12 - AOÛ 29 - Moita Flores (SIC)
Analise de Francisco Moita Flores
SIC (Querida Julia) - 29.08.2012
Traduit par Joana Morais
Julia Pinheiro : So, the British police admits to abandon the investigation relative to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. [ref. English police willing to abandon Madeleine McCann investigation] The Met Commissioner [Bernard Hogan-Howe], responsible for the process, stated to an English newspaper that until the end of the current year the (English) government should decide if the investigation should continue or not. It is a curious issue. I have with me, here, Francisco Moita Flores and Paulo Sargento. Hello, good afternoon. How are you both? What do you think Francisco?
Francisco Moita Flores (prof. universitaire, criminologue): Good afternoon. This is very strange.
JP : Very strange, isn't it?
FMF : In fact, I think this is too strange, you see, in England, everyday, children go missing. I wouldn't go as far as to say everyday, but at least many times per month, children go missing...
JP : At least every week children go missing.
FMF : ...Like in Portugal, where some also disappear, and as we know there aren't as many as those who go missing in England. This investigation, is an investigation made to a process that was already investigated. What the Scotland Yard is doing, and what the English police is doing, is an investigation to the investigation that was done by the Portuguese Judiciary Police.
JP : Yes, and in that they have already spent close to 3 million pounds.
FMF : It was not the police that invested in there [in the review].
JP : Who was it then?
FMF : Those who invested are always the same.
JP : Right.
FMF : That is, it's the government that handles the money, so they can find every possible solution that exists for the Maddie case. Even though the solution, for them, is always one and the same: "The child was abducted", and thus "Let us see where did the Judiciary Police failed", so "We can can find the abductor". They don't consider alternative hypotheses. Therefore, what is taking place, and I understood that from the first public appearance of the English inspectors [ref.DCI Andy Redwood], is that there is a sort of exam, an oral and written examination to the process investigated by the Portuguese Judiciary Police. What is also true is that everything that they have "found" at the time, the numerous leads [ref. 195 "leads"], clues and similar, were all leads that had been previously investigated [or dismissed] by the Portuguese Police, leads that had already been cleared up.
JP : Without results.
FMF : What I fear, or rather what I would be afraid of, if the Portuguese authorities turn a blind eye, is that a new whitewashing operation is being prepared in this case. And the whitewashing operation results in something similar to this: "the child was abducted", "there aren't any other hypotheses", the issue of involving people connected to the child is "vile", they are all "good people", "it had to be a Moroccan or a Portuguese" - it has to be someone whose complexion is a bit darker than average, that has performed the abduction. "Those poor people were just on holidays", "good people" and so on. To disturb them or even question them is indeed an "insult". Well, that is perverse, because it reveals that millions are being spent in order to whitewash people's images [reputations].
JP : But doesn't the idea of closing the investigation come as an attempt to put an end to the case, even the English people are tired...
FMF : The process is archived, the only one who can reopen the process is the Portuguese General Attorney's Office. Everything that they are doing is an investigation to a process that is archived!
JP : Exactly, so they are spending several resources of the British government, in...
FMF : They are lucky not have the IMF in there.
JP : At least not yet. [laughs/ref. See Portugal and the IMF] Let me speak with Paulo Sargento, who has been following the case attentively since the beginning. What do you think?
Paulo Sargento (prof. univers. psychologue forensique) : This has an hidden agenda behind it, as usual. When news, precisely like this one, appear in the British media they have an hidden agenda. About a month ago there was a first call to arms, now...
JP : But what this man stated now was "let's close this", "it will not really come to anything".
PS : What that man stated is nonsense. It means nothing. They're going to close, they're not going to close. First of all, they don't have any sovereignty to...
JP : To close anything.
PS : Precisely. As Francisco said and very well. I fully endorse what Francisco said, they don't have any sovereignty. [ref. Maddie Case review is “A mendacity for the sake of the English”] Secondly, what they did was a review of what the Judiciary Police had done. So, nothing that they have done so far matters at all. What matters is what we are going to have in September, on the 13th and 14th and then on the 20th and 21st. Those are the final hearings dates of the trial of the main action of the McCanns against Gonçalo Amaral. [ref. The McCann couple demand 1,2 million euro from Gonçalo Amaral] It's important for them to keep the story in the spotlight. These are news without any real interest, like rehashing again the 195 leads, it's just pure stupidity, pure media junk to keep the story in the spotlight long enough to reuse it later on in terms of image [i.e. PR strategy]. This is what is happening, it's better that the Portuguese realize that, and by the way, the English people as well. This is what is taking place, nothing else.
JP : What's written there [points to the UK newspaper being shown on the TV/ref. 'Yard chief suggests Madeleine probe may be wound down'] in the title...
PS : The "Scotland Yard" usage is to give the impression of an argument from authority.
FMF : And respectability.
PS : And respectability. Exactly.
FMF : At least it's more respectable than the English government [ref. UK PM's ex-media boss, friend to face charges for hacking].
PS : That's true. Do you remember about two months ago when David Cameron forgot his daughter in the pub?
FMF : Exactly.
PS : This seems to be recurrent in the English. So, people should use some discernment and understand that this is nothing more than a media strategy to put the focus back in the McCann couple, in this case targeting Portugal. What they want now [with the upcoming trial] is to build up their image.
JP : So, it has to do with a specific agenda.
PS : Without any doubts.
FMF : There is an essential error that the Scotland Yard could present - something that I've always considered a serious mistake in the process, and I don't mind giving this contribution to the Scotland Yard: What was the reason behind the protection given to the McCann couple and friends by the Portuguese Judiciary Police, immediately at the beginning? Why were they shielded? Why was there concern in addressing them before the situation that was taking place? [ref. Kate McCann forces political pressure] I know that some colleagues of yours, journalists, hold a 'beatified vision' [i.e. a quasi veneration] - "Oh, those poor parents", "Oh, those poor friends", "They are all good people, drinking red wine glasses and had nothing to do whatsoever with the child that was sleeping 200 meters away", "Those wicked cops!" - that is a sanctimonious and moralistic view that has nothing to do with the police procedures when handling problems of violence and homicide, where everyone is treated equally. And where the first suspects are the ones closest to the victim.
JP : Only yesterday we spoke about that Spanish case [ref. Unexpected twist in mystery over missing Spanish children], where a former colleague of yours said that at the beginning they always have that feeling of not involving the parents, and then...
FMF : But there isn't any other way, the victims, particularly children, and also other victims, are generally produced by those who are closest to them. This doesn't mean that the parents are guilty, it could be by those who had access to the house. And then it also emerged, another mistake that was made and that... - actually, firstly, let me place these questions [still regarding the political pressures]: Why? Where there any phone calls insisting that the parents shouldn't be disturbed? Where there any superior authorities that said "don't touch those people"? And the Portuguese Judiciary Police should tell the truth, they should tell the truth. Where there calls from the embassies? Where there phone calls directly from the directorships of the Judiciary Police?....
PS : Ambassadors where there immediately.
FMF : Ambassadors where in there. [ref. McCann Case: Freedom of Information Act on John Buck former Ambassador] Where there calls from the English government? They should answer these questions. They know what the answers are. It's not worth it to be silent.
JP : For the sake of clarity.