only ones still open, unresolved and offering a clear and defined line of inquiry
were those surrounding the nine British holidaymakers.
Of course we've had the endless claims since that "somewhere in the files"
were leads that could have cracked the case if only people like Amaral hadn't
focused on the innocent McCanns, claims originating chiefly from the people
with a direct financial interest in the McCann family's freedom and well-being
such as their "detectives" and numerous lawyers, civil and criminal.
Now even Duarte and the rest of the gang have to acknowledge that after many
years of well-funded examination by private detectives not a single one of the
"missed opportunities" has led anywhere, even a short distance, before
comprehensively failing. Instead, despite the boxes of leads donated to the case
by Metodo, despite Duarte's gift of "overlooked" inquiry lines and despite the
efforts of an anxious-to-help world public, all has descended, literally, into
fantasy – Bundlemen, Spottymen, M/S Millionaire Baby-Buyer, Gypsy gangs,
lurking paedophiles, Moroccan tribes and the rest.
These six years seem to confirm the PJ's belief that there really wasn't
anywhere else to look. So what, exactly, do Abreu and Duarte – we'll leave
aside their ignorant camp-followers – think the PJ should have done in late
2007? Suddenly announce that they were going to forget the reconstruction
stuff and look instead at a Hewitt before the prosecutor's bar came down?
No, the Nine were all they had and until Cider Jack earns his knighthood in
May by proving us and six years experience wrong by naming the 196-strong
gang who abducted Madeleine, the Nine is still all that any investigation
It is likely that Rebelo knew the game was more or less up once his UK visit to
discuss the forensic results was over. All the problem areas about the Nine and
their evidence had been shovelled into a leads file loosely called
"Reconstruction", waiting for the next step. But there wasn't a next step. Most
of the Seven. as Rebelo could see, were loudly asserting their desire to return
to Portugal to help the inquiry through their joint spokesman while
simultaneously – and secretly – taking all necessary steps to ensure that they
wouldn't do so. And there was nothing that he could do about it: the Seven
weren't suspects to be be forced back via prima facie evidence and a European
Arrest Warrant. They could only be asked to assist voluntarily.
…and wriggles
In theory, as the supporters of the parents have constantly pointed out, the
McCanns had to return for a clarification of evidence if the Portuguese
demanded they do so: not only did they not refuse to return with the others, the
argument goes, but they couldn't refuse, so there. Pull the other one, chums.
There was no machinery to enforce such a demand except their own
consciences, which at that time were not in high-visibility mode. You don't
engage the best extradition lawyers in the world if you're anxious for a PJ
reunion. The only way they could be forced back was via an EAW and that
again legally required prima facie evidence which, with the death of the
forensic results hopes, didn't exist.
That left only the interviews under the letters rogatory process to probe the
gaps in their evidence and that process itself had two fatal weaknesses. First,
the questioning was tightly confined by the treaty process to clarification of
events surrounding the disappearance; a "no fishing expedition" requirement,
as the lawyers call it, meant that the police could not build on material as it
emerged by developing new lines of questioning to test veracity. Hence, and
most obviously, the failure to explore the evidence of Jane Tanner and the
surveillance van episode. As the Bureau has repeatedly pointed out, to a certain
amount of scepticism, Tanner neither confirmed nor denied identifying Robert
Murat as the supposed abductor and under the terms of their remit the
Leicester police, though perfectly aware of the evasion, were not allowed to
press her with "Now look, I want a yes or no answer to this question: did you
tell the officers with you that the person seen by you from the van resembled
the person you saw at 9.13 on May 3?"

That was probably the most important question in the case so far and it could
have decided whether Jane Tanner was a credible and truthful witness or not,
since Bundleman/Eggman and the rest bear no possible resemblance to Robert
Murat and since Leicester police knew very well what her answer had been in
the van through the UK liaison officer Bob Small. So the Seven only had to
say what they wished to say without any fear of being trapped into logical

…and tears, of course

The second weakness, of course, was how any revelations from the Seven
could be used regarding Kate and Gerry McCann. Nothing that was said in
Leicester, even if Jane Tanner was exposed, helped in getting the McCanns
back. Tanner could claim in the future (tearfully as usual) that she'd been
intimidated and now denied her answers but even if she didn't the McCanns,
safely within their fortress of lawyers, couldn't be forced back for years, if
ever. How did that square with the prosecutors' deadlines? Having watched
from behind a screen as the questions were asked Rebelo knew the score and
left early, missing the 3,500 or so "ums" and "ers" of David Payne's
performance – the first record in history of a red-blooded male (we presume)
forgetting what a blonde woman standing by a doorway and wrapped only in a
towel had been wearing when he saw her.

Part Two will be found immediately below


Please Question Us! Part Two

Who Dunnit?

As usual the Bureau takes the conservative non-dramatic view of events,
believing that, given these circumstances, Rebelo didn't have to be a clean-up
man tasked with killing the investigation. It didn't need one. Whatever the
speculation about cover-ups etc. the evidence above clearly suggests that the
actual killers were the Tapas Nine, acting alone except for their lawyers.
It only needed Rebelo's PJ to make the understandable, if slightly dodgy, claim
in their report that the rogatory interviews "revealed nothing new" (they
hadn't even been translated, let alone analysed in depth) rather than "they don't
get us any nearer an arrest and it's time to give up" and for Rebelo and
Menezes to agree that further timescale extensions were not on, to end the
Unfortunately Menezes made a poor fist of his role. Naturally the "missing
paragraph" required to explain a shelving despite a key area remaining
unexplored couldn't have been written as frankly as we've given it above:
that's not the way the world goes round and would have cost him and his
colleague their jobs. His task, and challenge, though, was to justify the
shelving while maintaining the integrity of the PJ and its investigation on the
one hand, and avoiding leaving a black cloud of suspicion over two of the
arguidos and their friends on the other. The latter would have caused uproar –
claims of a smear job by the terrifying UK press and loud demands to lay
hands on the McCanns by a dissatisfied Portuguese public, demands that, as
we've seen, couldn't be met.

A Clever Plan

Menezes attempted to square this circle by minimizing the significance of the
Nine' s behaviour and evidence while stressing how exhaustive the inquiry had
been. The PJ report section on the needs of the reconstruction couldn't be
omitted from the archiving summary since the PJ wouldn't permit it so
Menezes attempted to counter its explosive implications by smothering them
with love. Hence the embarrassing purple-prosed final paragraphs in which his
rhetoric took wing with references to European literature, the art of the whodunnit
and the analytical power of the average man. All it lacked was a
swooning reference to the "fragrance" of Kate McCann, such as a dribbling
English judge had once made about a Mrs Archer during her well-known, and
crooked, husband's libel case.
He made a mess of it. So intent was Menezes on being "fair" to the two
arguidos that he skimmed, misread or minimised the evidence against them.
Thus his summary used the collusive and in places untruthful first batch (May
4) of statements by the group, not the later ones in which they had been forced
to change their stories under questioning; and he got them wrong too, the dolt,
referring to Russell O'Brien leaving the Tapas restaurant with Mathew at 9
PM, for example. Russell? A mistake like that in an official prosecutors'
report!* And with all the smothering the smoke was still visible, as in his
famous reference to the McCanns being "victims". What were they terrible
victims of, Menny, a miscarriage of justice? Why, they were victims, he said,
of their wilful refusal to co-operate with the investigation, thus losing the
chance to "demonstrate their innocence", poor lambs. Such victimhood.
So that was the archiving summary, their "exoneration".There's no need to
waste any more words on this lamentable work. We repeat we can't see that
Menezes, Rebelo or Monteiro had any choice but to wind up the affair as best
they could, given the forensics, time-scale and their impotence in the face of
the Nine. Menezes probably did the best he could.

Winners or Dreadful Losers?

But what about the Nine who had thus got away with refusing to co-operate,
what did they achieve for themselves? The only defence any of them have
regarding the fact of their killing off the police search for the child is that they
believed that the Portuguese police were out to get them, but once you force
your way through the self-pity it isn't much of one, is it? As so many people
have said, your own safety is normally put to one side, or not even
considered, when there is a chance, however small, of helping to save your
child. As for most of the other seven, just what risks terrified them so much
that they wouldn't return? Portugal isn't Iran or Putin's Russia and they were
never at risk of lengthy custody. Yet they opted for cowardice, by their own
account of events, or something worse if their accounts are untrue, abandoning
a four year old child to her fate. Brrr! Chilly.
The McCanns: failed to demonstrate their innocence, according to the official
summary report. The Seven: failed to assist for "unknown reasons" according
to the official summary report. It seems incredible that nine adults should be
content to have their reputations sullied for the rest of their lives by these
official conclusions. That is the legacy of condemnation and suspicion they are
going to leave their children.
It follows, naturally, that a new investigational review offers all of them their
only chance of removing this blemish.It can't happen passively, as it were –
simply waiting while a review/investigation which doesn't include the close
examination of their stories is concluded. Even if the child's body is
discovered that won't lift the cloud over them since, after many years, the
circumstances in which she died may be no more conclusive than the
circumstances of her disappearance. Only their willing assistance can give them
all the chance to demonstrate their innocence.
That is why Kate and Gerry McCann should have been pleading with the Yard
for the last eighteen months for the opportunity to answer any questions at all,
no holds barred. And so should their cowardly friends.
*"Pelas 21H00 Mathew E Russel [sic] O’brien foram verificar os filtos, tendo o primeiro
excutado a jancla, pelo exterior,que acede ao quarto de Madeleine, localizada na fachada do
bloco residencial, au nivel do piso terreo."