Gonçalo Amaral was NOT removed from the case for incompetence. He was SET UP on ONE OCCASION that was used against him. PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO. My favourite comment from a TRUTHFUL man... G.A. – I dont drink whiskey. I drink beer at lunch time, if they had written that, they would have been right. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Have you agreed with the decision of the former director of the PJ, who removed you from the case? No. Its an unfair and dangerous decision. I was not removed from the investigation due to incompetence. I left because of the direction that the investigation was taking. But the strategy was not decided by me only. It was everyone. It involved the English police and other Portuguese policemen. And what was being investigated, was the little girls death, even an accidental one. ----------------------------------------------------------- Gonçalo Amaral refused to comment any decision from the Public Prosecutors Office of from the Courts and refused to admit that he was frustrated with those decisions. Asked about his removal from the investigation, the former PJ inspector told the journalist that he had no contact with PJ director, on that day, and he only knew the reasons when he had a private conversation with Alípio Ribeiro – refusing to give details about it. Gonçalo Amaral revealed that the statement he gave to Diarios de Noticias – and was the reason for his removal, according to the PJ director – was not correctly reproduced and it was not a statement to a newspaper, but just an informal talk with a journalist from Faro, very close to the family, a friend of my wife, who called him to ask about the email sent to the web site of Prince Charles, denouncing a former employee of Ocean Club as the kidnapper. What I said, talking not to a journalist, but with a friend, a personal talk, was that Police should concentrate in what was the common conclusion of British and Portuguese Police: the child was dead and it was necessary to consolidate the existing evidence and move forward, to find where she could be and what happened. At that moment, the kidnapping line of inquiry was already closed, and another door was opened, Mr. Amaral said. When asked about the existence of political interference in the investigation, is answer was short and clear: I think there was more politics than police. We did our job, the best we knew and we were the target of a lot critics and insults, from the British newspapers, the former PJ inspector said. When the case of Joana Cipriano was first raised by the British Media, Mr. Amaral contacted the PJ director and called the attention for the risks, because those news about his alleged involvement in the torture of the mother of Joana Ciprianio would be, soon, a large campaign against him, and talked about the convenience of taking him out of investigation. What they told me, later, was that I had all the support and should continue the work. Surprised with his removal from the investigation, Gonçalo Amaral used a popular Portuguese phrase to explain what he felt, when he knew about his removal: I felt as if I was kicked up in the ass, on October 2. About the influence and importance of the McCann, Mr. Amaral said that there is a all story to be told, about this case, and I think that the journalists that followed this case, have a great opportunity and responsibility, in helping to understand what happened. This is really, a case that is different from all other cases. Gonçalo Amaral criticized the Justice minister, who said, after his removal, that it was, now, time to work: Mr. Justice Minister Alberto Costa, we worked hard. 2008-07-01 Gonçalo Amaral speaks of pressures in the Maddie case Former coordinator for the investigation of the Madeleine case said pressures existed around the process of the case for it never to be solved. Gonçalo Amaral says that the presence of the officer Clarence Mitchell is proof of that and argued that neither researchers nor directors should be afraid of working. Gonçalo Amaral interview Expresso I was removed because of the direction the investigation was heading 03 July 2008 Thanks to debk for translation, additional text by Joana Morais The former PJ inspector believes he was removed because he didnt wish to abandon the homicide theory. He maintains that Maddie is dead and the only reason there isnt more evidence is because he wasnt allowed to continue to the end of the investigation. Amaral: We were doing the last diligences related to a very important witness who was coming to Portugal. Expresso: And the witness came to Portugal? Amaral: As far as I know, the witness never came. Expresso: But this was truly an important witness? Amaral: Very important. Your name and your career will remain connected to the Maddie case forever? Im not worried about that. I have always worked in a team, with the preoccupation and the goal of reaching the discovery of the truth. No policeman likes to leave a case halfway through. Was that what happened with this investigation? Is it left halfway through? Not according to my will. Have you agreed with the decision of the former director of the PJ, who removed you from the case? No. Its an unfair and dangerous decision. I was not removed from the investigation due to incompetence. I left because of the direction that the investigation was taking. But the strategy was not decided by me only. It was everyone. It involved the English police and other Portuguese policemen. And what was being investigated, was the little girls death, even an accidental one. After you left, was that course maintained? I dont know. Im very naïve and I want to believe that my exit from Portimão had the purpose of advancing the investigation, because the person that took over is much more efficient. Do you believe that Madeleine McCann died in the apartment on the evening of the 3rd of May? Yes. That is what I and other persons believe in. And this is not because we idealised it that way. Is there evidence to sustain that thesis? I cant enter any details of the process. I will only say this: I am certain that I, and the persons who worked with me, did a good job and I doubt that anyone else could do better. Some day, people will see the process, they may agree or not, but there is nothing in there that questions my professionalism. Was the investigations direction, homicide, disturbing the political power? This case was more political than a police case. Did any politician pressure you? I was not pressured, I was removed. If there was a homicide, where is the body? That was what we were going to establish next. On the day that I was removed, I was carrying out diligences for a fundamental witness to come to Portugal. It was necessary for the PJ to pay for the trip, to arrange for lodging, and that was being taken care of. But then the important witness never came to Portugal and was never heard. But why? Why was an exception opened? The English police was used by the McCanns to send the PJ information that often was nothing but noise? Yes. And the fact that the couple had a press advisor, is a figure that is not even foreseen in the penal process code. In some way, we were all influenced by the campaign that was built, which said that the child is alive and must be found. I dont say that the English police was being ordered around by the McCanns, but it was influenced, like we all were. The PJ should have found a way to protect the investigators from everything else. That is strange: you say that it was established with the English police that the direction that should be followed was the little girl’s death, that there were enough indices, but there seems to have been an inflexion. Yes. And I was removed. I dont know whether there is a direct connection. I know that colleagues from the investigation have requested the polices directory for a syndication, to see whether the work was badly done. Whether mistakes were made. Do you believe that you reached the truth? I am convinced that we were on the right path and that we might end up knowing everything or not, but a great part. Now, that which we have collected and which we consider to be indices, may not be valued in the same manner. One of the criticisms is that the results from the months when you were leading the investigation are lots of convictions and zero evidence. Do you agree? I was the coordinator of the investigation from 3 May to 2 October. Five months. After me, there came other people that have been there nine months. I am not comparing, but we were professional and Im not ashamed of anything. And when the process is public you will see if it is true that there is nothing. There are indications and they are in the files. We did hundreds of interviews and searches. Thousands of diligences and from that there are no results? The little girl went up in smoke? Did the theory of the death of the child continue to be followed after your exit? I dont know. I can say that ever since that day I knew the process would be archived. Do you think that you made any mistakes? I made one. The error of the first hour. There are things about which I still cannot speak. But we know that there are things which could have been done in another way. No one should be shocked if we begin, immediately, to wonder if the parents were involved. After leaving the investigation, did you ever speak with your successor, Paulo Rebelo? No. It is an interesting question to consider. If they removed me for the barbarity of speaking to the press, and not for incompetence, it would be normal to be consulted. But this never happened. If, as all seems to indicate, the case is archived, the public is going to hold the Portuguese police responsible. How will you react? Archival is not a declaration of innocence. A process can be archived and reopened. The archival of this case could be the declaration of some incapacity of the police, or it could have a different meaning . Boozy Lunch fellow diner used to DISCREDIT the Portuguese Police? https://youtube/watch?v=ihSAVrgy7_E
Posted on: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 12:09:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015