UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: faithlilly on April 28, 2013, 12:20:49 PM
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
-
As long as it takes, I'd say. Till its known what happened to Madeleine.
I suppose the 20 million wasted in Jersey, was ok? But at least they found a coconut shell.
-
It would all depend on your mindset- whether you were a [ censored word ] or not.
-
It would all depend on your mindset- whether you were a h..... or not.
What has mindset got to do with it ? If, after two years, the review has flagged up no viable leads surely public money can't, and shouldn't be spent chasing shadows ?
In an ideal world every missing child would be searched for until they were found or what had happened to them ascertained but this is far from an ideal world and with demands on public money growing month on month perhaps it is now time to acknowledge that the evidence available at present may be insufficient to locate Madeleine or what has happened to her ?
-
Does this help?
Keep Looking For Madeleine McCann: Schoolgirl Natascha Kampusch escaped abductor after 8 years.
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/9/7/1283855530905/Natascha-Kampusch-006.jpg)
'I find it natural that you would adapt yourself to identify with your kidnapper.' Photograph: Frank Bauer for the Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/11/natascha-kampusch-interview
-
Does this help?
Keep Looking For Madeleine McCann: Schoolgirl Natascha Kampusch escaped abductor after 8 years.
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/9/7/1283855530905/Natascha-Kampusch-006.jpg)
'I find it natural that you would adapt yourself to identify with your kidnapper.' Photograph: Frank Bauer for the Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/11/natascha-kampusch-interview
Not really.
-
It would all depend on your mindset- whether you were a h..... or not.
What has mindset got to do with it ? If, after two years, the review has flagged up no viable leads surely public money can't, and shouldn't be spent chasing shadows ?
In an ideal world every missing child would be searched for until they were found or what had happened to them ascertained but this is far from an ideal world and with demands on public money growing month on month perhaps it is now time to acknowledge that the evidence available at present may be insufficient to locate Madeleine or what has happened to her ?
Your reply explains my contention adequately.
-
If Scotland yard, having reviewed all existing evidence, come to the conclusion that Madeleine was abducted, then the 'investigative' element of their remit should continue ( and be funded ) until they find the child, or definitive evidence of what happened to her
I really don't see how anyone ( particularly the McCanns ) would be prepared to accept anything less
... it would be akin to British police saying, "yeah, we think someone snatched this British child from her bed, and may still be holding her captive somewhere ... but *shoulder shrug* it ain't our problem"
-
Scotland Yard's Madeleine McCann quiz bill soars to £4.5m
THE cost of Operation Grange, the Scotland Yard review of the Madeleine McCann mystery, has risen to £4.5million, the Sunday Express can reveal today.
By: James MurrayPublished: Sun, April 28, 2013
10Comments
Madeleine McCann went missing in 2007
Detectives are said to be making “good progress” with the estimated £6,228-a-day investigation that began in May 2011.
The Home Office told us: “We remain committed to supporting the search.”
Home Secretary Theresa May will this week face pressure to explain in detail if taxpayers are getting value for money.
We remain committed to supporting the search
Home Office
The Yard will also be under pressure to call a press conference to say if they are any nearer to catching whoever was responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance in the Algarve in Portugal on May 3, 2007, when she was three.
On Friday, the sixth anniversary, her parents Kate and Gerry are expected to join supporters for prayers by a candle that burns day and night in their home village of Rothley, Leicestershire.
Michelle Canilleri, who lives in the village, said: “We want to make sure Madeleine will never be forgotten.”
From the Express today. It looks like there may be some sort of update by SY.
-
If Scotland yard, having reviewed all existing evidence, come to the conclusion that Madeleine was abducted, then the 'investigative' element of their remit should continue ( and be funded ) until they find the child, or definitive evidence of what happened to her
I really don't see how anyone ( particularly the McCanns ) would be prepared to accept anything less
... it would be akin to British police saying, "yeah, we think someone snatched this British child from her bed, and may still be holding her captive somewhere ... but *shoulder shrug* it ain't our problem"
Agreed.
What we don't know, but which I hope is also happening, is that the process of collating all the information from various police forces onto a database will serve as a template for other such situations. And, perhaps, restore mutual confidence as regards cooperation.
-
If Scotland yard, having reviewed all existing evidence, come to the conclusion that Madeleine was abducted, then the 'investigative' element of their remit should continue ( and be funded ) until they find the child, or definitive evidence of what happened to her
I really don't see how anyone ( particularly the McCanns ) would be prepared to accept anything less
... it would be akin to British police saying, "yeah, we think someone snatched this British child from her bed, and may still be holding her captive somewhere ... but *shoulder shrug* it ain't our problem"
Kerry Needham and the family of Claudia Lawrence have had to accept less, April Jones's parents may never know what happened to their daughter or where her body is but, I assume, have accepted that there just is not the money to search indefinitely. It is the reality all families of missing people have to face.
To date the review has come up with absolutely nothing of enough weight to convince the Portuguese judiciary to re-open the case and after two years it would be an optimist indeed who could see this changing in the near future.
-
Police were looking for a body for six months as they already charged someone with murder a week or so after
Is that a waste? If you were the parent you would not think so, it would give a proper burial if they were found, but reality is police cant search forever or keep cases ongoing for years, they become cold cases and are resurrected when new evidence appears
-
Police were looking for a body for six months as they already charged someone with murder a week or so after
Is that a waste? If you were the parent you would not think so, it would give a proper burial if they were found, but reality is police cant search forever or keep cases ongoing for years, they become cold cases and are resurrected when new evidence appears
Maybe the McCanns feel thesame.
-
Police were looking for a body for six months as they already charged someone with murder a week or so after
Is that a waste? If you were the parent you would not think so, it would give a proper burial if they were found, but reality is police cant search forever or keep cases ongoing for years, they become cold cases and are resurrected when new evidence appears
Good post, Redblossom.
We don't know what the trial review will reveal.
Sometimes cold cases are reviewed even without direct fresh evidence... but with new technology, a fresh set of eyes or even a member of the public who could stumble on something.
Edited to make a correction.
-
Mark Bridgers trial starts tomorrow morning
goodnite Carana, off out tonight, catch you later tonight or tomorrow
-
It should be funded till the police (the experts) determine there is nothing more they can practically do. Then it should be re-funded/opened as soon as either new evidence is available or new techniques are considered as possible sources of such evidence. It should not be a financial decision and it would be obscene if politics became involved in such a decision.
However, I do believe that some indication should be available to the public as to what is being done which costs such large sums. Is it manpower? Is it complex computer work? Is it large amounts of travel?
The reality I suppose, is that if there are thirty detectives involved for about two years or more then costs will mount rapidly. Conservatively each will cost about £50,000 a year with salary, insurance, office base, expenses etc. So £3,000,000 would be eaten up very quickly in two years with 30 people involved.
-
As a UK taxpayer I have no problem with the review going on for as long as the Police think it is worthwhile.
I don't expect to be updated during the process and am happy to wait for the outcome.
(will it have been a waste of time and money faithlilly if the end result is that the Mccanns are charged with something? - after all that is what people were shouting out for and in fact were submitting dossiers and videos to assist the Police in reaching that conclusion)
-
If Scotland yard, having reviewed all existing evidence, come to the conclusion that Madeleine was abducted, then the 'investigative' element of their remit should continue ( and be funded ) until they find the child, or definitive evidence of what happened to her
I really don't see how anyone ( particularly the McCanns ) would be prepared to accept anything less
... it would be akin to British police saying, "yeah, we think someone snatched this British child from her bed, and may still be holding her captive somewhere ... but *shoulder shrug* it ain't our problem"
Agreed.
What we don't know, but which I hope is also happening, is that the process of collating all the information from various police forces onto a database will serve as a template for other such situations. And, perhaps, restore mutual confidence as regards cooperation.
Agreed too.
May be the mutual confidence isn't, deeply, as bad as that.
-
Agreed.
What we don't know, but which I hope is also happening, is that the process of collating all the information from various police forces onto a database will serve as a template for other such situations. And, perhaps, restore mutual confidence as regards cooperation.
That's certainly a crucial point ...
-
I don't give a toss about how much money is spent on the review
Prince Harry flies multi million aircraft in wars no sensible person wants or needs
Just so he can be photographed in his Ray-Bans
An English child goes missing in the Algarve
yes, I'm happy for my tax money to be spent on that
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.
amaral couldn't
-
Luckily luz it is not your money that is being spent is it.
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.
You certainly have a point to some extent Luz.
Reviewing the evidence won't necessarily get Madeleine back but may apportion blame and lead to a prosecution.
We thought the whole idea was to get her back though? 8-)(--) Maybe we are wrong??
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.
bump because luz is denying she said this (on another thread)
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
bump because luz is denying she said this (on another thread)
You DEFINITELY HAVE A READING PROBLEM. I said «So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.» (check above), not that I could do the review without spending a pence, as you affirmed on the other thread.
-
why did you miss this bit out of your reply:
So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.
-
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
using the first part of what you originally said - you don't agree with it do you?
it's not your pence they are using you know - they are MINE.
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
bump because luz is denying she said this (on another thread)
You DEFINITELY HAVE A READING PROBLEM. I said «So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.» (check above), not that I could do the review without spending a pence, as you affirmed on the other thread.
In English please
-
it's simple - she is saying she could have said that Madeleine is either dead or alive, that the review is a waste of time and that she could have said that for free.
-
it's simple - she is saying she could have said that Madeleine is either dead or alive, that the review is a waste of time and that she could have said that for free.
Good. Finally you got it right.
Instead of a review I defend that there should be a re-opening of the investigation. That could bring new evidence and if the child is alive, that would be the only way to bring her back, not going over old papers about searches that have already been made.
-
it's simple - she is saying she could have said that Madeleine is either dead or alive, that the review is a waste of time and that she could have said that for free.
Good. Finally you got it right.
Instead of a review I defend that there should be a re-opening of the investigation. That could bring new evidence and if the child is alive, that would be the only way to bring her back, not going over old papers about searches that have already been made.
then why did you deny it?
-
luz denial
well according to luz she could have done the review without spending a pence (sic)
That's not what I said. I'm the foreigner but it seems that's you that needs some reading lessons.
-
it's simple - she is saying she could have said that Madeleine is either dead or alive, that the review is a waste of time and that she could have said that for free.
Good. Finally you got it right.
Instead of a review I defend that there should be a re-opening of the investigation. That could bring new evidence and if the child is alive, that would be the only way to bring her back, not going over old papers about searches that have already been made.
There can be no re-opening of the investigation without new evidence.
Why is that so hard for you to understand?
that's it in a nutshell
come on Luz - produce the famed smoking gun
or shut up
-
it's simple - she is saying she could have said that Madeleine is either dead or alive, that the review is a waste of time and that she could have said that for free.
Good. Finally you got it right.
Instead of a review I defend that there should be a re-opening of the investigation. That could bring new evidence and if the child is alive, that would be the only way to bring her back, not going over old papers about searches that have already been made.
There can be no re-opening of the investigation without new evidence.
Why is that so hard for you to understand?
But there is new evidence immediately available as long as Mr. and Mrs. McCann agree to a reconstruction or simply if Mrs. McCann answers the questions she refused to. As simple as that.
-
What lead to the archiving of the process was the impossibility to continue the investigation due to the lack of cooperation both from the UK authorities, that wouldn't release fundamental data, and the McCann & friends that chose to obstruct any attempt to dig deeper what could possibly have happened during the previous days and on that night regarding Madeleine.
If any of those parts, and especially the parents, showed any wish to make themselves available, the investigation would immediately be re-opened.
-
What lead to the archiving of the process was the impossibility to continue the investigation due to the lack of cooperation both from the UK authorities, that wouldn't release fundamental data, and the McCann & friends that chose to obstruct any attempt to dig deeper what could possibly have happened during the previous days and on that night regarding Madeleine.
If any of those parts, and especially the parents, showed any wish to make themselves available, the investigation would immediately be re-opened.
non-sensical post
-
What lead to the archiving of the process was the impossibility to continue the investigation due to the lack of cooperation both from the UK authorities, that wouldn't release fundamental data, and the McCann & friends that chose to obstruct any attempt to dig deeper what could possibly have happened during the previous days and on that night regarding Madeleine.
If any of those parts, and especially the parents, showed any wish to make themselves available, the investigation would immediately be re-opened.
complete and utter bollocks - not one word of your post is true and it is quite simply offensive.
-
it's simple - she is saying she could have said that Madeleine is either dead or alive, that the review is a waste of time and that she could have said that for free.
Good. Finally you got it right.
Instead of a review I defend that there should be a re-opening of the investigation. That could bring new evidence and if the child is alive, that would be the only way to bring her back, not going over old papers about searches that have already been made.
There can be no re-opening of the investigation without new evidence.
Why is that so hard for you to understand?
But there is new evidence immediately available as long as Mr. and Mrs. McCann agree to a reconstruction or simply if Mrs. McCann answers the questions she refused to. As simple as that.
May I ask....
What new evidence have you in mind Luz which could come to light as a result of a reconstruction?
and
Why didn't the Pj ask those 48 questions the day before when KM spent 11 hours being interrogated - and as a 'witness' would have been obliged by law to answer them at that time?
-
Why didn't the Pj ask those 48 questions the day before when KM spent 11 hours being interrogated - and as a 'witness' would have been obliged by law to answer them at that time?
Ah!
There is a balance there, Bernice. You're quite right that informal witnesses are denied the right not to answer questions.
On the other hand, neither can they asked leading or (potentially) incriminating questions.
That can only happen once the arguido status is imposed.
-
Why didn't the Pj ask those 48 questions the day before when KM spent 11 hours being interrogated - and as a 'witness' would have been obliged by law to answer them at that time?
Ah!
There is a balance there, Bernice. You're quite right that informal witnesses are denied the right not to answer questions.
On the other hand, neither can they asked leading or (potentially) incriminating questions.
That can only happen once the arguido status is imposed.
Thanks for that info Ferryman.
On re- reading the questions I see many which would have already been asked and answered during previous interviews.
e.g
1. On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?
IMO Kate did not answer the questions because she couldn't or didn't want to - she simply took the advice of her Lawyer. And as he was the professional expert on Portuguese law and she wasn't - then she would have been unwise not to.
-
With a reported 4.5 million pounds having already been spent on the Scotland Yard review and with no visible signs that they are any nearer to establishing what happened to Madeleine how long should taxpayers money be spent on this ?
With only £600,000 having been spent on the Jill Dando case review is a disproptionately large amount of money being spent on this case considering the crime happened on foreign soil ?
It should never had started. It's a ridiculous waste of money and manpower just to review papers. Considering that the portuguese investigation was accompanied by UK police, and that all the PIs work was just to throw sand into people's eyes, what does Grange expect to accomplish?!
So far they reached the brilliant conclusion that Madeleine could be either alive or dead. That I could do without spending a pence.
............................................................................................
Luz
SY said they were following two lines of investigation 1. That Madeleince is alive. 2. That sadly she is dead.
Two lines of investigating.
I believe it should be left up to SY to decide when enough has been spent on the review.