According to Joana Morais and her blog article you went on TV last night and decided to play rough (oh yes there are comments where you have told people that you didn’t intend to play nice) because of the Panorama Interview aired on British TV on Wednesday 25th April 2012, which can be viewed here.
Her blog article states, you said:
“They speak about sightings, about visions by mediums. A lot of things have been produced over the years and well produced and therefore the English police has to pass the ball to the Portuguese police and we are left with the onus and the expense of investigating. It is important to reopen the process, nobody should doubt that, but to reopen the process without limitations, the way they want to limit us”, the former Judiciary Police inspector explained.
Now if you listen to what DCI Andy Redwood actually said here, he speaks of 195 INVESTIGATIVE OPPORTUNITIES. I agree they could include sightings, but they could also and probably do include statements that should have been taken from people, whilst you were in charge of the investigation. Information that was submitted to the PJ that got filed by the likes of Paiva as NO FURTHER ACTION.
Police work is hard, information comes in and until you check it out thoroughly you CAN’T discount it. So before you go spouting your mouth off Goncalo Amaral, please listen to Andy Redwood actually said, because from where I am sitting you are sounding like a bitter and twisted thug who only cares about his reputation and honour and doesn’t give a shit about a missing little girl who could be alive and needs to be found.
You openly admitted on that Panorama interview that mistakes were made, you said:
GONCALO AMARAL: (translated) Its a fact that our investigation had its faults and lost a lot of time, lots of time and a lot of things didn’t get followed up. And I am just as much to blame for that as anyone else.
So stop acting like a child who is throwing their toys out of the pram in a tantrum and grow up and be a man and do all you can to find this child. This isn’t about you and this isn’t about your honour, this is about finding a missing child who could well be alive and a child who needs to be found and returned to her family.
Even the archiving dispatch mentions the errors only they class them as an enormous error margin, they state:
The investigators are well aware of the fact that their work is not exempt of imperfection; they have worked with an enormous error margin, and what they have achieved is very little in terms of conclusive results, especially concerning the fate of the unfortunate child. Nevertheless, they always knew that action was necessary and in reality they acted intensively and with commitment, even at the risk of erring.
You also state the following:
GONCALO AMARAL: (translated) The book deals with six months of the investigation and the conclusions at the time so the investigation needed to continue. The truth is only known when an investigation is finished.
You state that the book deal was during your time at the investigation and then go onto say that the truth is only known when the investigation is concluded. The investigation concluded with this:
Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:
a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;
b) The archiving of the Process concerning arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
Article 277 number 3 of the Penal Process Code is to be fulfilled.
Under article 214 number 1 item a) of the Penal Process Code, the coercion measures that have been imposed on the arguidos are declared extinct.
So please can you tell me how you can call your book the truth, when the conclusions of the investigation are not the same conclusions that you had when you were heading the investigation during the first six months? Surely it should be called The Lie of the Truth of the Lie.
Anyway here is what DCI Andy Redwood actually did say.
Just one more thing you go onto state this according to Joana Morais and her blog:
Lastly, the former inspector further accused the Judiciary police of internally persecuting his colleagues that remain by his side.
Have you not thought to yourself, that perhaps the PJ think you are a disgrace to the profession? Have you not thought that they do not approve of ex-cops that have been convicted of lying and falsifying documents? Have you not considered that some of the company you keep (all the other ex-PJ officers who are now arguidos in various different cases including torture) tarnish the reputation of the PJ? Have you not thought that in a modern civil society, truth and justice come from investigative skills and proper policing and not by intimidation, threats or in some cases violence, in order to extract a confession?
Thought not, think about it and then you might see why the PJ want to distance themselves from you and people like you.
And it is not the British Press that are demonising the reputation of the PJ who are in fact printing the truth, it is you that is doing that.