hmmm wonder what all that is about. Why interview these oh so innocent people separately?
2007-09-05 23:57:39 · 33 answers · asked by UK girl - England'shire 2 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
BTW - Re-interviewd by the police
2007-09-05 23:59:57 · update #1
She is going to be formally interviewd at 2pm and is bringing her lawyer with her!!!
2007-09-06 00:03:37 · update #2
Encantar if they are interviewing them "not as supsects" then why not interview them together. Why go to the trouble of seeing them separately and why does she need her brief with her?
2007-09-06 00:10:22 · update #3
"snetterton2" - Then why give the parents the bllod results SEPARATELY AND ON DIFFERENT DAYS?
2007-09-06 00:11:29 · update #4
"Goldfish" - EXACTLY!!! Why interview them separately if they are merely witnesses and NOT SUSPECTS.
2007-09-06 00:13:37 · update #5
the net is closing in
2007-09-06 00:00:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 13⤊ 4⤋
I think that you will find that what the police reveal will shock everyone. I'm still adamant that it's not the parents.
They are re-interviewing them both as witnesses. The police know who they want and they will clarify the statements already given by both parents. They will do this separately to confirm that they both gave the same account of what happened that night and to ensure that there are no changes since they were last interviewed together.
I'm throwing caution to the wind but I think it's somebody the McCanns know or knew through the holiday.
Edit - Bunny, that is what happens when you try to gain credibility with somebody like Dave S. You just get dragged in to the gutter with him. He's wrong and you will be too.
2007-09-06 00:49:23 · answer #2 · answered by Tabbyfur aka patchy puss 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hello The Words,
The whole issue regarding the disappearance of little Madeleine is strange to say the least.
My personal belief is and always has been that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Of course none of us know why the mother is being re-interviewed, it is simply a matter for conjecture.
However the interesting thing about this report is that the re-interview is taking place after partial forensic evidence has been supplied.
That in itself could be a mere coincidence but it gives me for one food for thought.
There are dozens, if not hundreds of children who seem to disappear from the face of the earth each year, never to be seen again. I really hope that the mystery of this one child's disappearance is very soon resoled.
My thoughts also go out to all those families whose children have disappeared too.
Poseidon
2007-09-06 00:59:00 · answer #3 · answered by Poseidon 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If Kate McCann is being formally interviewed by the police, with her lawyer present, it doesn't really sound like a cosy chat. On the other hand, I don't see it as too meaningful at the moments because she will be able to brief Gerry anyway when she gets home.
2007-09-06 00:51:04 · answer #4 · answered by Beau Brummell 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Kate's original statement said they were in the Tapas bar
checking on the children every half hour. If DNA evidence
showed that Madeleine died in the apartment, then this
crime would need to be undertaken within half an hour.
This is not a long time to kill a child and dispose of the
body. Hence it is obvious that she needs to be interviewed
again because the half an hour check is not a reasonable
explanantion - it is a reasonable explanation if she was
abducted.
2007-09-06 04:02:24 · answer #5 · answered by Ian P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Right .
Perhaps they are going over their statements and clarifying points before they reveal the DNA results?
Maybe Kate hasn't mention someone else from the Tapas 9 leaving the table, or maybe they need clarifications of the times she gave for an individual leaving the table? We just can't know at this stage and should not be guessing over such a serious issue.
I still think its the fella (tapas 9) who lives in Exeter & strangely enough, that is where Murats English genetics come from & where he resides when in the UK
2007-09-06 00:28:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
If they are going to give them results of blood tests separately they must think their reaction will be different and its important.
The McCanns must know the person who is being indicated as being involved by the test results.
I can understand why they wish to take lawyers with them when they are not 100% sure they are not being implicated.
2007-09-06 00:28:58 · answer #7 · answered by Saucy B 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Here's the link
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91210-1282955,00.html
I dont know how much you can read into this though.
Seperate interviews on seperate days!
Well Kate will go home that night and tell Gerry exactly what has been said.
Gerry's interview the following morning will have no suprises as Kate has filled him in.
Only disruption would be if Kate was held overnight and not allowed to speak with Gerry before his interview.
Dont get excited, if suspected, they would have been interviewed seperatly at the same time!
2007-09-06 00:07:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
I have no intention of getting involved in this argument let's face it there are maybe one or two people who know what happened and the sooner they are caught the better, whoever they are. However having read the article it says 'the police have previously stressed the mccanns are not suspects' the operative word there is 'previously'.
2007-09-06 00:24:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
Funny that the papers leak that the blood results were negative, then we hear that was not true. The Portugeese police are apparently 'happy' about the results. An odd phrase.
It is still possible that they are being interviewed just as witnesses. If somebody else 'did it', the MCCanns would still be needed as witnesses. Though, it is hard not to be suspcious of them.
2007-09-06 00:18:07 · answer #10 · answered by fundamentalist1981 3 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I think it is just legal speak all this stuff about being a witness, the equivalent of the police saying someone is helping the police with their enquiries, i.e. they haven't been formally arrested.
However, she is being interviewed with a lawyer and seperately so I can't see why donalds thinks this makes her innocent. Wishful thinking?
2007-09-06 00:17:53 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋