Saturday 30 September 2017

£154k FOR ONE SMALL CHILD, OR ONE LARGE CONSPIRACY?


UPDATE:  01:10:10
GERRY, KATE AND TAPAS FRIENDS - NEVER INTERVIEWED BY SCOTLAND YARD

I am not sure who the source of this bombshell news is (yet), but it undermines any idea that the parents and the police are working together.  The most important witnesses on the night Madeleine disappeared, are her parents and their friends.  They hold far more information than Warners' employees and the random suspects who have been cited worldwide.  Anyone of them could hold the key to what happened to Madeleine - experienced detectives can draw out details that a witness may not think important, but might solve the case.

Kate refused to answer questions from the Portuguese Police, on the instructions of her lawyer.  At the time it is possible they did not know the police files would eventually be made public, because those '48' 'no comment' answers have plagued their claims of innocence ever since.  Until now, we have been led to believe that the McCanns were co-operating with the British police at least, but the above negates that. 

I would imagine ALL clammed up on the advice of their lawyers, and this is no doubt the reason this case has dragged on for so many years.  Once a suspect says 'I want a lawyer' - that's it. The police then need to prove every element of their case, and quite often the case is simply shelved and left to go cold, as Madeleine's case was in 2008 when the Tapas friends refused to return to PDL for a reconstruction. 

This case hasn't been left to go cold.  Some, it would seem are determined to uncover the truth, and for those involved in Madeleine's disappearance, that determination must be chilling.  


______________________________




Apologies for going missing in action, but the last blog was going nowhere, as one astute poster pointed out (before I pulled the plug), it was being swamped with the same malicious and sordid allegations that are promoted on websites, such as the cesspit. 

I have said, again and again, the case of missing Madeleine McCann does not need to be sexed up.  And certainly not with the freaky imaginings of a fire and brimstone preacher in Essex.  I am sick and tired of hearing about the Madeleine and the make up photographs - who the f**k thinks a 3 year old dressing up is sexual? And I hope those reading those words, had the same shiver down the spine as I had, typing them.  And certainly not a group of highly ambitious and sociable doctors who were perfectly at ease handing their talkative toddlers over to nannies every day.  And those insisting Madeleine died earlier in the week, might like to take a minute to think that through too. 

Quite frankly, my patience has run out with the 'nonsense' theories, they are so stupid and perverted they offend me, and as a follow on from that, I am going to assume they offend many of my readers too.  Bennett, Hall, HideHo and Hyatt (possibly Petermac too, can't be arsed to read him) have painted themselves into corners, and should be left there to rot.  Their theories haven't panned out, in any way whatsoever, and never will.  Please restrict them to the cesspit and weirdo corners, the sane and the logical have long since moved on.  I'm looking for the truth and my time is too precious to waste on the braindead.(Ah, now I know why my students used to call me 'the Bitch'). 

So, let's get bang up to date.  Operation Grange have been granted another £154,000 to continue their investigation until March 2018.  Most of the backlash and outrage of course, is aimed at Gerry and Kate McCann, something SY must have been aware would happen, and something that negates any idea that the McCanns are being protected.  As yet, I haven't seen any comment or statement from Gerry, Kate or their spokesman, but please correct me if I am wrong.

Team McCann, should of course be ecstatic, Operation Grange are not giving up on Madeleine, that should be cause for celebration and a prompt reunion of all the poster, t-shirt and mug makers, and of course all those missing children charities and organisations because they only have 6 months left.  May I suggest a slogan 'Scotland Yard aren't giving up, neither should we'. 

But I suppose on top of ALL the money that has been spent on the search for Madeleine, £154,000 is but a drop in the ocean and not worthy of comment or thanks.   For the family of a genuinely missing and findable child however, I am sure they would be overcome with gratitude.  Kate and Gerry cannot understand why people don't like them, if they are reading, it's stuff like this. 

In this instance however, the McCanns are not to blame for all that extra funding.  They weren't the ones asking for it.  They seemed to have accepted that Operation Grange could go no further, and were preparing to re-start their own search.  Were their voices part of the request to the Home Office?

I'm going to go with No.  Because whatever is driving those officers of Operation Grange, it is not the heartfelt pleas of the parents, or even the public.  The public overall, have moved on, very few remember, and fewer still, care.  I don't think anyone, other than Gerry, Kate, Clarence and Pamela Gurney, believe Madeleine is still alive.  For those who have moved on, it isn't really because they don't care, it's because there have been thousands of heart tugging human tragedies since.  And News in general, has become far more sensational than anything Clarence could think up.  Clarence is old school greaseball, he thinks a stern Aunty Beeb voice and a smart suit, gives him authority - such is life, he would now be crushed by a stampede of enthused fourth formers exiting a media class. 

Those still arguing that Operation Grange is one big cover up, must now be covered entirely in egg or one large omelette.  Seriously folks?  All this for an inept burglar who didn't even grab the valuables?  An uneducated misfit who has for the past 10 years dodged all those reward grabbers (at one time it was over a £1m), all those police, all those detectives?  Or a gang (which of course multiplies the number of informers) of traffickers, paedophiles, all of whom have been free to carry on abducting kids undisturbed while two police forces read files?

If you have any understanding of this case whatsoever, the complexity of the investigation should not be a surprise.  What might be a surprise, is the sheer determination of two police forces to solve it.  That is, Scotland Yard here in the UK, and the PJ, who of course, have jurisdiction and the lead over the original crime.  A good question might be, why would SY need another £154,000 to investigate a crime they can't prosecute?  Why did Amber Rudd, like her predecessor, Theresa May, write a cheque that could implicate her in a crime?

I'm not quite sure who won the poll I put up asking if OG was a cover up.  I think however, it should be perfectly clear by now that Operation Grange are not going to quit without a result.  As much as I hate to say it, for both investigations, here and in Portugal, it may have become personal.  Arguably, it did for Goncalo Amaral.   For him, it has always been about the victim, and that is leitmotif for all those dogged real life detectives who pursue cold cases. 

I have never believed that 33+ homicide officers and untold administrative staff, would collaborate to cover up the death of the child.  The idea is absurd.  People forget sometimes that police are HUMAN, susceptible to all the same emotions and prejudices as we are.  It is not a coincidence, that the best writers of crime and thrillers, give their heroes 'human' flaws.  The accusations thrown at Goncalo Amaral, of excessive drinking are not a symptom of callousness, they are symptoms of yet another dagger, tearing at the heart of an intrepid old thieftaker.  He is hurt.  And the hurt shows.  That's endearing.  Not many admire automatons.  Even Superman is having to show a dark side. 

But, let's get back to the latest news.  There was an air of finality about this last extension, the previous ones always carried an option to ask for more funds, this one doesn't.  That must send a chilling message to those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance, whether it be who we think it is, or someone entirely different. 

It would be utterly humiliating now for both the UK and Portugal, to announce to the world that despite having spent millions of pounds and Euros for over a decade, neither police force has been able to achieve a result.  I'll give the 'cover uppers' a few minutes here.  There's a lot to take in. 

Cover up, I think not.  Now is the time for those interested parties (TM) to launch a new Campaign.  And I'm talking about a reunion of those media whizzkids who made Madeleine's disappearance such a global phenomenon in the first place. They need slogans;  Tapas 6, Tapas 9, Tapas 2?  Maybe Tapas 130+, if we go by Sir Bernard HH's Freudian slip at the launch of Operation Grange.  I suspect however, with Operation Grange, we may see a re-run of everything was tickedy boo with the PJ, until it wasn't.   

But, time is running out.  Whatever, they are going to chuck at Operation Grange and the PJ, they really need to begin now.  Will they claim both investigations were unfairly influenced by Goncalo Amaral 'who had it in for them' from the start? Will they claim it is impossible for them to have a fair trial?  Will they blame Leicestershire Police, how about CEOP, how about MI5 or MI6?  Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, multiple New Labour MPs, who attached their names to the spectacular fund raising Gerry and Kate, and their bravery in demanding the shut down of Freedom of Speech? ID cards, stricter border controls, policing of the internet, compulsory DNA, you can almost hear the Blair Babes (male and female) shouting bravo, bravo, bravo. Let's ennoble the pair, dress them in ermine, and give Lorraine Kelly first option on Maid of the Toilet rights.  

I will close here.  The blog however, is now re-open.  Not for those hung up on the 'paedo' angle or those who those who unleash their inner vitriolic personalities into my post box.  No, I still don't believe in censorship, but I do have standards of morality and decency, that some of you will probably never understand.  Not because I am religious or a pillar of the community, but because I always consider other peoples' feelings.  HONESTY AND INTEGRITY.  

There is no honesty and integrity in those who come here to use anonymity to be nasty.  Your own cesspits and forums have dried up because no-one likes your nastiness, so you think you can crash mine, because I'm a namby pamby liberal who invites free thinking.   Which of course I am, 99% of the time.  In this instance however, the quality of my blog takes precedence over the garbage I am being sent.  I have no problem with people putting forward opposing views, but at least do so with a bit of civility and good grace.  I won't tolerate in your face ignorance in the real world, I certainly won't tolerate it here. 

______________________________


142 comments:

  1. I've noticed there are posters who come on here just to mock your views Ros, I for one enjoy reading your views so you carry on blogging.

    There is a lot of noise from the public about the latest announcement about the funding, I ask myself who benefits if the funding was to be stopped, I believe the case has to be sown up tightly with no holes, time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It seems as if finally OG are true to their word of going back to the beginning,its in the hands of the Portuguese now.
    Brunt from sky suggest's its "It is complicated work, it involves a certain level of diplomacy, and the search for the clues that would corroborate that theory may take some time to emerge.He said the Scotland Yard team has been described as "minding the shop" while their Portuguese colleagues search for the illusive clues that would confirm the latest theory."

    On the boundary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "complicated work, it involves a certain level of diplomacy"

      You don't say, Martin. It was 'diplomacy' that created the mess in the first place. No surprise then that it has to invoked as a remedy.

      "the search for the clues that would corroborate that theory may take some time to emerge."

      And if they have not 'emerged' come next March what then - blame the Portuguese for being too slow?

      "'minding the shop' while their Portuguese colleagues search for the illusive (aka 'fake') clues"

      Reminiscent of the Kremlin's approach to its early rocket scientists - 'You build the missiles, WE'll decide where to target them'.

      Or how to assume management of an investigation that falls within another's jurisdiction.

      It sounds like the Met have simply been given another 'bung' to dampen the flames while they look to Portugal to come up with a 'get out' clause - hence the diplomacy.

      Delete
    2. They will finally find "a solution for this situation"?

      Brussels - 14 May 2007

      Luis Amado, Portuguese Foreign Minister: "Certainly we are concerned. We are all concerned. I even had the possibility to speak with my colleague, Margaret Beckett. We have done all our best to have a solution for this situation. Certainly we will be working closely with our police and with the co-operation of British police in the next days and weeks if necessary to find a solution for this situation."

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MaNt2M3Mg

      Delete
    3. Indeed. One of the most telling excerpts in the whole sordid history of the McCann case. Barely a fortnight after the child's supposed disappearance and there is no mention by either Beckett or her counterpart of finding Madeleine - just a solution to 'the situation'.

      A prime example of 'in your face' collusion.

      Delete
    4. One big issue here is, if OG is not a cover up and they are indeed determined to solve the case, why on earth haven't they grilled the parties involved. It does make it seem that the McCs are above the law.

      Delete
  3. So there you are, Ros! Been checking in every day, wondering if you'd been abducted (lol)!
    The jungle drums this past few days appear to sound a forthcoming denouement across the board. That maybe, just maybe, this really is the last throw of the dice.
    As for a protracted cover up, even those have their 'use by' date, e.g., Hillsbro'. Thorns in HM Government's side usually wind up dead, like Dr Kelly with WMD - so given the Mcs are still extant, abroad, alive and kicking suggests they maintain a great deal of use to those investigating the case.
    Whichever avenue of thought you follow it always ends up in an unsolvable paradox, and like you, the endless and speculative scenarios serve to frustrate and irritate us all in equal measure. In essence, no one really has a clue this side of law enforcement.
    I recall the Dando killing. It was a year later and still no arrests - this became embarrassing to the Gov who leaned heavily on the police to "find the culprit" - which they did - by fitting up Barry George. I always thought this would be the way the Mc case would end, and we've had a few put in the frame (Hewlett for one). But not this time. This case is unique in so many ways I have no complete or feasible explanation as to what happened.
    With Lady Lucan passing away just now it feels more like we may very well end up with an ever enduring mystery.
    -
    SixYearsInaComaMan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi SYIACM, I'm afraid I got tired of the rather nasty element who attempt to hijack the discussion and bring it down to their own cesspit level. Their perverted allegations affect very real people, kids among them and I don't want to give them a platform here.

      I don't think this case will remain a mystery SYIACM, too much time and money has been invested in the investigation, not only, but in Portugal.

      A 'Barry George' scenario has never been feasible, the Portuguese are the lead force, and the original evidence has been carefully documented and indeed, published online. Operation Grange has to work with has already been established, and besides which, OG can only assist the Portuguese police, ultimately, it is the Portuguese Police who will prosecute any crime, in a Portuguese criminal court.

      The ball is obviously now with the Portuguese Judiciary - what is the progress with their investigation? Have they wound their team down in the same way as Operation Grange? I think this time round Judicial Secrecy has worked very well indeed!

      Anyway, as always, nice to see ya!

      Delete
    2. Hi Ros!
      Thought you were taking time out for those very reasons. Good to have you back; there's only so much cesspit and MMM yoghurt knitting a person can stand in lieu lol!
      So, you feel we may yet get a revealing denouement? Certainly the atmosphere on line is one of renewed, final revelation promise. And yes, if this were just a UK investigation I feel assured they would 'fit someone up'- but I hadn't factored in the diligence and direction(s) of the PJ.
      And maybe you're right there about the PJ feeding us optimism. We too often focus on what Op Grange is either doing or not doing forgetting that the PJ are busy toiling away, quietly...
      -
      SixYearsInaComanMan
      P.S. Your absence? I hope you brought a note lol!

      Delete
  4. Hello Ros, good to see you back. Second paragraph, first sentence, I believe you may have missed a word out. I'm happy to see the blog going back to usual form. A friend :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many thanks for that Julie, Oops, [blushing smiley]. Actually my PC has taken to a bit of self editing lately (probably a good thing, lol, I'm not sure if I've been hexed or if it is the well worn keys, ha ha.

      Again, many thanks Julie, your kindness is always appreciated.

      Delete
  5. I would like to say welcome back to Ros, I really enjoy your blog, and I agree with you on the "lets keep it decent" policy. Those who show up just to attack you should be given short shrift.

    As for the new funding, well I have to say (in a hushed tone) that maybe just maybe SY are going to solve this crime! I have been on the cover up side for a long time now and have not been for turning. I really really do not want to get my hopes up that their will be justice for this poor child, but a small part of me has felt a tiny jolt of optimism!

    It looks like the waiting game will have to continue though, but if the right result is achieved in the end and whoever perpetuated this awful crime isbought to justice, it will definitely have been worth the wait.

    Lets see what happens!

    Regards

    AFAN

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for understanding AFAN. I am usually a glass half full (with room for vodka) kinda a gal, but the spite, vitriol and endless whining, would bring down my beloved Uncle Dynamite himself.

      How people can become so emotionally involved with a news story in which they are not involved, to the extent they do, baffles me. How they can hate a stranger online with different views, that also have no bearing on their lives, is scary.

      I think many forget that they are onlookers AFAN, they want active involvement and their names on the credits, those pushing the loony theories that is. And it is mostly they and their followers who come here to promote their creepy paedophile theories.

      I do think the end is in sight AFAN (hope JB pops in), because it would be absolutely absurd, after having all these financial top ups, for the investigation to close without a result.


      *He of sweetness and light and my all time fav literary character, from my all time fav writer, PG Wodehouse!

      Delete
  6. Ros said -

    "As yet, I haven't seen any comment or statement from Gerry, Kate or their spokesman, but please correct me if I am wrong."

    I was thinking the same thing yesterday. I find the deafening silence from the McCanns on the extra money being given to SY quite intriguing. Where is Mitchell? Where is Tracey Kandolah? Why haven't they rushed to the McCanns' defence that this extra money is proof that SY are looking for the "abductor".

    It does seem that the McCanns' farce may have come to the end of the road and things aren't looking good on the horizon. When the McCanns have said in the past "we're so buoyed by the extra money given to SY for the search for Madeleine" they must have been quite oblivious as to what was really happening behind the scenes or were bluffing if out or didn't want to think they would be the suspects in the end if everyone else has been eliminated. If the focus is now on the McCanns they obviously can't have anyone saying on their behalf "oh isn't it wonderful that SY have had all this extra money granted to them".

    Oops, oh dear, any extraditions on the horizon I wonder?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous30 September 2017 at 16:51

      ''I find the deafening silence from the McCanns on the extra money being given to SY quite intriguing.''

      What's intriguing about it ? They haven't said anything. That's it. Thousands of people are waiting and salivating wanting words to chew on and 'interpret'. In the meantime, chew on their silence ? Each to their own I suppose.

      ''''they must have been quite oblivious as to what was really happening behind the scenes or were bluffing if out or didn't want to think they would be the suspects in the end if everyone else has been eliminated''

      They aren't suspects. That's only online.

      ''If the focus is now on the McCanns they obviously can't have anyone saying on their behalf "oh isn't it wonderful that SY have had all this extra money granted to them".

      And 'if' the focus isn't on them -or anyone else, like the past ten years ?

      ''Oops, oh dear, any extraditions on the horizon I wonder?''

      You're excited by what you're imagining.You know there's no reason to wonder that. If it was even in the ballpark of realistic they'd wrap it up now and save another 154 grand and a handful of men getting paid to chase the fog.

      VT

      Delete
    2. I've had the benefit of reading the latest Clarence statement, before your post 16:51, but it is not exactly filled with enthusiasm. The actual wording is open to interpretation. They are grateful to all those officer still actively looking for Madeleine, is what I read, and my guess is, probably not many.

      There was also no mention of 'hope', or of re-starting their own search. I could say it's because of good manners, not wanting to be disrespectful to the police, but that has never happened before. Have they stopped believing Madeleine is alive?

      Missing too are the 'no evidence' chants (except on here) or a taunting 'prove it'. The wind has been knocked out of their sails. Why didn't they personally thank the police? Who, apart from world leaders, needs a spokesman? Especially 10 years after the event.

      All the signs are there. When things are going well for the McCanns they 'do all the media', they appear on talk shows, repeat the abduction story, without additions or variations of course, and they belittle their critics. Ah, and they also taunt Goncalo Amaral and all those dogged detectives who can't catch them. I think Gerry's inability to hide the smugness, put the 'dogged' before detectives.

      .....continues

      Delete
    3. We should perhaps remind ourselves of Gerry and Kate at the launch of Operation Grange, when SY kindly commissioned an aged progressed picture of Madeleine.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=divprR1XZKM the link is to a press conference they held, where both are extremely confident and self assured in front of all those cameras. So much so, that Gerry at 21.04 can't hide his laughter.

      This investigation hasn't been good for Gerry and Kate, the media and camera friendly pair, now appear anxious and withdrawn. They must however, have nerves of steel, it has to be hellish living under a police investigation.

      I don't feel good writing the above, I am not without sympathy, but the hell they are living with, is a hell they created, and one they could end at any time simply by telling the truth.

      I always remember Kate saying she and Gerry are 'finishers', it sent a moderate chill down my spine, because it captured their characters in a nutshell. There is no denying their will to power. Not only will they run up to the top of that mountain, they will do it in record time.

      Normal mortals, I think, would have caved years ago. Living under the kind of scrutiny they have, is a prison in itself. Worse perhaps than one with bars, because there is no means of escape. No freedom to grow into the person you were mean't be. And worse, no freedom to make mistakes.

      I fear Gerry and Kate, in their entire lives, have never experienced that exhilarating feeling of owning up, and not giving a shit about the consequences. Mostly because they have been too busy finding someone else to blame.

      Those not afraid to say 'yeh, it was me (who ate the last After Eight or whatever)', are relieved of a burden, they don't have to find hiding places for all the little black packets or blame the dog. Confession brings relief from that nagging conscience, it's one of the few benefits to being a Catholic!

      Delete
    4. ''the hell they are living with, is a hell they created, and one they could end at any time simply by telling the truth. ''

      '' Living under the kind of scrutiny they have, is a prison in itself. Worse perhaps than one with bars, ''

      The 'Hell' was brought about by them telling the truth - unless of course both the PJ and SY are lying to us all . They seem to have believed them for a good many years now, hence no arrests.The alternative theory is that if they lied, and if the PJ and SY didn't /don't buy their story, then the lack of arrests suggests a conspiracy to conceal a lot. It's easy to imagine the parents as 'prisoners' behind bars of - what some believe- their own making due to the feverish scrutinising of their every move and word. But maybe they have told the truth. Isn't it an oft-quoted christian banner line that ''the truth shall set you free'' ? Perhaps that's their strength. Tricky business..

      ''Mostly because they have been too busy finding someone else to blame. ''

      Who have they blamed ? The only other name that was blamed was Murat-twice. And that wasn't by them.

      'Confession brings relief from that nagging conscience, it's one of the few benefits to being a Catholic!''

      Not having to is one of the benefits of being a politician with friends in high places.Ask Blair, Brown, or Cameron.Maybe even Pope Frank. Blair turned catholic sharpish after his time in number 10.He must have been worn down with such weight that he needed to mutter a few hail Marys to lift it all.

      VT

      Delete
  7. There's a statement from Clarence Mitchell regarding the new funding on the OFM page..

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anon 17.51

    I've checked a few times and can't find anything. Where is it shown on the OFM page.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "but the last blog was going nowhere"

    And you expect this blog after your absence to do what exactly?

    It is such a pity that you didn't decide to move on and use your blog for something else.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The thought did enter my mind 19:09. I am mesmerized by American news at the moment, I don't know if it's a freedom of speech thing, or the charisma of the presenters, but it's all so much more exciting than our own! They are 'Dallas', we are 'Coronation Street' :(

      I very rarely, if ever, say this about anyone, but I truly do hate Donald Trump, not just him, but his vile animal mutilating sons and Avaricious Barbie. I would really like to set my barbed wit on them! grr.

      Why don't I?

      1. I am a desperately insecure writer who doesn't think I'm good enough

      2. He might have me bumped off, and

      3. There is too much competition!

      I jest. Lack of confidence probably :(

      My blog was never part of any life plan 19:09, it just kind of evolved. I enjoy an interactive audience, that is, I prefer to hear the opinion of a cross section of the public, rather than the opinion of experts and spin doctors.

      And don't you think it is one of the marvels of the internet that we can 'connect' with people who are musing about the exact same subject? In the old days, you would have to scour at least 20 pubs, and kiss hundreds frogs before you found someone as interested in, say, the life and times of the Emperor Claudius as you were. And guess what, lots of frogs lie!

      The case of missing Madeleine is the greatest mystery of the 21st century, it is ridiculous to demand people not talk about it! Do you not think it better that the mystery be discussed civilly and compassionately here, rather than in those sanctimonious kangeroo courts, where verdicts have been reached and abuse is welcome?

      I offer something unique here 19:09. A platform for all views and opinions on this case (apart from the freaky stuff), Gerry, Kate, their spokesman or anyone on their behalf is as free to post here as those who do not believe. And they would be treated with courtesy.

      I provide a level playing field 19:09, I don't spam logical, reasonable arguments, in fact I welcome them. Unfortunately, those posting on behalf of the McCanns, don't seem to be able to put forward their views without personal insults to myself and others.

      Delete
  10. Oh no - don't let people disagree with Ros - such bad form cos she is such a good Mccann hater.

    Pathetic and that is after just a few posts.

    Let's all revel in Ros's hate and not have any dissenting views eh chaps!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How old are you? 5?

      If you could insult me eloquently, with even one micro particle of wit or originality, I would give you a guest blog 19:14.

      Based on the above, I would be embarrassed for you in a juniors playground, '......cos (sic) she is such a good McCann hater', really? That's the best you got? lol

      Delete
    2. To anon @ 19:09 and @19:14,why keep visiting ifs it not to your liking,it's got to be like walking into a sports hall only to declare I don't like sports but I'll keep visiting any way.

      Delete
  11. Either a conspiracy is responsible for the length of time and depth of the funding well or a ten year catalogue of consistently terrible detective work. It's reasonable to believe that the the idea od 33 detectives would be complicit in a cover up is outrageous. It's just as reasonable to believe they're honestly going about their work unaware of that cover up. OG came to the party relatively late, remember. It did more for Cameron's public face than anything else. It made him look 'determined and caring' all in one pulled punch. OG isn't a cover up, it's just part of the whole facade. that facade has MPs / PMs mugshots all over it as we go through governments and leaders.Everyone willing to throw empty statements around and dip into a seemingly full purse to back them up. Why would they be so willing to attach themselves to a 'conspiracy' ? Because they know it's good PR- something increasingly difficult to ahieve in these times for politicians and police forces. And, of course, they know that nothing will ever be discovered to expose any cover up. Any idea of evidence being found, never mind corroboarted, that would nail the culprit was buried alaong with the spade ten years ago. To suuport that theory I point to the amount of positive progress made in terms of solving the case or finding Madeleine.It's still 2007.

    The McCanns are intelligent people. I don't believe they expect any closure from this, whatever money's thrown about. It hasn't come close yet, why would it now ? Only they know what their private thoughts are and they're entitled to those. We don't need any statements from them or their spinner, Mitchell. They're not politicians and they're not members of the Buckingham Palace posse. If they say anything it won't be anything other than anyone could predict( we're grateful /thankful/and believe/ hope etc).

    As an aside, I've been glued to the series 'Tears Of A Crime' recently. Great little series. The watcher, the listener and the profiler. Catchy. They rehash high profile crimes that have been big media shows and examine the micro expressions of the face and the vocabulary of the parents /spouses etc who later get nabbed. You'd all love it. It's way above the usual fayre as seen on youtube.I've also been playing around with other unsolved (or questionably solved ) cases here in the UK. Of the latter, the Hanratty case never gets old. Did he / didn't he ? Should he have met the gallows-or was it a frame up ? They did some 'interesting' things with DNA in 2002 to achieve a victory for the Establishment over those pesky conspiracy theorists.Or did they......my jury's out ..

    VT

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was going to thank you for being courteous VT, but you just couldn't resist a sneer in your final paragraph.

      Your arguments for a cover up are weak VT. If those detectives working on Operation Grange have been hoodwinked into a cover up, they are not very great detectives.

      You also forget this is a crime that was committed in Portugal. Scotland Yard will not be prosecutors unless they have uncovered crimes committed in the UK.

      The disappearance of Madeleine is in the hands of the Portuguese police. If it is unbelievable that 33+ British officers would conspire, it is even more unbelievable that the Portuguese police and judiciary would too.

      '..... they KNOW nothing will ever be discovered'? No they don't. This case has a cast of hundreds, if not thousands. People closely involved, people on the periphery. People who worked in government departments, two police forces, private detectives, trusted journalists and spin doctors. Any one of them could blow the whistle, and indeed, be paid handsomely for it. It has always been a ticking bomb, the government had no option but to fund a British investigation.

      Thank you for the 'Tears of a Crime' recommendation, I will certainly look out for it. Hanratty I don't know - not a case I have ever looked at closely.

      At any time, any one of them, could blab. Circumstances and relationships change, we are a decade on from 2007.

      Delete
    2. I meant to add VT, that whilst the McCanns are not obliged to issue statements, or reveal their inner thoughts, you have to admit it is out of character.

      It may well be, that the 'hope' has gone, and they are grieving. In which case, their public would sympathise. It is as if admitting Madeleine is dead, is admitting defeat.

      Acceptance is one of the most difficult stages of grief, but it is necessary, in order to move on, to find closure.

      I suspect Gerry and Kate know, and have known for a long time, that SY and the PJ have concluded Madeleine is dead. And that whatever the end results, of the British and Portuguese Police investigations, that Madeleine is dead will form part of the official closing statements.

      There are many reasons of course, why that would not be a good result for Gerry and Kate, not least their ongoing battle against GA for saying the same thing.

      They are presently between the devil and the deep blue sea. If they intend to carry on the search for a live Madeleine, they cannot agree with the conclusions of the police.

      Whilst they could win back a huge wave of public sympathy if they admitted they were grieving for their daughter, they would have to close the Madeleine Fund and distribute what remains to children's charities. Quite a conundrum.

      Delete
    3. My point was, and is, that I don't think, nor ever have, that the police 'on the ground' have conspired willingly to hide anything or mislead in the case. I believe any conspiring that occurred was above them. I assert that they know nothing will be discovered for the same reason you believe it will be, that is, because a 'cast of thousands' haven't done so in ten years. I believe that a cop could 'go rogue'. But he'd have to be extremely brave, and extremely clever at concealing his identity. I won't go into the other 'oaths' they swear, it annoys me.

      That series is : Faking It : The Tears Of A Crime by the way. Can't recall the station but it will be on catch up on sky or something.

      The Hanratty case is an old college /school favourite when that old chestnut about 'for or against bringing the rope back'. The bigger picture and other suspects make it well worth a look. The lady who survived but crippled from the waist down only died last year, God rest. Her interviews are on the tube. Here's a flavour of the case...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHtn2VF7aUI

      VT

      Delete
    4. Do you think the police 'on the ground' have been lobotomised? That they are incapable of independent thought? Like tweedledum and tweedledee perhaps?

      But round and round we go. That no-one, the McCanns and their friends specifically, have been arrested, means nothing. Police the world over have their eyes on suspects, while murmuring 'one day, you sob'.

      With advances in science and technology, case that are several decades old are being solved and those who thought they got away it, imprisoned.

      If SY and the PJ have eliminated the parents and their friends from their enquiries, then why not be more specific? What eliminates them? eye witness evidence? DNA? lie detector tests? Isn't it rather cruel of them to leave these people under suspicion?

      Delete
    5. ''Do you think the police 'on the ground' have been lobotomised? That they are incapable of independent thought? Like tweedledum and tweedledee perhaps?''

      No, I just think they follow orders.According to the consensus( online), there was evidence early on. Appparently two dogs that were brought in found evidence. Apparently, blood was found all over the place. A little while later DNA was found.But as I already stated..'early'. In particular, a long time before OG was dreamed up.All of this came to nothing and it was as near as anyone got to a case. Why did it come to nothing ? Was it genuinely worthless ? Or was the briefing to say that it was ? If it's the former it won't magically become evidence now. Holding out to the tune of millions of pounds year after year won't do it. If it's the latter, how many people have compromised themselves for two suspects ? I doubt anyone would. But they might be willing to for something else. What does DNA testing lack now that would bring a new aspewct to the investigation ? How advanced does it need to be ? That what struck a chord with me when reading about the Hanratty case. There was a nutcase kidnapping a couple at gunpoint in their car wearing no gloves. He shot the man dead and raped the woman. No traces of him were found in that car.Her pants were kept on file ( they had his semen in them). They dug him up 40 years later and bingo- a match. This was after several protests and petitions for a posthumous pardon and accusations of bad policing and cover ups levelled at the establishment.The interpretation of that DNA for that case wouldn't pass muster today.But it did for that case that day. A point was made. That was 2002, 40 years after the hanging.If the evidence of this case is as incriminating as the majority keep saying, the technology is there and the advances have been made. DNA /Blood aside- the findings of the cadaver dogs was rejected too- why ?

      '' What eliminates them? eye witness evidence? DNA? lie detector tests? Isn't it rather cruel of them to leave these people under suspicion?''

      It could be either ; it could be all. Only the PJ and SY can say. Didn't they say as much on the ten year anniversary ? They didn't say why specifically, but said the parents were, in so many words, off the hook. They suggested they were never really fully on the hook. The court chipping in with the 'that doesn't mean that they're cleared' doesn't matter if the police investigating say otherwise.It's a police investigation. That the majority who refuse to believe the McCanns or their friends never altered their opinions is proof that it doesn't really matter who explains why they're not suspects, they'll still be 'under suspicion' of them, even if the police don't share their opinion. Those who pass out the orders and rubber stamp extensions to the fund might not mind anyway if the general consensus has all eyes on the parents. Misdirection is an invaluable tool in prestidigitation.

      VT

      Delete
    6. Yeh, the 'just following orders' defence lost all credibility at Nuremberg.

      Again, you claim the alerts and findings of the blood and cadaver dogs have been rejected (with no evidence whatsoever). Like the pair of pants in the ancient Hanratty case VT, all the original PJ evidence has been preserved and could come into play at any time.

      If the objective of Operation Grange is to cover up the cover up and steer suspicion away from the parents, they are failing miserably. The abduction story is even less believable than it was 10 years ago, and it is doubtful anyone is looking for a live Madeleine.

      Your acceptance of what some might perceive to be cruelty by the police is odd VT. If Operation Grange have it within their power to remove the suspicion from Gerry and Kate, why don't they?

      If they know what happened to Madeleine, and I suspect they do by now, why not end the parents' agony? Imagine the police saying to Kerry Needham, we know what happened to your son, but we've got one last lead to follow and will let you know in 6 months time. Or maybe not. And if the police are deliberating misdirecting the public towards the parents, that takes the cruelty up several notches. Why aren't the normally assertive parents protesting?

      In the past they have been apoplectic with rage at anyone who suggested they may have been involved, newspaper proprietors especially. Where is their outrage now? Operation Grange has proved far more damaging than Goncalo's book, or tabloid headlines. And if they are being scapegoated by people higher this particular unsavoury food chain, then they are, on this occasion, genuine victims. It would appear they have much to protest, so why so coy?

      Delete
    7. The 'following orders' is valid. They do. And, as we're finding out of late, they've been 'guilty' of it many times . The Savile case is the 'big one'. They wanted to arrest and charge, they were told to look away.Hillsborough was the same. I suspect this case is more subtle.I'm not sure what the police think or, as you suspect, know. The PJ seemed to be of a mind that the parents were guilty of at least something( burying a body). SY have been saying the opposite. That's probably why they go round in circles ; they're rowing the same boat in opposite directions. The DNA coming into play at 'any time' is sounding like a straw being clutched at. If a civilian is guilty, they would have had him or her by now.

      I'm at a loss to state what OG's remit is. It appears to me that it was a PR exercise dreamed up by Cameron's party. He'd been under some kind of implied threat from that ginger bitch, Brooks, hadn't he ? Of course, if they've actually achieved anything of worth then I'll stand corrected.

      I don't call what the police have done ( or not done) cruelty. As I said, they have bosses. There's a well defined hierarchy and code in that force.The hierarchy above it is even more well defined and have an even stricter code. If a few detectives are aware of dodgy dealings they know better than to speak of it publicly. That doesn't mean they're proud of it.

      I've seen the Ben Needham case quoted a lot. I have my own ideas on that. But I fear that that little boy came to an unfortunate end. I don't think the case is comparable to the McCann case. Where were our police flying out to take over ? Or MI5 ? Or PMs giving Kerry their numbers ? Nowhere. Why ? Because it was a police matter. Why isn't this ? As for the parents protesting..How many years ago did KM call the two PJ detectives tweedle dee and tweedle dum ? That outburst of frustration is still quoted even now. And there was GM on camera, free of Mitchell, shouting demands for Cameron to call an 'independent' enquiry and accusing media moguls of hijacking too much of the investigation ? That fell on deaf ears.

      I believe the apparent 'help' that has been showered upon the McCanns, as well as the funding, has played a part in their reluctance to protest. Can you imagine the internet insanity if they came out and slated those who have been allegedly trying to solve the case ? They'd have 'biting the hand that's fed them millions' added to the litany of accusations made by Joe Public and his gang. They won't bother with Amaral now.It's a bit like 'unaothirised biography' . We remember a certain scandalmonger, Kitty Kelley ( yank) and her 'tell all' books. The likes of the royals and Sinatra trying to block her book sent sales soaring. Why ? Because Joe Public added 2 and 2 again and came up with 'juicy'. The logic being that if those discussed within the cover were panicking, it's because some truth was being exposed that they wished wouldn't be. The McCanns protesting on the grounds of the book containing unfounded lies and accusations has been overlooked as 'he's spilling the beans' - despite the infamous court ruling being based on the book being allowed to float as a work discussing suspicions and hypotheses.

      When the heads of the food chain are challenged over cover ups, the game gets dirty. David Kelly's final 48 hours is evidence of that.

      VT

      Delete
    8. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton1 October 2017 at 00:30

      ''It may well be, that the 'hope' has gone, and they are grieving. In which case, their public would sympathise. It is as if admitting Madeleine is dead, is admitting defeat. ''

      I tend to agree. As I said, they're intelligent people.They live in the real world and they must have feared the worst very early on- we all would.But as parents we have to cling to any hope we can. As time passes the likelihood of a happy ending fades . It's more a case of accepting the realistic than admitting defeat.


      ''Acceptance is one of the most difficult stages of grief, but it is necessary, in order to move on, to find closure. ''

      Exactly.

      ''There are many reasons of course, why that would not be a good result for Gerry and Kate, not least their ongoing battle against GA for saying the same thing''

      I think one reason outranks all ; accepting that their child won't be coming back. Most observers feared the worst from 2007. How and by whom has been unknown to us. it doesn't help anyway. But Amaral didn't 'say the same thing' exactly. The 'dead' part, maybe. The rest was his asserting how, at the hands of whom, and the disposal of the child's body.

      The conundrum, as you call it, would be avoided if they accepted that the investigation stalled on the starting line and is still there. No killer or abductor or procurer is going to pop out of the woodwork now with a need to unburden himself. The case needs to be shelved if that's the case.Nobody has anywhere to look now.The 'one more lead' line has been nothing more than a PR trick to postpone the inevitable while they think.

      VT

      Delete
    9. When was Gerry on camera (and free of Mitchell) shouting demands for Cameron to call an independent Enquiry VT? Are you referring to Leverson or do you not see the Scotland Yard investigation as 'independent'? Better still, where's the clip?

      Delete
  12. Theres a very good series on the beeb at the moment,its called the detectives,it follows the murder squad in Manchester,a DCI Sarah Jones tells us that "this job is not about what I think has happened,you do not guide the story,the story takes you" wise words.What say you DCI Wall.

    On the boundary.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ros. What do you make of this?:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4588686/madeleine-mccann-parents-kate-gerry-tapas-seven-never-quizzed-british-police/
    -
    SixYearsInAComaMan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rowley told us that back in April,nothing new just the Sun catching up,not known for their exclusives are they,oh! save for the bollox about Hillsborough at the time.

      Delete
    2. Thank you SYIACM. Actually, it is news to me, despite the comment that follows yours. I don't remember DCI Rowley saying the McCanns hadn't been interviewed by the British police, and I'm pretty sure that is something I would have remembered!

      I did think it strange at the time of the SY/ Crimewatch reconstruction, that none of the tapas group participated, and of course, it was filmed somewhere other than PDL.

      Is DCI Rowley being diplomatic when he said there was no need to re-interview the British contingent? From the real crime documentaries I have seen, that seems very unlikely.

      The McCanns have been lawyered up since Day 1, and when they and their friends stopped co-operating with Portuguese police, the case was shelved.

      We have been given the impression the parents were co-operating with the British police, but were they? I somehow doubt it, because under interrogation, none of the statements add up. Any deviation from any statement, would bring the whole house of cards tumbling down.

      After her first police interview, Kate refused to answer questions, possibly to avoid any conflict with the answers given by Gerry. She has however, told the 'abduction' story on TV chat shows many times, but has never made it sound believable. The tapas group and the inner circle however, have kept schtum since the parents were made arguidos.

      I think we have to remember that Gerry and Kate have no qualms or reservations about telling great big whoppers (bit like Trump), it doesn't shame them that 'some' people know they are lying. To be honest I think it gives them a bit of buzz. It's a playground way of saying I'm cleverer than you are.

      For months they kept up the pretence that they were working in harmony with the Portuguese police, whilst doing the complete opposite. I tend to think their 'good relationship' with Operation Grange is more smoke and mirrors.

      Delete
    3. Well Ros, it's more like the "news" as such has been made official. But like you, I'd never seen a report like that.
      Rowley diplomatic? Yes, I think so. It's very edgy territory is McLand. Perilous. As we've seen...
      And no, I have never felt the Mcs have ever cooperated with anyone - except Carter Ruck. And Mitchell.
      I don't think the Met or PJ have any liking of the Mcs whatsoever. I feel they hate having their hands tied. But what would it cost any of them to break ranks? Serious jeopardy methinks.
      -
      SixYearsInAComaMan
      P.S. It was me had the last After Eight mint lol!

      Delete
    4. ''The Met detectives have been relying on Portuguese transcripts of key interviews with British witnesses, and have never conducted their own, The Times has learned.''

      Well done 'The Times'. I'm guessing that they also learned that the Met are British and that the crime occurred in Portugal and is, therefore, not their's to investigate. They're on hand if needed.

      ''Neither Gerry and Kate McCann nor their seven friends they dined with on the night Maddie vanished have been formerly interviewed.''

      So, what happened when the parents were made suspects and brought into the station- a game of cards ? In what context were the statements of the Tapas 7 taken ?

      The chaos of that night in 2007 is reflected, in part, by statements not being 100 percent reliable or being contradictory. So Colin Sutton suggests, ten years later, that 'fresh statements' would be a way to go. Fresh after ten years. Good call.

      ''A source close to Scotland Yard's search Operation Grange said the new individual is now a "critical line of inquiry" in the investigation.''

      And there he is again, and there it is again. Mr Source and a 'new lead'. I wish I had a pound for every time Mr Source leaked information and a new lead was made 'critical'.The Sun still shining brightly among the constellation of worthless rags...

      I keep reading how 'unbelievable' the abduction story is. It's everywhere. Why do the police believe it then ? And why do they believe the parents are innocent of any crime ? Could it be that they know there was an abduction but the McCanns were not involved ? Could it be that those above who were willing to allow the UK to hijack the case and then have the lead detective removed wanted something smothered ? The PJ closed the case in 2008 and it looked almost like a protest or similar gesture. But they re-opened it and they were cancelled out.

      I don't know what the relationship between the McCanns and the PJ are. I won't pretend to either. I don't see much said about the possibility that their hostility could have been due to frustration and the lack of success in finding their daughter and being more concerened with asking her about her dreams and the relationship between Madeleine and her siblings. I just see the names they called the detectives and the observation of that being proof of their badness. I'm more interested in the legitimacy of the claim of SY that both forces enjoy a good working relationship and understanding while they each hold opposing views of what happened to Madeleine.

      VT

      Delete
    5. We all know they were interviewed in 2007 Ziggy, but it appears, not since. And not by Operation Grange or the current Portuguese team.

      If they are working with OG to find their daughter, then shouldn't be offering every bit of information they have?

      You see the names Kate called the police, but it was Kate herself who revealed those nuggets in her book. The objective of course, was to get we the audience sneering at bumbling, inept, Portuguese police, but it didn't work out that way. She was quite proud to tell her readers that she went through her police interview chanting 'f**cking tosser' at the police. For a supposed academic, she's not very bright.

      Who, other than yourself, is claiming there is a rift between the PJ and Scotland Yard? And who, other than yourself, believes they hold opposing views on what happened to Madeleine?

      Delete
    6. Rowley question and answer session April 2017:
      [quote]MR: Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the
      original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
      all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
      investigation[/quote]

      Delete
    7. Yeh, I don't think anyone took 'the parents have never been interviewed (by OG)'from that 22:01.

      And of course the original investigation was left open. Madeleine is alive or dead, more likely dead, and the parents lost the opportunity to prove their innocence. And, as pointed out by the Portuguese Supreme Court, the archiving report did not clear them.

      That OG agree with the way the original investigation was run, does not bode well for Gerry and Kate. From their perspective, it would have been better if OG had disagreed with the findings of the PJ. And maybe re-interviewed Gerry, Kate and their friends, so they could have the opportunity to clear themselves.

      Delete
    8. ''Who, other than yourself, is claiming there is a rift between the PJ and Scotland Yard? And who, other than yourself, believes they hold opposing views on what happened to Madeleine?''

      The head of the Portuguese police federation, Carlos Anjos:

      "Mr Mitchell wants to discredit the Policia Judiciaria and invent excuses so the McCanns do not come to Portugal to participate in the reconstruction of the night she disappeared..."He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth. Finally we know what side truth is on."

      ''Scotland Yard's six-year investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance was a poisoned chalice laced with critical errors because of a high level agenda to not interrogate the child's parents, according to a former UK detective....'' ( Sutton)

      ''In 2010, with planning underway to launch Operation Grange, Sutton received a phone tip off from "a very senior Metropolitan police officer", warning him about the looming investigation and how it would be handled''

      ''"I immediately assumed that what was meant was that the [McCann] family and Tapas 7 [the group of seven friends on holiday with the McCanns] were a no-go area," Sutton said.''

      ''Sutton also hit out at Scotland Yard claims that the McCanns, who have always denied any involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine, had been cleared by Portugal's police force, the Policia Judiciaria (PJ).''

      ''"The PJ have never cleared anyone," Sutton said.''

      Assistant Commissioner of London's Metropolitan Police Mark Rowley : "We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation."

      ( It would be helpful if these two from the UK were on the same page )

      Pedro do Carmo ( deputy director of the Judiciary Police) : "Maddie's parents are not suspects. Period."

      https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/pedro-do-carmo-maddies-parents-are-not.html

      Sutton (again) said : ''It was "entirely possible" that some of Operation Grange's remit was forced upon Scotland Yard by government officials''

      Amaral suggested MI5 “for sure had an involvement”, either by helping to hide Maddie’s body or covering up the alleged crime.

      https://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2017/04/26/goncalo-amaral-claims-mi5-and-gordon-brown-hid-madeleine-mccanns-body-in-cover-up-after-her-parents-killed-her/


      VT

      Delete
    9. Most of those quotes are ancient Ziggy, and none support your case.

      The police in both countries are fully aware of the media and online speculation that surrounds this case. They are not going to say anything that would cause a media storm. The police often declare people 'not suspects' then arrest them the next day. They are not lying per se, because 'suspect' is a fluid status, it can change by the hour.

      You are using a lot of quotes from Colin Sutton, no disrespect to Colin, but he is just another voice volunteering another opinion, he doesn't know.

      Delete
    10. Ahh SYIACM, you are an 'owner upper' like moi, lol. Doesn't it make like so much more satisfying? Especially because it takes the wind out of the sails of accusers, who have long detailed arguments prepared, and don't get to use them lol. To be fair, I'm just crap at lying, under interrogation, I would cave within 30 seconds, maybe 40, tops!

      Delete
    11. Yep Ros! I'm crap at lying, too, so I own up to snaffling the last After 8. But there's worse crimes - those who eat After 8s but leave the empty packet in the box so you think there's more left! That's just plain evil!
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    12. I have to confess, I do that [blushing smiley] but things can get down and dirty round here on occasion! Younger son keeps threating to wrap Brussel sprouts in gold paper and present them to me in a Ferrero Rocher box! There are no words to describe that kind of evil :(

      Delete
    13. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton2 October 2017 at 12:27

      ''Most of those quotes are ancien''

      The quote from Portugal was broadcast May 2017.

      ''The police often declare people 'not suspects' then arrest them the next day''

      Other times, they mean what they say and don't arrest them the next day or ten years later.

      ''You are using a lot of quotes from Colin Sutton, no disrespect to Colin, but he is just another voice volunteering another opinion, he doesn't know.''

      Isn't that what Amaral's been doing for years now ? What about Mark Rowley ? Are his quotes 'ancient' too ? Is he 'volunteering an opinion' too ?

      Is it a case of all quotes that opine the guilt of the parents are valid while all that confirm them as innocent are not ? A case of picking the quotes that agree with your own suspicions and applauding them and dismissing the quotes that argue against them .

      Delete
    14. Too right, Ros, and er... I put "empties" back, too! But disguising sprouts in Ferrero Rocher foil is a hanging offence, surely? lol!
      -
      SixYearsWithMyLastRoloWhichImightShareMan

      Delete
  14. If Operation Grange were going to solve this case surely they would have done so by now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That sentence would make more sense if it read 'if Operation Grange were going to SHELVE this case, surely they would have done so by now'. :)

      Delete
  15. Anonymous1 October 2017 at 19:24

    ''If Operation Grange were going to solve this case surely they would have done so by now''

    I agree. What have they achieved ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They've achieved an astronomical bill and
      not much else.

      Delete
  16. The only bit of news out of the £154k is some assumption, inference that the MET are working with \ alongside \waiting for information out of Portugal.

    PMSL ..... let us remember the level of co-operation from the LP. Let us recall fundamental FACTS like having Mrs McCann on maternity leave on the background check that was less than half A4. Nothing on the T7. And most famous of all LP working on behalf on the PJ seeking the T7 + JW to attend the re-enactment, just read the emails from call me ''Stu''

    Then recall the drawn out affair of the rogatory interview farce and how that was thwarted & remember the PJ had, had enough and went before the end. PJ hands tied, only allowed to observe & not field questions - read of the whole story behind the rogatory farce, reading each others statements, having prior knowledge of the questions and also recall Mr & Mrs McCann did not get interviewed, but were allowed as part of the Rogatory process field their own questions - having a full copy of the interviews to take place. Most of this is within the terms and criteria - but hardly investigative.

    As set in stone as the day they cobbled together their most famous hand written timeline, amended two copies. Later a full typed up joint timeline.

    And so the farce continues.

    Every time the UK digs deeper into it's pocket to continue this investigation, remember the McCanns had nine years ago could exercise their right as arguidos for the Portuguese file to remain open. They didn't bother.

    All this trouble and strive because these children were left homealone, Madeleine paid the ultimate price, and sadly in turn so will this saga mar the lives of her brother and sister.



    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous1 October 2017 at 20:22

    '' remember the McCanns had nine years ago could exercise their right as arguidos for the Portuguese file to remain open. They didn't bother.''

    Can you elaborate on that please.Or explain what you're implying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When the Portuguese Authorities shelved\archived the investigation. Mr & Mrs McCann, as arguidos had the legal right to ask for continuation. The period of six weeks came and went - they didn't.

      What am I implying. If my daughter was missing and I was told the case was to be closed, but I have six weeks to appeal, I would appeal immediately.

      I'm therefore implying nothing. This is a fact.


      Delete
  18. Hi Ros, welcome back.

    The Daily Mail online has followed up this story as well. They have also made a few interesting comments. One being this.

    It is understood police chiefs have a working theory on what happened to Madeleine but may be unable to reveal it publicly because it implicates an individual or individuals.

    For the full article link below.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4938194/Madeleine-McCann-police-hunting-person-significance.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi John, thanks for that and thanks for coming back yourself. I found myself desperately in need of break!

      As you said in your later post, there was no hesitation in revealing the names of the 'joe bloggs', the blue collar workers, the suspected burglars and the misfits who have had their faces splashed all over the tabloids. It's really hard not see this case as a class issue.

      Delete
    2. '' It's really hard not see this case as a class issue.''

      A 'working theory'. Is that the new ' significant lead' then. We'll know, of course, when we see where it actually 'leads' to. My money's on nowhere. Then, the 'class issue' could be right. There could be an unholy public backlash if it's revealed that somebody has been 'looked after' due to their social status or profession. Especially if it turns out to be neither the McCanns or any of the Tapas group . Like that's ever going to see the light of day. Nothing to see here..

      VT

      Delete
    3. And who do you think that might be VT? Politicians, police chiefs? Embassy staff? You surely don't buy into the idea that someone of presidential importance or royal status was holidaying at Warners family resort?

      No, of course you don't, but you might be implying that someone of great importance wanted Madeleine because she was so special. And it is their crime that is being covered up. Ie. Operation Grange know who took Madeleine but are covering up for them and the McCanns of course, are not in the loop. Yeh, now I see where you are going with that.

      Meanwhile, why haven't the McCanns and their friends given fuller and more detailed statements to the police?

      Delete
    4. I'm not implying that anyone of great importance was holidaying in PDL . And I'm not implying anything regarding why little children like Madeleine are delivered to people in high places. I don't need to imply that that happens or that people in high places share a penchant for them as well as protection. I don't need to imply that such things have occurred for reasons of political leverage either- it's known now ( see Tim Fortescue 1970s). I don't need to imply that this was a police matter as soon as whatever happened happened but was made a political one immediately.

      ''Operation Grange know who took Madeleine but are covering up for them and the McCanns of course, are not in the loop.''

      ''Meanwhile, why haven't the McCanns and their friends given fuller and more detailed statements to the police?''

      How much fuller and detailed could they be ? They rushed to an apartment when the alarm was raised and Madeleine was gone. If the perceived 'lack of cooperation' was proving to be an obstacle to solving this case or finding Madeleine, the police of both countries have had plenty of time to put the pressure on them. The only people screaming out for them are online. There's only so much dissecting and scrutinizing of isolated sentences or words hoping to find that eureka moment that you can do before patience vanishes.They want a new menu. Why the police don't seem to is anyone's guess.

      In the meantime, much is implied about the cadaver scent being ignored for no good reason, or the blood found all over the apartment.The findings of in the hire car etc. The list goes on ( and around and around). Nobody, whatever their opinions, theories, hypotheses and suspicions should 'buy into' anything given the lack of foundation they would need to claim it as truth.

      VT

      Delete
    5. How much fuller and more detailed could they be?

      You must be kidding! Kate at one time claimed they were being watched, maybe she had seen something she didn't think significant, or that could have been drawn out through hypnosis or a skilled professional.

      The Tapas group were closest to the child for the entire week, anyone of them could have held the key, could have offered something useful for the police to work on. Didn't they want to find the child?

      Finally, the only one implying the cadaver scent and the blood is being ignored, is you again Ziggy. Why do you think Scotland Yard organised digs and searches in PDL?

      Delete
    6. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton2 October 2017 at 23:49

      ''You must be kidding! Kate at one time claimed they were being watched, maybe she had seen something she didn't think significant, or that could have been drawn out through hypnosis or a skilled professional. ''

      If you suspect your child has been abducted and are aware that you and your friends had been checking on them around the clock, it's natural to suspect an abductor was waiting to pounce during one of the intervals. That's only supposition and in hindsight I accept, but it's human. Didn't any detectives draw that conclusion too ? A skilled professional hypnotising her ? Hmmmm..Good idea in theory. But that was tried in the Ben Needham case and the resultant revelations were alarming and tended to fit what many suspected. Despite this, a reason was found to dismiss them...

      ''The Tapas group were closest to the child for the entire week, anyone of them could have held the key, could have offered something useful for the police to work on. Didn't they want to find the child?''

      You kep saying that.I agree.But what could they do ? The closest thing to a 'jogged memory' was Jane Tanner's sighting( or alleged sighting). Of them all, her cooperation stands out. And look what it's prompted on the internet. If you were one of their number, would you be eager to follow her example ?

      I have no choice but to accept that the police have ignored the cadaver scent. Why ? Because they said that there's no evidence that Madeleine died.Many accept that. It doesn't even matter if you believe it or not, they have the last say. So they presumably considered that the possibility of her being killed, or 'gotten rid of' later if they were digging around. They seem, by their actions, to be suggesting that there's no evidence that she died in the apartment but that doesn't mean she didn't later, elsewhere . As for the blood, there was enough found to identify someone.

      VT

      Delete
    7. OH please Ziggy, Redwood said on TV that she may not have left the apartment alive, so obviously they DO think its a possibility. It is YOU who is cherry picking.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous3 October 2017 at 10:56

      ''OH please Ziggy, Redwood said on TV that she may not have left the apartment alive, so obviously they DO think its a possibility. It is YOU who is cherry picking.''

      Redwoods still searching isn't he. May or may not ? What's that mean ? If it's a guess ( which is what it sounds like). A guess could be helped by some evidence. Why wasn't the cadaver scent viewed as evidence ? Why ignore that, then send men outside to randomly dig around where no cadaver scent had been detected ? Redwoods just using a few extra words to say ' don't know'. Even if he went with the 'she was dead' scenario, there's then the debate over cause of death and culprit. If everyone's still officially 'not giving up on her being alive' - how do you explain that ? It's a bit more than cherry picking that's kept this going for so long.

      Delete
  19. It certainly is incredible that six and a half years down the line, at a cost of £12 million to the taxpayer, the last people to see Madeleine alive, her parents and the tapas 7, have not been interviewed (even moreso given Jane Tanner maintained for years that she saw the abductor carry the girl away). I've never known an investigation like it. I too doubt the McCanns are cooperating, despite their declarations of gratitude. If I recall correctly, they had a battle with the Met over the Smithman e-fits (which they withheld from the public for five years)and Henry Exton's report. Exton himself was threatened with legal action by their lawyers. These don't sound like the actions of parents who want to find their child.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This latest revelation sounds like a leak to me 00:00. A leak intended to put pressure on anyone withholding information. Basically it tells us that the McCanns and their friends have not been co-operating. Something we suspected, but this confirms.

      No, these don't sound like the actions of parents who want to find their child. The loved ones of genuinely missing people, take root in their local police stations, reporting everything they can possibly think of, that might help the police search.

      For the past decade Gerry and Kate have urged everyone who may have visited PDL to contact the police in the hope they may hold the final piece of the jigsaw, yet they, who were in the thick of it, haven't bothered themselves.

      This latest revelation will not do the parents' cause any good whatsoever. The bumbling Clarence was less than convincing when he explained why Kate wouldn't answer the PJ's 48 questions, how will he get them out of this one?

      Delete
  20. Hi Ros, The reason why I have highlighted this quote from the DM, suppose if the person/s were Joe Blogs the local weirdo his picture would have been plastered all over the place. Perhaps the reason is this person/s is part of the group & SY want to make sure whatever evidence is available is watertight.

    ReplyDelete
  21. So the rumble in the jungle now rests with the MET and the English translations. Six years and now the translations are suspect, something could be lost. Fantastic. Just a pity six years ago they didn't re-interview all the witnesses.

    But let us remember the LP were there, the McCanns had their own translations carried out. The Rogatory interviews were carried out in English on English soil, by English police.

    The famous two copies of the timeline hand-written in English and the groups subsequent own typed statement giving fuller information in support of the earlier hand written ones.

    And now they (MET) want to interview the witnesses?

    Some might recall, so did the Portuguese, they were known as the 48 questions and re-enactment.

    The last sums of renewed budget were £80 - £90k, why £154 this time, more travel, more officers? more what?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. £154k for what you ask 08:10. I'll take a stab, lol.

      As a former legal secretary, the busiest and most frantic times in a lawyer's office, were preparing for trial. All the documents, all the evidence etc, has to be collated and distributed to all parties, and all the witnesses and experts must be contacted and/or subpoenaed. I remember sitting in a trial and my boss giving me 'the evils' because a page the Judge referred to was missing from everyone's else's 'bundle' and it was my fault!

      We should remember too, that the Portuguese have the lead in this case. It is they who will prosecute in Portugal, so travel probably is on the agenda as the two forces will have to finalise whatever it is they are doing, together.

      Delete
  22. ‘lost in translation’ from Kate McCann’s account of the truth:

    “By the Sunday evening [13 May], we found ourselves giving our statements again, this time to a couple of detectives from Control Risks. We were concerned that parts of the statements we had made to the Portuguese police, especially on that first day, might have been lost in translation.”

    What parts?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hi Ros, I am afraid he did say they were never interviewed as suspects :


    -M Rowley , transcript Of interview:
    Q: One of the biggest criticisms of the Portuguese investigation, which they acknowledge as well, is that they did not interrogate the parents from the start, if only to eliminate them. When you started your investigation, you appear to have done the same. Did you formally interview the McCann’s under caution, ever consider them as suspects?

    MR: So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start, all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress forward. It would be no different if there were a cold case in London, a missing person from 1990, we would go back to square one look at all the material and if the material was convincing it ruled out that line of enquiry we would look somewhere else. So you reflect on the original material, you challenge it, don’t take it at face value. You don’t restart an investigation pretending it doesn’t exist and do all the same enquiries again that is not constructive.

    Q: The first detective in charge of the case said he was going right back to the start of the case and accepting nothing. It seems very much he was suggesting that it was going to be a brand new investigation.

    MR: It’s a brand new investigation, you are going in with an open mind. You are not ignoring the evidence in front of you. That would be a bizarre conclusion. You would look at that material, what does it prove, what it doesn’t. What hypothesis does it open what does it close down and you work your way through the case.

    Q: Just to be clear you did not interview the McCanns as potential suspects?

    MR: No

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you 14:04, you are right, I did miss, or at least, did not pick up on that.

      Perhaps the ambivalence arose from that final 'just to be clear' sentence. 'Just to be clear you did not interview the McCanns AS POTENTIAL SUSPECTS'. 'No' replies MR. However, this leaves open the possibility that they have been interviewed, but not as potential suspects.

      I don't see however, OG accepting the original statements as sound, to be a good thing for the McCanns and their friends. Especially if the objective is to clear them of any involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. Once again they have missed an opportunity to prove their innocence.

      Delete
    2. And how many opportunities have been lost in proving their guilt ?

      Delete
  24. If SY do interview Kate McCann I hope they remind her of the sentence in her book regarding the cadaver dog findings, didn't she say ( - not verbatim, I haven't read the book but remember what people have being posting) -

    "How can a cadaver scent be detected when the body was moved so quickly/was there for such a short time".

    How does that statement tie in with the fact that she insists Madeleine was "abducted" (and there is no proof that she has come to any harm), was that a "foot in mouth" moment, one of many according to her book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. KM ('madeleine'):

      "Supposing she had been killed – and we think this extremely unlikely – she must have been taken out of the apartment within minutes. Did they really believe that a dog could smell the ‘odour of death’ three months later from a body that had been removed so swiftly?"

      Delete
    2. @ Anonymous2 October 2017 at 14:47

      That's what happens when you isolate a sentence out of context to suggest something . As 'Anonymous 2 October at 16:58' has demonstrated for you.

      Delete
    3. Anon 22.27

      I've read KM's statement from her book, posted at 16.58. However, the one thing that strikes me is KM saying "and we think this extremely unlikely", obviously she isn't going to state, oh my God, we're terrified that someone killed Madeleine, otherwise their "Find Madeleine Fund" would come to a halt with no more donations going into it as how can they have a Fund if she's dead.

      The McCanns are not stupid and have had every angle covered, that's why they took on high priced lawyers from 3rd May 2007 to instruct them on every move and everything they say.

      Seeing that the odour of death was detected in the apartment I think that you can dismiss KM's statement that a body had been removed so swiftly.

      Delete
    4. Speaking of 'extremely unlikely':

      "A source close to the McCanns' solicitors said the smell on Mrs McCann could be explained by being in contact with corpses while working as a GP."

      Delete
    5. Anonymous3 October 2017 at 17:07

      So, in your mind, KM wrote a book and expressed hope that her child is still alive because of the funding. The 'privileged' middle class professional GP and Surgeon have to resort to a protracted con for a few bob as though they were desperate and unemployed. Does that seem probable pow that you read it back ?
      The McCanns are not stupid and have had every angle covered, that's why they took on high priced lawyers from 3rd May 2007 to instruct them on every move and everything they say.''

      What are lawyers supposed to do ? Should they have needed lawyers in PDL ? GM spoke for himself, KM didn't speak. No arrests were made.

      ''Seeing that the odour of death was detected in the apartment I think that you can dismiss KM's statement that a body had been removed so swiftly.''

      What is the position of Scotland Yard and the PJ on that one ?

      Anonymous3 October 2017 at 17:42

      ''Speaking of 'extremely unlikely':"A source close to the McCanns' solicitors said the smell on Mrs McCann could be explained by being in contact with corpses while working as a GP."

      I agree, extremely unlikely. But it depends on how much faith you place in alleged quotes from ' a source close to' . I've never known of so many 'sources' and 'insiders' and people 'close to' involved in one event for so long. To me a source (etc) is nobody, ergo they say nothing of any weight. Once they put their name to it and go on record, it should be listened to.Not before. I read that KM was at a loss to answer accusations about the famous cadaver scent and offered up the scenario cited above as a 'maybe'.

      VT


      Delete
  25. To be honest The McCanns & party not being interviewed by SY is something we have all missed, perhaps I myself assumed it would have been standard operating procedure. Now this has come to light is OG ready to reveal what they think has happened & why team McC are quiet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Hello. My reply to you was full of typos: this is its replacement.

      Hello. I don't think we have "all missed" the admission that the Nine have not been interviewed as suspects: Mr Rowley told us about it very carefully in April.

      And to make sure that nobody misses it, the story has been placed with the MSM for the second time in five months, this time via a leak.

      As I've said since 2015, the trajectory of this investigation is now straightforward, something we know mainly from the words (and certain significant silences) of the police themselves:

      The only claimed abduction witness has been eliminated; one suspect left, all other suspects eliminated from the investigation; "one line of inquiry" being pursued, all other lines of inquiry terminated.

      The one "abduction witness" was the person comprehensively described in a Nine document presented to the PJ - a person who never existed and was therefore a product of the Nine's imagination, not observation. Welcome to the frame, Nine: you are now in it.

      The one suspect left is Smithman. The one line of inquiry left is the activity of Smithman.

      This year the police are referring to the Nine in regard to operations for the first time. And they appear to be hinting that the identity of their suspect may be known. The one name they never say anything about anymore is Smithman.And the one thing they never talk about is just what the Portuguese, the lead investigators being assisted by Grange, are up to.

      Whether arrests and a trial will follow I do not know but the trajectory could hardly be clearer if they shouted it out through a megaphone.

      Still, don't let me disappoint the pessimists.

      Delete
    3. I have been hoping to hear from John, so your post is very welcome.

      The net it would appear, is closing in, and as you say, all the clues were there, starting of course with the elimination of Tannerman and the pushing to the forefront of Smithman as the chief suspect.

      The NINE of course, all provide alibis for each other, Gerry especially, who they claim was at the tapas when the Smith family saw a man with a child. They are indeed all in it now.

      Delete
    4. Welcome Ros .

      I wasn't trying to be pessimistic JBS , just factual , since it was a part of the interview that was easily missed .

      I did find this latest renewed interest by the press interesting .

      Good analysis on the nine document .

      Delete
    5. John1002 October 2017 at 15:13

      ''To be honest The McCanns & party not being interviewed by SY is something we have all missed, perhaps I myself assumed it would have been standard operating procedure''

      And you would have assumed right had the crime occurred in England and Leicesteshire Police had asked for their help.

      Delete
  26. All of the statements made to the PJ have been on the internet, in English, since 2008 -

    www.mccannPJFiles.co.uk

    I don't remember any of the Tapas 9 or any other people complaining that their statements on that website were inaccurate. I would also think that SY have been through them all with a fine tooth comb numerous times to look for any discrepancies and to cross check the information in them. They must have a huge file of all the discrepancies, I bet their brains were spinning by the time they'd been through them all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed 15:59. I'm sure cold case detectives forensically examine old statements. I watched a recent 'cold case' where a teenage boy vanished on the way to meet his two friends. The two friends were suspected but the police could not prove it. Many years later, a cold case investigator picked up on the word 'immediately' in one of the friend's statements. In that he said, he 'immediately went to bed'. It was enough to re-interrogate the 'friend' and he cracked and confessed.

      The statements of the Tapas 9, would not hold up to intense questioning, could you imagine any of them under interrogation in a witness box?

      The chances are they have all spent the past 10 years replying 'no comment' to every question. The police have obviously had to work around them rather than with them.

      Delete
    2. ''The statements of the Tapas 9, would not hold up to intense questioning, could you imagine any of them under interrogation in a witness box? ''

      If that's even 75% accurate the PJ should get stuck in then. The prosecution service might have concerns on the grey area and the gamble involved but if they 'crack' in court it's done and dusted.

      Delete
    3. I don't think the police can interrogate people who do not want to be interrogated 22:34. When the tapas group stopped co-operating with the police, there was nothing they could do, hence the case was filed.

      They have all given locktite alibis for each other, ergo the police will have to prove everything in a court room. It will be up to the Portuguese Judiciary to decide if the police have a strong enough case for prosecution.

      With cases such as these there is always a risk of double jeopardy. That is, if the prosecution fails, the suspects cannot be put on trial for the same crime again. That was the reason given for the parents of Jonbenet Ramsey not being prosecuted. The police would only get one shot at it, and if they failed, the parents walked. As it turned out, it dragged on so long, the parents walked anyway.

      Not the same circumstances here I hasten to add. There are two live police investigations, neither of which appears to be giving up.

      Delete
    4. The police don't do the interrogating in court, the counel for the defence and prosecution do. If you don't cooperate with their questioning you find yourself in contempt of court and will be guided to answer.Either way, it's a slippery slope. If your assertion is correct( that they'd crumble under such scrutiny) then that's what the police should try to convince the CPS of Portugal of. Their choice would be to gamble on circumstantial evidence confident that one or more of them would bring the house of cards down on all of them.

      The double jeopardy law stands on shaky ground if new evidence is later produced that sheds light on the original case and if it's seen as valid enough to go back to trial.This is according to the ECRH. Only five members have failed to ratify this, and Portugal isn't one of them ( the UK is).

      VT

      Delete
    5. I know the Prosecution presents the police case Ziggy, no need to patronise.

      In a trial however, if the Defendant chooses not to go in the witness box, the Prosecutor barrister can't question him/her. If they choose not testify themselves, they can't be cross-examined.

      Your last paragraph is confusing, are you saying Portugal does or doesn't have double jeopardy?

      Delete
    6. All members of the Council of Europe (which includes nearly all European countries, and every member of the European Union) have signed the European Convention on Human Rights. The optional Seventh Protocol to the Convention, Article Four, protects against double jeopardy and says:

      No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offence for which he or she has already been finally acquitted or convicted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of that State.

      Member states may, however, implement legislation which allows reopening of a case in the event that new evidence is found or if there was a fundamental defect in the previous proceedings:

      The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not prevent the reopening of the case in accordance with the law and penal procedure of the State concerned, if there is evidence of new or newly discovered facts, or if there has been a fundamental defect in the previous proceedings, which could affect the outcome of the case.

      This optional protocol has been ratified by all EU states except five: Belgium, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.[7] In those member states, national rules governing double jeopardy may or may not comply with the provision cited above.

      So, with the exception of the 5 named states, the double jeopardy ruling can be ignored if something develops post-trial.

      Hope that clarifies.

      VT

      Delete
    7. Doesn't matter about double jeopardy since the case has never been tested in a criminal court.

      Delete
    8. Hi Julie

      We were discussing the possibility of the double jeopardy ruling taking effect should a trial ever take place and if it could influence the PJ in making arrests

      VT

      Delete
    9. Hello VT, my apologies. It's been a long few days and I missed one of the comments.

      Delete
    10. ( thumbs up emoji)

      VT

      Delete
  27. Just to add to my post of 15.59 when you look at that list of the PJ Files it's truly astonishing and disgusting that the PJ were called incompetent by all and sundry and are still being blamed on MSM for "messing up" the inquiry into Madeleine's disappearance.

    Now who would want to do that when you look at that website, I doubt anyone could call them incompetent after looking through that lot, well of course, only those who knew what happened to Madeleine and knew the PJ were far cleverer than they thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who gives a shit what the MSM say about anything or anyone ? It's different branches of the BS business.

      Maybe the PJ were useless, maybe they had nothing to go on. Abducted kids don't magically reappear after half an hour. What were they supposed to do, tune in telepathically to the criminal ? One thing would have shown them up as incompetent and that would have been the mighty Met, the boys of Scotland yard telling them to step aside, watch and learn. They did that. The PJ are still waiting...

      VT

      Delete
    2. I never know how to take your posts VT, you seem very angry but seem to contradict people's posts for some reason and don't get the gist of them.

      I wasn't criticising the PJ, I was criticising the press for trying to turn people against them, well I do give a shit when the MSM are demonising GA and the work the PJ did, trying to tell everyone that they were useless and the poor McCanns were badly treated and made arguidos and they were whiter than white.

      I was standing up for the PJ so your comment has me confused. I read all of your posts and most of them confuse me.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous3 October 2017 at 14:03

      ''I never know how to take your posts VT, you seem very angry but seem to contradict people's posts for some reason and don't get the gist of them.''

      Nothing i post should suggest anger. At most, frustration surfaces when I see certain things repeated ad nauseam that have little or nothing to support them but are put forward as factual or 'truth'. Contradicting posts is debating and discussing. I get the gist of all I read here. They're, for the most part, plain English and unambiguous.

      My 'who gives a shit' aimed at the MSM was for the same reason you mention. If i wan't an opinion about PJ,SY,McCanns,Amaral etc, i won't be looking to them. Part of what they report is truth-but hardly new. Most of what they report has profit as agenda number 1, and 'public shaping' as agenda number 2. The former is understandable, the latter is more underhand with a hint of the sinister and cynical.

      ''I was standing up for the PJ so your comment has me confused. I read all of your posts and most of them confuse me.''

      They shouldn't. I can't understand why they would.Sorry.

      VT


      Delete
  28. Several things to remember. The PJ files translated and online, are from the released DVD. However when the translators worked on them, they were aware that some documents were withheld. Interesting, by suspect quite normal in an investigation, did the MET get them? or prior to the MET the LP. Have the MET ever spoken to the LP - call me 'Stu' Prior?

    Don't forget there was a MET officer, fluent in Portuguese seconded by the LP to Portugal. The PJ didn't work completely in secret, except to the public.

    Think about the Gaspars statements, these were in English, then in tardy fashion forwarded to the PJ without seemingly any investigation.

    Files, piles of files and information. Consider the volume and sources of the METs investigation. All the stuff from the McCanns, LP, PJ etc. Stuff so important .... that Justice Hogg gave a ruling, over what could be returned to the McCanns.

    The PACT of silence: oh... so do all the left hands know what the right hands were really doing?

    If the McCanns had the files translated for £100k, the MET a team of 30+ for £12m? what's their problem?

    And did the MET ever sit through the Rogatory interview videos - mind numbing! they were conducted in English.

    Then we must consider has the MET ever interviewed the Smith family?

    As they say people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Perhaps MSM might consider the METs £12+ and rising, 6 years KEYSTONE COPS, rather than have bemoaned the Portuguese Officers!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello. On a factual matter: Operation Grange and the Portuguese PJ reviews of the McCann case both began in 2011.

      In both Portugal and the UK the investigative reviews became live investigations - with no remit limitation, as Mr Rowley confirmed - in 2013. So both investigations have been running for the same time.

      Accordingly, if results so far are the key, then all the remarks made about Grange - Keystone cops etc. - apply equally to the Portuguese.

      Delete
  29. Two things strike me about the latest money given to Grange

    1.It's not a lot, £154,000
    2.It's until the end of March 2018

    I surmise that the money is for admin purposes, either a tidy up
    of a report which is as exhaustive as can be regarding any theory..look , we looked at everything.
    Or, it is a case file which needs to be the best case file ever case filed, ever, signed off by a cast of stars,police, CPS, politicians. It will make the OJ Simpson trial look like a summary offence in a Norfolk magistrates court.

    I have always thought that the only way to crack this is if the *state* has bugged any one of the Tapas party whilst in the UK, repeatedly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The good news is : That is the easiest thing in the world to do due to modern bugging and spying / listening devices and techniques. The Tapas 9 could have been getting 'spied on' for the past 10 years. If they farted, it would have been heard, even whispering can be picked up.

      The bad news is : None of it would be admissible as evidence in a court of law.

      Delete
    2. so why do it in the first place

      Delete
  30. Anon 20.57

    "so why do it in the first place"

    Because it would give them something to work on if they hear anything they'd not known about before

    Because it may confirm what they'd already suspected

    Because it may implicate other people they'd never suspected and therefore give them a reason to widen their horizons

    Because they may find out where all the £££millions have been stashed and give them places to search in

    Because ...........

    Because ............

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I see. So if they had tried that i suppose we can assume that none of them have mentioned anything.Because, if they had, they'd have been nabbed by now.Then again, if the McCanns are under protection from the top, then their friends will be too.Because it wouldn't be fair to protect the 'perps' but nab their mates for anything .

      ''Because they may find out where all the £££millions have been stashed and give them places to search in''

      The £££millions referred to, I take it, is the funding. If that's been 'stashed' ( because why not) why would the Tapas group be under watch ? They didn't get any of it. They, like Murat, received their little back-handers in the guise of 'damages' from newspapers. So that's all very above board, naturally.

      VT

      Delete
    2. The money I was referring to was the Fund, I didn't mention money the Tapas friends received.

      "So that's all very above board naturally".

      The fund would still be fraudulent plus any payments received by the McCanns from newspapers and put in the Fund if there was no "abduction".

      Just because nobody's been "nabbed" it doesn't mean there is no investigation going on and things aren't being investigated. Tracing money can take years especially if it's in off shore accounts, both crimes go together.

      Delete
    3. ''The fund would still be fraudulent plus any payments received by the McCanns from newspapers and put in the Fund if there was no "abduction".''

      The PJ and SY have to officially state that they believe no abduction took place.If they do that, they are calling the parents liars and there's then enough to arrest them for perverting the course of justice for starters. Then they would then have to explain why they did or answer a prosecutor in court. But none of that has happened. Adding embezzlement to the ever growing list of crimes allegedly committed by the McCanns is stretching credibility. It does little for the credibility of the antis if they're trying to promote that idea. It's hard enough finding evidence for or against a death, abduction or burial that can be used one way or another without inventing a whole new area of criminal activity where even less evidence can be found. But it's free speech I suppose.

      VT

      Delete
    4. "The fund would still be fraudulent plus any payments received by the McCanns from newspapers and put in the Fund if there was no "abduction"."
      There are, I believe, nine directors on the board of the company that controls the monies held in the Fund. Most of these are independent. The McCanns cannot authorise any payments without the approval of the other directors.

      Delete
  31. 13 Sep 2007

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1562993/Madeleine-McCann-mothers-diary-of-love.html

    'Philomena McCann, Mr McCann's sister, said she advised her sister-in-law, who is now a formal suspect in the case, to keep the diary to show Madeleine how much they loved her.

    She told The Sun: "I asked Kate to keep this journal because at first the Portuguese police were doing very little.

    "A lot of the things that happened were only because of the family contacting the media.

    "So I said to Kate that it would be a good idea if someone wrote down, for Madeleine, notes on everything that was happening, because we have to prove to Madeleine how much we looked for her and how much we love her."'

    ----------

    21 November 2007

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm

    Richard Bilton: “Robert Murat was questioned for three days and he remains an arguido. Our access to police briefings points to another area of concern, Kate McCann's journal.”

    Susan Healy: “Kate was very distressed, obviously. Every evening people were having to kind of hold it together, you know, because as bed time came, it was another day gone and they didn't have Madeleine back, and so she needed support at that time of the night and I think it was during that time that Philomena suggested: "Kate, why don't you start to keep a journal and then when Madeleine comes back you can let Madeleine read it."

    ----------

    Kate McCann (‘madeleine’):

    “At the last two meetings the barrister and legal assistant were joined by a consultant called Hugh, whose profession was not at first explained (‘Just call me Hugh,’ he said enigmatically). It transpired that he was a former intelligence officer, now a kidnap negotiator and counsellor.”

    ...

    “It was after one of the IFLG meetings that Hugh asked me whether I was keeping a diary."

    ...

    “‘You should,’ he said. He didn’t elaborate on why. The barrister handed me a spare A4 notebook he happened to have with him."

    ....

    "It gave me an outlet for my thoughts and emotions, and a means of communication with Madeleine. I could talk to her! I could also talk to God, and even to the abductor, if I wanted to. Whatever Hugh’s intention was, I am very grateful to him for his suggestion. It might just have saved my life.”

    ----------

    Who advised Kate McCann to keep a diary? Philomena or Hugh (brought in by Control Risks)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Hugh Lohan specialised in security and intelligence during his 30 years in the British army. On leaving, he worked in the defence and aviation industry before joining Control Risks as an adviser on kidnap and extortion, and subsequently as an external consultant."

      http://esjg.co.uk/who-we-are/

      Delete
    2. ''Who advised Kate McCann to keep a diary? Philomena or Hugh (brought in by Control Risks)?''

      Why couldn't they both have suggested it ? Keeping a journal is a much -used therapeutic tool for people in extreme and / or extreme emotional pain.

      VT

      Delete
    3. And Kate didn’t tell Philomena and Susan Healy about Hugh’s suggestion? (KM on Hugh’s question whether she was keeping a diary: “the idea had never crossed my mind”.) Why would Philomena ask Kate to keep a journal when Kate already had been writing in the A4 notebook she’d been given?

      Delete
    4. The devil really is in the detail when it comes to this case.

      Delete
  32. I read a couple of years ago that the McCanns and their friends were simply left out of the British police review and investigation. That is why Redwood was able to say the McCanns and friends were not persons of interest or suspects to his inquiry.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Ruth

      Maybe it was the other way around ; They were not persons of interest or suspects, so were left out of the review and investigation. Whichever way you slice it, they would have had to arrive at that decision following a review of the initial investigations.

      VT

      Delete
  33. Saludos Ros
    One wonders about the role of Doctor Death ,John Reid, in this sorry tale.
    Reid was Home Secretary on the evening of 3rd May 2007 when Maddie disappeared.
    He appeared on the World at One radio progamme the next day on Friday 4th of May 2007 and when questioned by Martha Kearney refused to support Gordon Brown's labour leadership bid and therefore confirming that he would be a candidate himself to oppose Brown when Blair left office within the next few weeks.This had been Ried's position since Blair let it be known he would be standing down.
    At this point the Maddie story was still breaking news.

    Reid then appeared on the Politics show on Sunday 6th May 2007 and announced that not only was he not standing as a candidate in the labour leadership contest he would not be serving under the new government and he would be returning to the back benches .His supporters were shocked at him doing such a U-turn.
    Since then he has all but disappeared from public life other than a brief troublesome stint as Chairman of Celtic F.C.
    Reid and Gerry McCann were aquainted as McCann was the former Celtic club doctor in the mid nineties before heading to England.
    Reid was also labelled a sex pest for his continued sexual harrasment of junior minister Dawn Primrollo in the late nineties.
    At least five ex-employees of Celtic F.C are facing child abuse sex charges or have recently been convicted of child abuse charges involving crimes commited over last twenty years.Police Scotland are still investigating this matter further.
    May be the above is all just a coincidence but it is worth keeping an eye on Dr. Death ,nothing in this case should surprise us.
    Yours ever Ros ,loyal reader.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 7 June 2003

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/no-10-ordered-reid-to-go-on-the-offensive-against-media-108033.html

      Philip Pullman, author

      "It is John Reid's job to make excuses for the Government and his outlet is blaming the press. I can't dispute that it's good Saddam is overthrown but there are many other things that worry me. I am particularly worried about Britain echoing America's moves while being in America's shadow."

      Delete
    2. Anonymous4 October 2017 at 21:56

      ''May be the above is all just a coincidence but it is worth keeping an eye on Dr. Death ,nothing in this case should surprise us.''

      Interesting notion. I would add to that point, Mr Brown had a few more 'interesting' colleagues and friends apart from the one you mention. His dirty dealings and partners in grime are widespread even if little known. A seedy individual at best. There's something stuck on him that he can't wash off. When will they all see it, Browny..

      VT

      Delete
    3. Many thanks for your interesting post 'loyal reader', and I was very touched by our sign off, aw shucks.

      I think we are going to be in for a lot of surprises LR, this length of the investigation and the amount of resources thrown at it (seemingly without question), suggests this is something very big.

      There is no question, that some, who knows how many, perverted the course of justice, hence we are still here 10 years on. Whether that will include former Prime Ministers or Cabinet Ministers, time will tell. To be honest, I think this has all the makings of a public inquiry.

      However, by 2007, Blair had reached the 'off his rocker' stage of his premiership. He had already got away with an illegal war, thousands killed in his name, and was about to knight the horse he rode alongside Rupert and Rebekah.

      If anyone were to examine the entire litany of his lies and crimes against humanity, the disappearance of one little girl, is small potatoes.

      Unfortunately, such is life, if each of us, so engrossed by this case, were to study other cases in similar depth, we would discover we are swimming in sewage. Maybe, that is why, I have just stuck with the one, my poor troubled head can only take so much.

      Madeleine's case is unique, in that no other has been under such intense scrutiny for so many years. I suspect, when this case does break, and I think this will be quite soon (especially after reading JB), it will be massive, possibly even a bigger story than it was in 2007.

      I think by now we can be fairly certain OG are not investigating the life and times of petty criminals in PDL. Nor have they acted as if there were a risk to other children staying in the Algarve.

      I actually suspect, OG are not involved in the investigation of the original crime at all. As Mr. Rowley said, that part of the investigation is complete.

      So what are they investigating? There is little they can do in Portugal, they haven't taken the case worldwide, so they can only investigate the British side, whatever that might be. Sir B HH mentioned 130+ people of interest when OG began, did he give something away?

      Delete
  34. A word, or much more than a word, on the renewed funding. It is, of course, a tiny amount: once salaries are paid there is no money left over for pursuit or "searching". They don't need it.

    I’ve frequently referred in various places to the McCann investigation interview given by PJ head Alipio Ribeiro to three European newspapers in summer 2007. The Amaral activist and excellent free-lance translator Sofia de Landerset sent me a copy of the interview the same day and invited me to draw my own conclusions. It turned out that we independently took exactly the same view, one that was later confirmed in the records.

    Ribeiro, like Rowley, was sensibly guarded in his answers but there was one area that gave him away. Following a clamorous media campaign for more activity, more feet on the ground and more money (inspired by who?) the journalists asked him what extra resources the investigation needed. “None,” replied Ribeiro and explained that it was a matter of analysing the data already in their possession until the pieces fell into place, the famous “Hercules Poirot” quote.

    The pieces never did fall into place, which cost Ribeiro his job. That’s an argument for another time: what matters here is what the quote meant if you thought hard enough about it – the only way the investigation could go on record saying it didn’t need more resources was if they were quite certain they were no longer looking for a live child and no longer looking for an abductor, for those are the things that eat up the millions and need a bigger and bigger head count. Ribeiro made it clear that all he needed was a small analytical squad fully familiar with the investigative results so far.

    It hardly needs adding that six years of separate reviews and separate new investigations by the Portuguese and the British have not discovered anything to invalidate Ribeiro’s view. Quite the reverse. No live child has ever turned up and no abductor trails have ever led anywhere – if the latter had occurred we would have had the McCanns leaking it like Niagara Falls.

    The parallels with the state of the investigations do not need emphasising. Operation Grange does not want more resources apart from those required to keep a very small team going. No air fares to Borneo or Mauretania or wherever the McCanns might believe she might be, no sense of urgency to save her because, of course, she’s dead. Like Ribeiro, Grange knows that nothing is going to come out to make them eat their words – ever.

    In the end Ribeiro ran out of time and access to his suspects. That is not something that will happen to Grange this time, however much some people might want it to. Nor is it going to happen to the PJ.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good post, Mr Blacksmith.

      It would seem that we are to infer that the whole shebang has been an expensive, staged tragedy .Ribeiro was seemingly in possession of facts that were not intended for public consumption . So his head rolled. Being philosophical about it, he's probably happy he still has one .As you point out, nobody over there or here has done anything to counter his claim .It doesn't necessarily mean him and Amaral were on the same page regarding the finer details, but it would seem they were on the right track inasmuch as the UK involvement was to keep the masquerade going. The question is for who ? To say it's for the parents is too simple for my liking.Op Grange was put in place by the Tory Party of the time . If Ribeiro was /is right them the UK had to know what he knew. But the PJ had no need to cover up anything. Their subtexts always seem to suggest 'our hands are tied, and that's the way it will be'. Not so much a case of read my lips, but more read between my lines..

      This seems to put to bed any doubt about OG being part of a cover up if I'm reading Ribeiro right via the post above. He said no more money needed because, as pointed out, nowhere to look and, therefore, no extra man hours or manpower to pay for. So, as I see it, in terms of a police investigation, it went unofficially cold not long after it began . Which suggests that, since then, it has been a game of political chess. Amaral wants a check mate, OG want a stale mate. Hence no endgame.

      VT

      Delete
    2. It was indeed a good post by JB, but it has led you to an odd conclusion.

      The sole aim of a review or an investigation or indeed any project undertaken, is to reach a conclusion VT. No-one starts a project aiming for stale mate and they certainly don't keep extending the project knowing there can be no result. The idea is ludicrous.

      Scotland Yard and the Officers of Operation Grange are public servant. They are accountable to the Home Office and the Government. They can't embark on secret investigations and keep the results to themselves

      Delete
    3. Anon / VT 11.19

      You said-

      "So, as I see it, in terms of a police investigation, it went unofficially cold not long after it began . Which suggests that, since then, it has been a game of political chess. Amaral wants a check mate, OG want a stale mate. Hence no endgame."

      It went unofficially cold because the McCanns refused to cooperate with the PJ, what does that tell you about parents of a missing child who refuse to cooperate with the investigating police officers. No wonder the SC stated that the McCanns have not been cleared.

      Amaral has nothing to do with the police investigation now, I don't know why you brought his name into your post, probably just to twist the knife into him some more on behalf of the McCanns.

      I doubt OG want a stale mate, not after £11million plus has been spent on finding the people responsible for the disappearance/death of Madeleine.

      I think there would be an outcry by the public against the SY if their investigations came to nothing after spending all that money on chasing shadows/ridiculous fairy stories/George Harrison look alikes. Someone/some people are involved in the disappearance/demise of Madeleine and they need to be brought to court and imprisoned if necessary.

      Delete
    4. ''It went unofficially cold because the McCanns refused to cooperate with the PJ, ''

      You might be surprised to learn that 99% of people in custody. or being questioned about their whereabouts and such following a crime, refuse to cooperate . many who go to jail still swear by their victimisation. That's why evidence produced before a jury is pretty handy. In this case, there wasn't any-so they tell us. When the PJ shelved it in 2008 it was a gesture. It spoke of their attitude and opinion of the case - ie, it was being stalled and was out of their hands. That's when it went cold in terms of a police investigation.

      ''No wonder the SC stated that the McCanns have not been cleared.''

      Their opinion effects nothing. The opinion of the PJ/SY/OG does. They're carrying out the investigation - supposedly.

      ''Amaral has nothing to do with the police investigation now, I don't know why you brought his name into your post''

      You should have read it again. I made the comparison ( him and Riberio ) as they were pivotal in the PJ side of things. One hinted that there was no need to look any further, the other stated categorically that he thought the parents buried a body. Both were removed.

      ''I doubt OG want a stale mate, not after £11 million plus has been spent on finding the people responsible for the disappearance/death of Madeleine.''

      It depends on what the alternative is. £11 million is huge to you and me. Its stake money to others


      ''Someone/some people are involved in the disappearance/demise of Madeleine and they need to be brought to court and imprisoned if necessary.''


      I agree. It's quite a(to quote a UK politician or two) 'situation'. It's unfortunate that it wasn't simply a police investigation that was allowed to gather pace and momentum rather than have its laces tied together at the starting line. The 'some people' are pretty high rollers if the political involvement and funding is any mark to go by. Now, if they were ever unmasked, the public outcry would be like a hurricane.

      VT

      Delete
    5. Bravo and well said 14:44, VT/Ziggy is again trying to take the discussion in his chosen direction.

      Selling the idea that the Archiving Report was official clearance of the McCanns, was a masterstroke by their spin doctor. It was nothing of the sort and like yourself, I'm glad the SC confirmed it.

      I'm reading VT/Ziggy's digs at Goncalo Amaral as a sign of his being unhinged 14:44. This stopped being about GA many years ago, only a limited few would still bear such an intense grudge.

      It would be very Kremlin-esque if this case were filed away without any convictions and with a secret result known only to a select few. And given it's worldwide fame/infamy - impossible.

      The 'British' insulted the Portuguese. Not only did they insult them, they prevented a crime from being solved. They stepped in as 'the professionals', to show the Portuguese how it's done, a sense of competition is inevitable.

      I tend to think the British, under Cameron, felt a need to make reparation to the Portuguese for the previous government's interference. Perhaps even with financial assistance in their own re-opened investigation. It was Scotland Yard, for example, who paid for the digs and searches in and around PDL.

      Operation Grange can only assist the PJ, they are not the lead force. And over the past few days it is beginning to become apparent, that OG haven't revisited the original investigation. Something they would almost certainly have done if they believed that the original investigation was botched. Translated, Goncalo Amaral is again vindicated.

      Delete
    6. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 October 2017 at 13:28

      ''No-one starts a project aiming for stale mate and they certainly don't keep extending the project knowing there can be no result. The idea is ludicrous.''

      I think 'ludcrous' left the table a long time ago. It was ludicrous to remove a long serving chief inspector after five minutes. It was ludicrous to send MI5 , a PM and Chancellor to another country and appoint a media controller in a police investigation concerning the abduction of a child.It was ludicrous to utilise dogs then ignore them. It was ludicrous that the media were reporting so much misinformation while still under the scrutiny of Government man Mitchell.The list goes on .

      None of us know what the real remit to OG was or is. That they've added nothing but time and cost to it all doesn't say they're breaking any land speed records in finding an answer to this.More money and more time will be more waste. If I'm wrong- great- it means the case will have been solved.But looking at this race, OG isn't a horse i'd be wanting to back in running. If i was the bookie id make the book as follows : 12/1 arrest/s and charge/s. 1/5 case shelved until further notice( evidence /confession). In other words - stale mate looks odds on. As JBS stated in his post, the clues were there...

      VT

      Delete
    7. Amaral is brought into it because its all the pro's have,its his fault,how he was involved in Madeleines disappearance is a mystery but at all cost's his name must be brought into question.Blacksmith correctly points out there is nothing that invalidates Ribeiros view, add to that, Amarals theory in the subsequent years since his removal from the case.

      Delete
    8. ''I'm reading VT/Ziggy's digs at Goncalo Amaral as a sign of his being unhinged ''

      You shouldn't even be reading any digs.None were made apart from the ones aimed at the UK's influence on his fate and the fate of the investigation.The suggestion was that the case went 'unofficially cold' - or did you miss that too ?

      VT

      Delete
  35. So, the hunt goes on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The hunt for the final piece of evidence goes on.

      Delete
    2. Without a body what can anyone do?

      Delete
    3. I agree its the sticking point but my thoughts are on the increase in expenditure on one last lead that from £85,000 last time to a precise £154,000 this time covers forensics.Who knows but its clear from the nonsense in the press OG aren't telling any one any thing.

      Delete
    4. Judging by Gerry's evil smirk and "find the body..." retort there is no body, and never will be,that can be used in evidence against the narcissistic couple.
      She was either eaten by a invisible bear in the Algarve hills or more probably cremated along side an other corpse under the eyes of the watching media.
      Circumstantial evidence it must be then and we all know there is lots of that.

      Delete
    5. Agreed 16:10. Scotland Yard and the PJ know how much this case is dissected by the media and online. SY too, it would appear, have operated under judicial secrecy.

      I suspect the £154k is to bring the case to a final conclusion, ready to present to the Portuguese prosecutors, with all the evidence of both police forces joined together.

      The thing with a jigsaw puzzle, is that all the separate pieces have to fit exactly, you can force them in, or chop bits off, the only way the puzzle becomes complete, is when all the right pieces are in the right place.

      Bad people do not confine their badness to just the one nasty streak. Bullies at work for example, are usually guilty of financial crimes too. Try to imagine what Donald Trump is like, behind closed doors, if that is his good side?

      Unravelling one crime, can lead to the unravelling of many more, some entirely unrelated. Those complicit in deceit want something for themselves, or, because those demanding the deceit have the power to destroy them. The governments of the 50's and 60's were vulnerable because homosexuality was illegal, the lives of politicians could be destroyed by the Sunday papers.

      Bribery and corruption however, is probably still going strong and this multimillion pound case was wide open to it. I don't think a single marketing opportunity was missed, by anyone, including politicians.

      Delete
  36. Anonymous5 October 2017 at 16:22

    ''Judging by Gerry's evil smirk and "find the body..." retort there is no body, and never will be,that can be used in evidence against the narcissistic couple.''

    Don't mistake contempt and suppressed anger for somebody repeating annoying questions when your child's missing for' evil smirk' and 'narcissism'. While i agree that clues and mistakes can leak through statements or visible discomfort can sometimes suggest the hiding of a secret or guilt, often it is just a simple thing.Not everything needs to be read into and analysed. Find a fully qualified UK Psychologist with experience in the field, and with experience in suspect questioning, who suggests either of the McCanns display tell-tale signs of psychological narcissism. It's a buzzword picked up by thousands who watch documentaries and used to try and sell a bias. You suggest it can be 'used in evidence against ' . As I say, first you have to find someone with impressive credentials, then you have to fins a court willing to allow it . I doubt you could find the former, and I'm sure the latter's a no- go

    Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 October 2017 at 19:24

    ''Bad people do not confine their badness to just the one nasty streak..Unravelling one crime, can lead to the unravelling of many more, some entirely unrelated. ''

    True, occasionally. But, often, a killer just kills, a burglar only burgles, a thief just steals. We're in modus operandi territory.Either way, unravelling just one crime would be a start in this context.

    ''Bribery and corruption however, is probably still going strong and this multimillion pound case was wide open to it. I don't think a single marketing opportunity was missed, by anyone, including politicians.''

    I can't figure out where you stand on the cover up / conspiracy front. You seem to keep it simple ( the parents did it, there's been 'contacts' shielding them, the police wouldn't be part of a cover up). On the other hand you imply bribery and corruption involving people beyond your chosen culprits ( MPs and 'marketers' and so on) and often point to the idea of so many pillars of society being involved in such things, especially involving children, is ludicrous(despite overwhelming historical records that say otherwise).

    Googling the Shirley Oaks atrocities is enough to remind anyone that uniforms and position shouldn't always kid you into blindly respecting either. The survivors have a site.

    https://www.shirleyoakssurvivorsassociation.co.uk/

    VT

    ReplyDelete