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: Sherlock Holmes on February 13, 2014, 03:52:44 PM
-
Portugal's Attorney General cited in October 2013 'new elements of evidence' as 'justification for the continuation of the investigation' officially shelved in 2008.
According to Portuguese authorities, police have had been reviewing the case since March of 2011 - two months before Scotland Yard began their official review in May of that year.
There are now two teams of officers in Portugal dedicated to the McCann investigation, including a small team in Faro, Algarve, working 'on behalf' of Scotland Yard (SY's words).
It does appear on the face of it that there is considerable co-operation between the two sets of authorities, international protocols and bureaucracies notwithstanding.
But what is the main motivation for Portuguese re-opening of the case? Was it, as Redblossom suggests, for the sake of backing up Scotland Yard?
Was it because of 'Tractorman', as reported in the press?
Or is it for good and genuine legal and investigative reasons, as far as Portuguese authorities are concerned, that the investigation there was reopened - as per the official position of the AG?
-
Well, there has been a crime (as in 'type of crime unknown').
What I'm saying is that perhaps watching the PJ at this point is a better guide as to the rate of progress in the investigation. They are not beholden to the international and other protocols that inhibit SY in this context.
They also have an incentive to 'crack' this case rather than suffer the embarrassment of SY doing it for them, so would want to get in there and make arrests if sufficient evidence was there.
-
Well, there has been a crime (as in 'type of crime unknown').
What I'm saying is that perhaps watching the PJ at this point is a better guide as to the rate of progress in the investigation. They are not beholden to the international and other protocols that inhibit SY in this context.
They also have an incentive to 'crack' this case rather than suffer the embarrassment of SY doing it for them, so would want to get in there and make arrests if sufficient evidence was there.
Is that why the PJ were asked to find 'new evidence' ?
-
Well, there has been a crime (as in 'type of crime unknown').
What I'm saying is that perhaps watching the PJ at this point is a better guide as to the rate of progress in the investigation. They are not beholden to the international and other protocols that inhibit SY in this context.
They also have an incentive to 'crack' this case rather than suffer the embarrassment of SY doing it for them, so would want to get in there and make arrests if sufficient evidence was there.
I didn't mean there was no crime. Sorry, missed out the words "being committed" by the person to be arrested.
8()-000(
I don't know what the PJ have done with their own review over the last couple years and their reopening of the investigation....but they have been working together with SY, SY have not gone out 20 times just for a cup of tea. I also think all this talk of embarrassment is a bit silly and premature
-
Well this is what the MPS think according their website. I have made a precis of what I considered to be salient points.
Anyone who thinks I am biased don't tell me follow the link and read it all yourself.
April 2012 Detectives from the Metropolitan Police Service conducting the investigative review into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are releasing an age progression image of her as we approach her ninth birthday on 12 May. DCI Andy Redwood said: From the outset we have approached this review with a completely open mind, placing Madeleine McCann at the heart of everything we do. We are working on the basis of two possibilities here. One is that Madeleine is still alive; and the second that she is sadly dead
If you know where Madeleine McCann is now or you have new direct information/evidence about what has happened to her then please contact us.
Oct 4th 2013
DCI Andy Redwood said: "
.. Our investigation in the UK remains ongoing.
Oct 14th 2013 Reward The Metropolitan Police Service is offering a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person(s) responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz Portugal on the 3rd May 2003.
Oct 24th 2013 The Portuguese Judicial Authorities have today, 24 October, announced that they have reopened their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. This development follows the discovery of new lines of enquiry as a result of an internal review of their original investigation by the Portuguese Policia Judiciaria.
The Portuguese investigation will run in parallel with the Operation Grange investigation, and a team of Portuguese colleagues continue to follow up enquiries on behalf of the MPS under the terms of the International Letter of Request (ILOR).
Quote from A/C Mark Rowley: "Last week was a significant point in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance
. today's development is good news. Combined with the formal re-opening of the Portuguese investigation today, and our ever closer working relationship, I believe that we have the best opportunity yet to finally understand what happened to Madeleine."
http://www.met.police.uk
-
I didn't mean there was no crime. Sorry, missed out the words "being committed" by the person to be arrested.
8()-000(
I don't know what the PJ have done with their own review over the last couple years and their reopening of the investigation....but they have been working together with SY, SY have not gone out 20 times just for a cup of tea. I also think all this talk of embarrassment is a bit silly and premature
Possibly.
But as a driving force for the PJ, I mean. Wouldn't they want to be the ones to solve the case?
For SY to come in and solve a cold case on foreign turf when the PJ had failed to crack it on the ground at the time would make the PJ look bad. Not corrupt or inefficient, necessarily. Just inferior to SY.
Won't they want to do everything they can at the moment to avoid that eventuality?
-
Possibly.
But as a driving force for the PJ, I mean. Wouldn't they want to be the ones to solve the case?
For SY to come in and solve a cold case on foreign turf when the PJ had failed to crack it on the ground at the time would make the PJ look bad. Not corrupt or inefficient, necessarily. Just inferior to SY.
Won't they want to do everything they can at the moment to avoid that eventuality?
You are perhaps answering your own questions, SH.
They can't do what's not possible can they.
-
Possibly.
But as a driving force for the PJ, I mean. Wouldn't they want to be the ones to solve the case?
For SY to come in and solve a cold case on foreign turf when the PJ had failed to crack it on the ground at the time would make the PJ look bad. Not corrupt or inefficient, necessarily. Just inferior to SY.
Won't they want to do everything they can at the moment to avoid that eventuality?
Well I'm sure they're quite happy actually that the UK are funding a new investigation, what with being in financial dire straits for a few years, as some other european countries, they did their investigation in 2007/8, their biggest manhunt, huge resources spent, forced to shelve the case despite, so they may actually be on the back burner as it were, following the lead
>@@(*&)
No, I don't think it's a matter of police pride myself
-
Well this is what the MPS think according their website. I have made a precis of what I considered to be salient points.
Anyone who thinks I am biased don't tell me follow the link and read it all yourself.
April 2012 Detectives from the Metropolitan Police Service conducting the investigative review into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are releasing an age progression image of her as we approach her ninth birthday on 12 May. DCI Andy Redwood said: From the outset we have approached this review with a completely open mind, placing Madeleine McCann at the heart of everything we do. We are working on the basis of two possibilities here. One is that Madeleine is still alive; and the second that she is sadly dead
If you know where Madeleine McCann is now or you have new direct information/evidence about what has happened to her then please contact us.
Oct 4th 2013
DCI Andy Redwood said: "
.. Our investigation in the UK remains ongoing.
Oct 14th 2013 Reward The Metropolitan Police Service is offering a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person(s) responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz Portugal on the 3rd May 2003.
Oct 24th 2013 The Portuguese Judicial Authorities have today, 24 October, announced that they have reopened their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. This development follows the discovery of new lines of enquiry as a result of an internal review of their original investigation by the Portuguese Policia Judiciaria.
The Portuguese investigation will run in parallel with the Operation Grange investigation, and a team of Portuguese colleagues continue to follow up enquiries on behalf of the MPS under the terms of the International Letter of Request (ILOR).
Quote from A/C Mark Rowley: "Last week was a significant point in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance
. today's development is good news. Combined with the formal re-opening of the Portuguese investigation today, and our ever closer working relationship, I believe that we have the best opportunity yet to finally understand what happened to Madeleine."
http://www.met.police.uk
Thanks for that precis, Estuarine.
It is crystal clear that they are looking for an abductor despite repeated statements that they are 'keeping an open mind'. (No contradiction, actually; the 'open mind' will have led them down avenues that they must have ruled out, before focusing in on the abduction scenario).
-
Well I'm sure they're quite happy actually that the UK are funding a new investigation, what with being in financial dire straits for a few years, as some other european countries, they did their investigation in 2007/8, their biggest manhunt, huge resources spent, forced to shelve the case despite, so they may actually be on the back burner as it were, following the lead
>@@(*&)
No, I don't think it's a matter of police pride myself
Nonetheless Portugal has two teams (one in Faro) operating on this at the moment. If they are stretching themselves greatly to do this in difficult economic circumstances, they must have good reason.
It was their choice to open the case, and if they didn't want to spend money on it, they didn't have to go looking for new evidence.
-
You are perhaps answering your own questions, SH.
They can't do what's not possible can they.
No but the fact that they are trying is significant.
-
Nonetheless Portugal has two teams (one in Faro) operating on this at the moment. If they are stretching themselves greatly to do this in difficult economic circumstances, they must have good reason.
It was their choice to open the case, and if they didn't want to spend money on it, they didn't have to go looking for new evidence.
But you have no idea what and how much they are doing, it doesn't cost a penny to reopen a case, and I didn't say they don't want to spend any money, that's a distortion of what I wrote
Reopening the case could have also been a technicality to aid working with SY, who knows? Certainly Tractorman wasn't the real reason, what a joke that was
-
If you trawl through the MPS website you will find a comment to the effect that the primacy for the investigation remains with the PJ. I feel that if one wants to find comment to back any thesis it can be found in the MPS briefings (a bit like Nostradamus and Old Mother Shipton!). My view remains not a lot is being given away; the MPS aren't saying much and the PJ are saying even less.The MPS A/C was very circumspect in his last publicised comment.
-
Well they must already have found some new evidence, because they have officially reopened the case.
(They story was that that evidence was tractorman, but that's pretty hard to believe).
Or maybe something that was already there assumed a new importance during the review?
-
Difficult to say. First of all I believe The PJ saw a reason for why the handling of the original investigation needed looking into. And then in the process of doing that they found things that were neglected and needed a closer look at.
What will have followed is obvious.
-
Or maybe something that was already there assumed a new importance during the review?
Could be - but it was there one way or the other.
New thread has been created on this topic and last few posts on this discussion will be moved over.
-
Difficult to say. First of all I believe The PJ saw a reason for why the handling of the original investigation needed looking into. And then in the process of doing that they found things that were neglected and needed a closer look at.
What will have followed is obvious.
I agree with you, Eleanor, though I'd like to look into the matter of exactly why they decided to re-open things when they did.
Their 2011 review began just before that of SY - officially at least.
The way we often look at the investigation in Britain is that SY, in motivational terms, are the ones driving the investigation. They are appealing to Portuguese authorities for green lights in carrying out certain diligences, and have a team of officers acting on their 'behalf' in Faro (not sure what that means exactly; perhaps someone can confirm).
But if the early groundwork for a new investigation was actually laid down in Portugal, what does that tell us about the relationship between UK and Portuguese authorities in this case? Are SY really pushing the PJ and others to do things, or is that motivation coming from within?
-
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-send-third-letter-of-request-to-portuguese-authorities.1392306410?http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-missing-british-police-3142582?''Deputy
Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt said that so far no requests to carry out interviews or arrests had been made.
He said: "We sent a further detailed letter of request which went out from the CPS on Friday.
"This is part of an ongoing process.''
-
The credibility of The PJ took a serious knocking over this case, so I think they had to look into it, unmotivated by anyone on the outside. Look into procedures I mean.
We just don't know what they found once they started delving. Quite possibly they found new evidence which warranted a reopening.
I think that Scotland Yard are simply following legal steps towards assisting. And they will also have good knowledge of the case by now.
-
The credibility of The PJ took a serious knocking over this case, so I think they had to look into it, unmotivated by anyone on the outside. Look into procedures I mean.
We just don't know what they found once they started delving. Quite possibly they found new evidence which warranted a reopening.
I think that Scotland Yard are simply following legal steps towards assisting. And they will also have good knowledge of the case by now.
Of course they are. 8)-)))
-
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-send-third-letter-of-request-to-portuguese-authorities.1392306410?http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-missing-british-police-3142582?''Deputy
Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt said that so far no requests to carry out interviews or arrests had been made.
He said: "We sent a further detailed letter of request which went out from the CPS on Friday.
"This is part of an ongoing process.''
Yes, thanks for that Stephen.
Also says at the foot of the article: ' Portuguese authorities said last October that a review had uncovered enough new information to justify reopening it.'
This strongly suggests they have their own leads and ideas and are not just assisting SY.
Doesn't it suggest that there could be real material out there? If two forces working independently (as well as together) see fit to reopen the investigation and spend monies during economically hard times?
We can say that the McCanns managed to pressure David Cameron and others.
But the McCanns were not pressuring anyone in Portugal.
-
I found it incredible that the case was closed at all. In the UK any missing person or murder case remains open and assigned to some responsible person until solved or cleared up. There is no way to close such serious cases so quickly as it seems possible in Portugal.
-
Before anyone gainsays my claim that serious cases are not closed:
http://www.essex.police.uk/news_features/features_archive/2013/january/cold_case_investigation_team.aspx
"No unsolved murder or rape case is ever closed by Essex Police."
-
I found it incredible that the case was closed at all. In the UK any missing person or murder case remains open and assigned to some responsible person until solved or cleared up. There is no way to close such serious cases so quickly as it seems possible in Portugal.
It is an incredible case, and witnesses weren't cooperating. Where could the investigation possibly go?
You say in the UK cases aren't closed, but in unsolved high-profile ones there is often pressure to bring a prosecution somehow, against someone, and we know what that can lead to.
I think the Portuguese had the better solution, but clearly no justice system is perfect in any country.
-
It is an incredible case, and witnesses weren't cooperating. Where could the investigation possibly go?
You say in the UK cases aren't closed, but in unsolved high-profile ones there is often pressure to bring a prosecution somehow, against someone, and we know what that can lead to.
I think the Portuguese had the better solution, but clearly no justice system is perfect in any country.
Frequently witnesses and suspects do not cooperate. There are legal rules that allow this. Despite that, all serious cases in the UK (with or without witness cooperation) are kept live, at least nominally.
I cannot believe that the Portuguese system is better where their interviewing recording is still police written statements rather than proper contemporaneous recordings, and where their interviewing process is so old fashioned- still based on gaining a confession rather than evidence gathering and cognitive interviews.
I have been quite surprised about just where the Portuguese system stands currently compared with countries that use more modern and academically backed methods.
-
The PJ and Scotland Yard seem to be finding all sorts lately, and all things that were already there to be found back in 2007 and 2008, So obviously the case should not have been shelved.
-
Frequently witnesses and suspects do not cooperate. There are legal rules that allow this. Despite that, all serious cases in the UK (with or without witness cooperation) are kept live, at least nominally.
I cannot believe that the Portuguese system is better where their interviewing recording is still police written statements rather than proper contemporaneous recordings, and where their interviewing process is so old fashioned- still based on gaining a confession rather than evidence gathering and cognitive interviews.
I have been quite surprised about just where the Portuguese system stands currently compared with countries that use more modern and academically backed methods.
Madeleine disappeared in 2007 and you don't have to go too far further in the past to see serious organisational and investigative mistakes being made by British police. The Soham case was in 2002, and that's just one example.
British police do have better PR though, that is definitely true (and a media that rarely asks many questions). The reality that lies behind the PR though isn't as brilliant as you're making out.
-
The PJ and Scotland Yard seem to be finding all sorts lately, and all things that were already there to be found back in 2007 and 2008, So obviously the case should not have been shelved.
No what you have are journalists claiming they have found all sorts lately: the police themselves haven't said this.
-
When I started out doing what I do I used seven figure log tables and a slide rule. We then had mains powered calculators wheeled around on a trolley, followed by mains powered desk calculators followed by battery powered desk calculators, main frame computers and finally desk top and lap top PC's. None of them allowed me to my job better than I did with the log tables and slide rule. I could do it quicker and retrieve data faster but as for doing it better NO. If you don't know what you are looking at no amount of whizzy gadgets will help you.
-
No what you have are journalists claiming they have found all sorts lately: the police themselves haven't said this.
You can kid yourself all you like but it is still obvious that the original investigation was a complete cock up. Even The PJ think this. Why bother having Reviews if there was nothing to find?
-
Madeleine disappeared in 2007 and you don't have to go too far further in the past to see serious organisational and investigative mistakes being made by British police. The Soham case was in 2002, and that's just one example.
British police do have better PR though, that is definitely true (and a media that rarely asks many questions). The reality that lies behind the PR though isn't as brilliant as you're making out.
And how quickly was Ian Huntley detected and charged despite lying through his teeth and refusing to cooperate. The only errors I am aware of were ones of recording previous offences and accessing those. I don't think there were any actual organisational or investigative mistakes- merely a less than comprehensive recording system for general crime.
-
When I started out doing what I do I used seven figure log tables and a slide rule. We then had mains powered calculators wheeled around on a trolley, followed by mains powered desk calculators followed by battery powered desk calculators, main frame computers and finally desk top and lap top PC's. None of them allowed me to my job better than I did with the log tables and slide rule. I could do it quicker and retrieve data faster but as for doing it better NO. If you don't know what you are looking at no amount of whizzy gadgets will help you.
In many professions new technology has completely changed modalities...certainly in Gerry's profession angioplasty has revolutionised the early treatment of heart attacks....I'm sure you aren't a luddite but you are sounding like one
-
And how quickly was Ian Huntley detected and charged despite lying through his teeth and refusing to cooperate. The only errors I am aware of were ones of recording previous offences and accessing those. I don't think there were any actual organisational or investigative mistakes- merely a less than comprehensive recording system for general crime.
It wasn't just that, it was the problem of communication between different forces (though that was spun away over the years. We assume now that things are done better).
-
You can kid yourself all you like but it is still obvious that the original investigation was a complete cock up. Even The PJ think this. Why bother having Reviews if there was nothing to find?
You're overlooking an obvious fact. The Portuguese made the records of the investigation public: this never happens in the UK does it. Why?
-
In many professions new technology has completely changed modalities...certainly in Gerry's profession angioplasty has revolutionised the early treatment of heart attacks....I'm sure you aren't a luddite but you are sounding like one
And as usual you are showing your ignorance in the way you use the term Luddite. I suggest you check thoroughly who they were and what they stood for ...... you usually have Google open when you are on here to dazzle us with your ability.
-
You're overlooking an obvious fact. The Portuguese made the records of the investigation public: this never happens in the UK does it. Why?
I have no idea why Portugal does this, but you wouldn't catch me making a statement against anyone in Portugal after what I have seen this last seven years.
-
And as usual you are showing your ignorance in the way you use the term Luddite. I suggest you check thoroughly who they were and what they stood for ...... you usually have Google open when you are on here to dazzle us with your ability.
I don't have to check google the luddites smashed the machines...new technology...if my second year history lessons serve me well...once more you try to insult me...shows you are intimidated
-
I have no idea why Portugal does this, but you wouldn't catch me making a statement against anyone in Portugal after what I have seen this last seven years.
That's a different issue re: anonymity. But the main issue is that we have very limited FOI laws in the UK, and particularly with regards to police. Is this healthy? If our justice system is so great why is it still shrouded in secrecy?
-
And as usual you are showing your ignorance in the way you use the term Luddite. I suggest you check thoroughly who they were and what they stood for ...... you usually have Google open when you are on here to dazzle us with your ability.
1.
luddite
1. One who fears technology (or new technology, as they seem pleased with how things currently are...why can't everything just be the same?)
2. A group led by Mr. Luddite durring the industrial revolution who beleived machines would cause workers wages to be decreased and ended up burning a number of factories in protest
A luddite generally claims things were "just fine" back in the day, and refuses to replace/update failing equipment/software/computers on the basis that they were just fine 10 years ago.
I think the part in red sums up your post......don't you
can I refer that to an own goal by you ...or will you try to tell me Im wrong on that as well
don't make it 2 nil
-
I am going to eat my hat if there were no arrests very soon.. max a month from now..
-
That's very brave of you. Will you put it up on Youtube for us ?
-
I am going to eat my hat if there were no arrests very soon.. max a month from now..
Are you Derek Acorah in disguise ? @)(++(*
-
1.
luddite
1. One who fears technology (or new technology, as they seem pleased with how things currently are...why can't everything just be the same?)
2. A group led by Mr. Luddite durring the industrial revolution who beleived machines would cause workers wages to be decreased and ended up burning a number of factories in protest
A luddite generally claims things were "just fine" back in the day, and refuses to replace/update failing equipment/software/computers on the basis that they were just fine 10 years ago.
I think the part in red sums up your post......don't you
can I refer that to an own goal by you ...or will you try to tell me Im wrong on that as well
don't make it 2 nil
Your history is dreadful (who is Mr Luddite? @)(++(*) as is your comprehension of the English language. Get a decent history book out of the library and read on the Knitters of Nottinghamshire and the Carpet Weavers of Worcestershire. When you have I will debate Luddism with you until then don't show your ignorance on a topic you clearly know little about. Also I never said I did not use new technology I merely said it did not enable me to my job better just quicker maybe.
-
Mr Luddite? >@@(*&) @)(++(*
-
Your history is dreadful (who is Mr Luddite? @)(++(*) as is your comprehension of the English language. Get a decent history book out of the library and read on the Knitters of Nottinghamshire and the Carpet Weavers of Worcestershire. When you have I will debate Luddism with you until then don't show your ignorance on a topic you clearly know little about. Also I never said I did not use new technology I merely said it did not enable me to my job better just quicker maybe.
oh dear...a nerve is touched
-
That's a different issue re: anonymity. But the main issue is that we have very limited FOI laws in the UK, and particularly with regards to police. Is this healthy? If our justice system is so great why is it still shrouded in secrecy?
For people like The Gaspars.
-
For people like The Gaspars.
That's just the anonymity issue again.
-
You're overlooking an obvious fact. The Portuguese made the records of the investigation public: this never happens in the UK does it. Why?
Interesting question. The PT judiciary seems to make rulings available for consultation, wherever such documents used to be stored, but personal details are masked (names, phone numbers, addresses, passport ID, etc.) I presume that the purpose is to allow the press to comment, in a responsible fashion, without revealing personally identifying details.
That system went belly-up when the contents were provided on DVD, in theory restricted to responsible journalists, but uploaded by whoever had access to it.
-
You're overlooking an obvious fact. The Portuguese made the records of the investigation public: this never happens in the UK does it. Why?
That's because we have a 'Freedom of Information Act' to stop that sort of thing from happening - not in the public interest, you know. @)(++(*
-
That's just the anonymity issue again.
And David Payne? And what about Robert Murat?
-
That's because we have a 'Freedom of Information Act' to stop that sort of thing from happening - not in the public interest, you know. @)(++(*
Not for the eyes of riff-raff, only selected journalists with the right credentials 8(8-))
-
oh dear...a nerve is touched
No! I am just amazed that you obviously do not understand the implications of your statements; they are somewhat hilarious. I am sure when you have worked it out you will see the humour in it.
-
I found it incredible that the case was closed at all. In the UK any missing person or murder case remains open and assigned to some responsible person until solved or cleared up. There is no way to close such serious cases so quickly as it seems possible in Portugal.
Very nice to have you on the forum, EnolaStraight. A warm welcome from all.
It seems that this case was treated more as a missing person's case than a murder case from the start, and as such was abandoned when leads and resources fell flat, as many missing persons cases are.
-
But you have no idea what and how much they are doing, it doesn't cost a penny to reopen a case, and I didn't say they don't want to spend any money, that's a distortion of what I wrote
Reopening the case could have also been a technicality to aid working with SY, who knows? Certainly Tractorman wasn't the real reason, what a joke that was
What do you mean it doesn't cost a penny to reopen a case? What doesn't cost money?
Relative to the resources Portugal has, the new investigation is probably costing them a lot.
-
You're overlooking an obvious fact. The Portuguese made the records of the investigation public: this never happens in the UK does it. Why?
You are adding an irrelevant detail.
The original investigation was a cock-up.
What difference does the fact that the cock-up was made public make?
-
No! I am just amazed that you obviously do not understand the implications of your statements; they are somewhat hilarious. I am sure when you have worked it out you will see the humour in it.
I'm about six steps ahead of your attempts to make yourself look intelligent
-
You are adding an irrelevant detail.
The original investigation was a cock-up.
What difference does the fact that the cock-up was made public make?
As per usual you get it wrong 'ferryman'.
There was no cock-up, there was no evidence of abduction.
The cock-up was the two parents leaving their children , night after night by themselves, in what they claim was an unlocked apartment.
-
As per usual you get it wrong 'ferryman'.
There was no cock-up, there was no evidence of abduction.
The cock-up was the two parents leaving their children , night after night by themselves, in what they claim was an unlocked apartment.
Are we measuring the success of that investigation on the failure to find evidence of abduction?
What about all of the other possibilities for which nil or insufficient evidence was found?
No conclusions were reached at all.
-
As per usual you get it wrong 'ferryman'.
There was no cock-up, there was no evidence of abduction.
The cock-up was the two parents leaving their children , night after night by themselves, in what they claim was an unlocked apartment.
Another vote for the cock up
-
We've yet to see if SY manage to do any better.
-
I'm about six steps ahead of your attempts to make yourself look intelligent
If you were you would be explaining it to me with glee rather than just making idle boasts.
Out.
-
Are we measuring the success of that investigation on the failure to find evidence of abduction?
What about all of the other possibilities for which nil or insufficient evidence was found?
No conclusions were reached at all.
As we know already, the forensics were inconclusive, no more, no less.
Not a jot was found of abduction.
Likewise there has been not one sign or trail of Madeleine to date.
I don't want to bore you with statistics in the likelihood of Madeleine being found now.
However, what has struck many people is one simple salient point, the reward offered, which at one point ran into millions.
Can you seriously believe that not one person would , to use a modern colloquialism, snitch , on those involved for the reward ?
-
As we know already, the forensics were inconclusive, no more, no less.
Not a jot was found of abduction.
Likewise there has been not one sign or trail of Madeleine to date.
I don't want to bore you with statistics in the likelihood of Madeleine being found now.
However, what has struck many people is one simple salient point, the rewARD OFFERED, WHICH AT ONE POINT RAN INTO MILLIONS.
can you seriously believe that not one person would , to use a modern colloquialism, snitch , on those involved for the reward ?
Offering a million pound reward is not an indicator of the quality of an investigation.
A better measure of the investigation would have been to see some results.
-
The reward wasn't offered by the police, so was nothing to do with their investigation.
-
Are we measuring the success of that investigation on the failure to find evidence of abduction?
What about all of the other possibilities for which nil or insufficient evidence was found?
No conclusions were reached at all.
You say that where 'other possibilities' are concerned ( for example parental involvment ? ), no evidence was found
You say that where 'abduction' is concerned, there was a failure to find evidence
See what you did there ?
-
Offering a million pound reward is not an indicator of the quality of an investigation.
A better measure of the investigation would have been to see some results.
You don't seem to get my point.
I wasn't talking about the quality of the investigation.
I merely pointed out that if Madeleine was abducted, it is inconceivable that only one person would have known what happened, and one thing you can guarantee, MONEY TALKS.
-
You don't seem to get my point.
I wasn't talking about the quality of the investigation.
I merely pointed out that if Madeleine was abducted, it is inconceivable that only one person would have known what happened, and one thing you can guarantee, MONEY TALKS.
So who do you think would have knowledge of the crime while not being involved? What relationship to the abductor would this person have?
-
As we know already, the forensics were inconclusive, no more, no less.
The forensics were worthless.
No more, no less ...
-
So who do you think would have knowledge of the crime while not being involved? What relationship to the abductor would this person have?
Now if there if there has been an abductor(s), someone would have spilled the beans.
MONEY
-
As we know already, the forensics were inconclusive, no more, no less.
The forensics were worthless.
No more, no less ...
If they are worthless ferryman, why have spent much time 'googling' and attacking Martin Grimes ?
-
You say that where 'other possibilities' are concerned ( for example parental involvment ? ), no evidence was found
You say that where 'abduction' is concerned, there was a failure to find evidence
See what you did there ?
I was just this minute wondering where you were, icabod. And here you reappear, keeping us all on track!
I obviously did not spell out clearly enough what I was attempting to do!
I'll be less subtle now:
If you read back, you'll see I did not say that there was a failure to find evidence for abduction. I was quoting Stephen.
He commented that the original investigation was not a cock-up', it simply found no evidence for abduction.
In reply to him, I was hinting at a logical matter, namely that measuring the quality of the investigation only on its failure or otherwise to find evidence to back up the abduction theory would imply that the abduction theory was the main or only one to be considered.
This would be a strange position for Stephen to be taking. (Sorry to talk about you in the third person, Stephen).
Ironically, even though I am a 'believer' in the abduction theory, I was reminding Stephen of the fact that there are many other possibilities on the table.
Surely then a better measure of the investigation would be to look at its record in considering all possible scenarios - not just one - and examining its success in making progress accordingly.
-
Now if there if there has been an abductor(s), someone would have spilled the beans.
MONEY
Anyone involved in the crime in any way would not be allowed to benefit.
Anyone related to the abductor would hardly be likely to snitch.
Anyone not associated with the abductor would not know anything about it.
Collecting a reward is no where near as easy as it sounds., And this particular reward involved the return of Madeleine unharmed.
-
Anyone involved in the crime in any way would not be allowed to benefit.
Anyone related to the abductor would hardly be likely to snitch.
Anyone not associated with the abductor would not know anything about it.
Collecting a reward is no where near as easy as it sounds., And this particular reward involved the return of Madeleine unharmed.
I don 't believe you are that naive.
-
You don't seem to get my point.
I wasn't talking about the quality of the investigation.
I merely pointed out that if Madeleine was abducted, it is inconceivable that only one person would have known what happened, and one thing you can guarantee, MONEY TALKS.
I understand that you weren't talking about the quality of the investigation. But I was!
As for the money, I agree. That kind of money would be hard to resist for most people.
But nonetheless, there could be all sort of reasons why a person on balance would decide not to claim it. There could be all different kinds of reasons for an abduction, and all sorts of different people involved. Too many unknowns.
Therefore we cannot possibly base the case against abduction on the fact that no-one made a claim.
-
I don 't believe you are that naive.
I think it is a little naive to suggest, if I may say, Stephen, that a case can be solved yay or nay simply by putting out a reward.
If that were a viable method, the criminal justice system would save millions!
-
If they are worthless ferryman, why have spent much time 'googling' and attacking Martin Grimes ?
Don't take my word for it.
Take Mark Harrison's.
It was he who waited until after both inspections at villa and gym before issuing PJ personnel with instructions on how to conduct searches in buildings and cars.
And it was Harrison, not me, who disowned UK participation in those searches where Madeleine is known, definitely, never to have been.
-
Bottom line is that if the investigation in Portugal had been a success - success as in reaching some kind of definite conclusion - then the Attorney General would have had no need whatsoever to reopen it.
-
Bottom line is that if the investigation in Portugal had been a success - success as in reaching some kind of definite conclusion - then the Attorney General would have had no need whatsoever to reopen it.
Fair comment, although I think it's also fair to add that competent investigations can, sometimes, also be inconclusive ...
-
I think it is a little naive to suggest, if I may say, Stephen, that a case can be solved yay or nay simply by putting out a reward.
If that were a viable method, the criminal justice system would save millions!
So you are saying cases aren't 'solved' by someone informing on another for monetary gain ?
Come on.
-
Fair comment, although I think it's also fair to add that competent investigations can, sometimes, also be inconclusive ...
@)(++(* Very fair of you I must say, ferryman.
-
So you are saying cases aren't 'solved' by someone informing on another for monetary gain ?
Come on.
They can be. Some cases are solved like this, but not the majority.
Rewards are not a measure of the competence of an investigation. They are only one tool of many that police or others are using.
-
Don't take my word for it.
Take Mark Harrison's.
It was he who waited until after both inspections at villa and gym before issuing PJ personnel with instructions on how to conduct searches in buildings and cars.
And it was Harrison, not me, who disowned UK participation in those searches where Madeleine is known, definitely, never to have been.
Can you say with absolute certainty ferryman that what the dogs indicated was wrong ?
If so, provide proof.
-
They can be. Some cases are solved like this, but not the majority.
Rewards are not a measure of the competence of an investigation. They are only one tool of many that police or others are using.
Sherlock, I didn't measure the reward in terms of the competence of the initial investigation.
-
Fair comment, although I think it's also fair to add that competent investigations can, sometimes, also be inconclusive ...
It's true, Ferryman. I forgot to add that important point.
Nonetheless, the Madeleine case is still to this day listed as 'type of crime unknown'.
We don't know even in broad terms what may have happened to Madeleine, let alone anything more helpful or specific. It is unfortunate that things did not get further before the initial investigation was closed.
-
Sherlock, I didn't measure the reward in terms of the competence of the initial investigation.
I know.
That would make no sense.
-
They can be. Some cases are solved like this, but not the majority.
Rewards are not a measure of the competence of an investigation. They are only one tool of many that police or others are using.
I think rewards is a two-edged sword. No one with relevant information and sincerely motivated to try to solve a crime should need a reward to come forward.
Equally, time-wasters on the make can be motivated by a reward for all the wrong reasons ...
-
I think rewards is a two-edged sword. No one with relevant information and sincerely motivated to try to solve a crime should need a reward to come forward.
Equally, time-wasters on the make can be motivated by a reward for all the wrong reasons ...
Hewlett for example wanted money, and they refused to give him any.
And not everyone with a snippet of information is going to get a million pounds.
-
I found it incredible that the case was closed at all. In the UK any missing person or murder case remains open and assigned to some responsible person until solved or cleared up. There is no way to close such serious cases so quickly as it seems possible in Portugal.
Hello and welcome to the Madeleine McCann forum
I have to comment that the case was not "closed" but "shelved" pending any new serious/relevant/concrete (sorry, I dont remember the exact phrase used by the AG) evidence to restart the investigation
It is no different to what they do in the UK, active investigations do not run ad infinitum
Eta the PJ had three suspects/persons of interest, the judicial authorities decided not to bring charges, no different to the uk, see here last point number 3, another reason to "close" a case as it were if an investigation has become exhausted
http://content.met.police.uk/Article/What-is-the-investigation-process/1400006933335/tvcwhathappensnext
-
Hello and welcome to the Madeleine McCann forum
I have to comment that the case was not "closed" but "shelved" pending any new serious/relevant/concrete (sorry, I dont remember the exact phrase used by the AG) evidence to restart the investigation
It is no different to what they do in the UK, active investigations do not run ad infinitum
AG now says he has 'new elements of evidence' - whatever that means.
-
Bottom line is that if the investigation in Portugal had been a success - success as in reaching some kind of definite conclusion - then the Attorney General would have had no need whatsoever to reopen it.
Err Sherlock, think that goes without saying LOL! too funny
-
Err Sherlock, think that goes without saying LOL! too funny
Not really, Red. If they felt strongly that everything possible had been done to solve the case, then they would not have reopened it. Reopening it is sort of an admission that they did not complete their initial task, isn't it?
-
Not really, Red. If they felt strongly that everything possible had been done to solve the case, then they would not have reopened it. Reopening it is sort of an admission that they did not complete their initial task, isn't it?
not wanting to split hairs but read your post to which I replied, you said if the case had been a success and had reached a definite conclusion then they wouldn't feel the need to reopen it!! Well, yes, exactly, IF.....
As for not completing the initals task....not all police investigations are able to do so
-
Not really, Red. If they felt strongly that everything possible had been done to solve the case, then they would not have reopened it. Reopening it is sort of an admission that they did not complete their initial task, isn't it?
This is an extract from the archiving report.
Finally, it should be noted that an archiving decision may be a fair decision, although of the possible justice, and, especially, to underline heavily that the archiving of the present files does not equal a definite and irreversible closing of the process. This process, as long as the prescription deadline for the possibly committed crimes does reach its term, and if new evidence that justifies it, appears, can always be reopened, officiously or through the request of an assistant, again ordinate to a final decision of accusation or non accusation.
We have more than one case of an unsolved murder in England at least one going back more than 50 years. I am sure the cops were diligent but could not gather enough evidence to charge any one. I am equally sure they would be immeasurably p****d off were it implied that no result = poor investigation.
I don't believe it is a case of the Portuguese cops having done a lousy job. Sometimes it works out as a no result. In my opinion there is a gradual brainwashing of the public by TV that "The Mountie always gets his man". Unfortunately this is not borne out in real life.
-
I think the Portuguese had no option but to open the case under pressure from the UK...I also think that the initial investigation was pathetic with the pj concentrating on the parents when there was all but no evidence against them
-
I think the Portuguese had no option but to open the case under pressure from the UK...I also think that the initial investigation was pathetic with the pj concentrating on the parents when there was all but no evidence against them
What's pathetic is saying the PJ were concentrating on the parents when they did no such thing...it wasn't until after three months later the British brought their dogs in and suggested if they alerted it could mean a body had been in the flat and removed were they made suspects, (the PT police had no experience of these type of dogs) and still, only a month after...
Zzzzzzz
If anything the PJ treated the mccanns with kid gloves for a long long time..and they shod be grateful for that...that was one of their errors! British police would not have done this, they were lucky the "crime" happened in Portugal
and of course all them translation errors
-
What's pathetic is saying the PJ were concentrating on the parents when they did no such thing...it wasn't until after three months later the British brought their dogs in and suggested if they alerted it could mean a body had been in the flat and removed were they made suspects, (the PT police had no experience of these type of dogs) and still, only a month after...
Zzzzzzz
If anything the PJ treated the mccanns with kid gloves for a long long time..and they shod be grateful for that...that was one of their errors! British police would not have done this, they were lucky the "crime" happened in Portugal
you bring up the dogs again...the pj misunderstood the dogs alerts and thought they proved a death in the apt when they didn't...they then concentrated on the parents when there was no evidence against them
can you give me a reason why the pj did not consider abduction when SY now do
-
that is a false and absolutely ridiculous statement..obviously you not read the files, then again, I never did think you had, otherwise you wouldn't continuously come across as ignorant lol
the fact is the lead detective wrote a book in which he claimed that the parents were responsible and there was no abductor...he also claims that this was the belief of the all the pj team...you cant have it both ways...so is amaral lying
-
I think the Portuguese had no option but to open the case under pressure from the UK...I also think that the initial investigation was pathetic with the pj concentrating on the parents when there was all but no evidence against them
Did we send a gunboat and anchor it off Lisbon? Civis Britannicus sum.
-
Did we send a gunboat and anchor it off Lisbon? Civis Britannicus sum.
you seem to have studied the same period of history as I did..palmerston
gce history ..mid sixties..joint matriculation board
-
This is an extract from the archiving report.
Finally, it should be noted that an archiving decision may be a fair decision, although of the possible justice, and, especially, to underline heavily that the archiving of the present files does not equal a definite and irreversible closing of the process. This process, as long as the prescription deadline for the possibly committed crimes does reach its term, and if new evidence that justifies it, appears, can always be reopened, officiously or through the request of an assistant, again ordinate to a final decision of accusation or non accusation.
We have more than one case of an unsolved murder in England at least one going back more than 50 years. I am sure the cops were diligent but could not gather enough evidence to charge any one. I am equally sure they would be immeasurably p****d off were it implied that no result = poor investigation.
I don't believe it is a case of the Portuguese cops having done a lousy job. Sometimes it works out as a no result. In my opinion there is a gradual brainwashing of the public by TV that "The Mountie always gets his man". Unfortunately this is not borne out in real life.
I'm not implying Estuarine - and Redblossom - that because the case was closed in Portugal (with the possibility of reopening if new evidence came to light, as you remind us) that meant that the investigation was incompetent.
It is true that there are a lot of unsolved 'mysteries' that have defied investigation.
My initial question was why the case in Portugal was re-opened. Is it, as davel and others suggest, because of pressure from SY and the UK? Can that really be the case? If so, why was it re-opened in Portugal Before Scotland Yard began their review? Doesn't that suggest Portugal has reasons of its own for re-opening the case?
-
I'm not implying Estuarine - and Redblossom - that because the case was closed in Portugal (with the possibility of reopening if new evidence came to light, as you remind us) that meant that the investigation was incompetent.
It is true that there are a lot of unsolved 'mysteries' that have defied investigation.
My initial question was why the case in Portugal was re-opened. Is it, as davel and others suggest, because of pressure from SY and the UK? Can that really be the case? If so, why was it re-opened in Portugal Before Scotland Yard began their review? Doesn't that suggest Portugal has reasons of its own for re-opening the case?
was it re opened before SY began its review
-
I'm not implying Estuarine - and Redblossom - that because the case was closed in Portugal (with the possibility of reopening if new evidence came to light, as you remind us) that meant that the investigation was incompetent.
It is true that there are a lot of unsolved 'mysteries' that have defied investigation.
My initial question was why the case in Portugal was re-opened. Is it, as davel and others suggest, because of pressure from SY and the UK? Can that really be the case? If so, why was it re-opened in Portugal Before Scotland Yard began their review? Doesn't that suggest Portugal has reasons of its own for re-opening the case?
In my opinion the Portuguese review either threw up new material or resulted in a different view being taken of something already archived. I don't buy the international pressure argument.
-
was it re opened before SY began its review
March 2011 Portuguese police began an official review of documents
May 2011 SY
-
I'm not implying Estuarine - and Redblossom - that because the case was closed in Portugal (with the possibility of reopening if new evidence came to light, as you remind us) that meant that the investigation was incompetent.
It is true that there are a lot of unsolved 'mysteries' that have defied investigation.
My initial question was why the case in Portugal was re-opened. Is it, as davel and others suggest, because of pressure from SY and the UK? Can that really be the case? If so, why was it re-opened in Portugal Before Scotland Yard began their review? Doesn't that suggest Portugal has reasons of its own for re-opening the case?
Good points and another to add.
Are not the Portuguese authorities pursuing different leads from Scotland Yard?
-
In my opinion the Portuguese review either threw up new material or resulted in a different view being taken of something already archived. I don't buy the international pressure argument.
why did the Portuguese decide to review the case imo it was to save face ...they didn't want to look as though they had been forced into it by SY...and all they came with..it appears is tarctorman
-
you seem to have studied the same period of history as I did..palmerston
gce history ..mid sixties..joint matriculation board
Close enough I guess. I always had sneaking admiration for the stance. A bit like the Al Capone friendly words and a gun thing.
-
In my opinion the Portuguese review either threw up new material or resulted in a different view being taken of something already archived. I don't buy the international pressure argument.
Personally I think this is correct (only a guess obviously because we have no access to the information).
If according to Portuguese law a case can only be re-opened if meaningful new material presents itself, then we have to assume that that is the explanation here. The AG states that new evidence was found.
I think we have to assume that this is indeed how things happened on this occasion. Otherwise we are saying that the AG made a false claim in order to pander to SY.
Why would he do that?
-
March 2011 Portuguese police began an official review of documents
May 2011 SY
You would expect that negotiations had been taking place before may 20011 to allow SY to review the case,,,Portugal therefore had prior knowledge which enabled them to review first...to save face
-
Good points and another to add.
Are not the Portuguese authorities pursuing different leads from Scotland Yard?
Yes, there are teams in Oporto and Faro , and they are both doing slightly different things. Helena Monteiro is the team leader in Oporto; officers in Faro are said to be supporting SY.
Look at this article from the Portugal News re the official re-opening of the case:
http://theportugalnews.com/news/portugal-orders-re-opening-of-madeleine-case/29711
and note in particular the following paragraph:
It is believed the PJ team in Oporto uncovered shortcomings in the initial investigation conducted by their counterparts in the Algarve and were now actively pursuing the theory that Madeleine McCann was abducted from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. Helena Monteiro and her four-man team of detectives, who were handed the case due to their expertise and neutrality, having never worked on it before, are also reported to be keen on speaking to a number of people who were never questioned during the first investigation led by inspectors in the Algarve.[/i]
-
How rude.
You always kept on about attack the post NOT the poster.
Yeah right! One rule for you and another for others?
On yer bike Red.
Sadie...worry not..red is desperately trying to save face...as are the Portuguese...both are rattled at the thought of losing face
-
You would expect that negotiations had been taking place before may 20011 to allow SY to review the case,,,Portugal therefore had prior knowledge which enabled them to review first...to save face
Yes, one would imagine that talks did take place prior to the Portuguese embarking on their review.
And the matter of face - saving is not to be underestimated here. If the solution to this case comes from Portugal, they will be able to quash once and for all suggestions that things were mishandled.
This way they are giving themselves a head - start on SY, whilst working with them to a certain extend.
A very clever strategy that is surely costing them monetarily - but which they obviously consider worthwhile.
-
Sadie...worry not..red is desperately trying to save face...as are the Portuguese...both are rattled at the thought of losing face
Tbh, davel, some of them have lost it already. Abuse and smart ar*e answers are their only response along with a few twistings of facts.
Others, a few, are still rational and prepared to discuss rather than abuse. I feel sorry for the rational ones that their input gets hidden behind the ravings of others.
-
Tbh, davel, some of them have lost it already. Abuse and smart ar*e answers are their only response along with a few twistings of facts.
Others, a few, are still rational and prepared to discuss rather than abuse. I feel sorry for the rational ones that their input gets hidden behind the ravings of others.
I wouldn't bother posting on some forums because the posters have such a poor grasp of the real facts.. I thought this forum was a little better but I'm starting to wonder
-
Recent conversation removed in entirity for irrelevance.
-
Yes, one would imagine that talks did take place prior to the Portuguese embarking on their review.
And the matter of face - saving is not to be underestimated here. If the solution to this case comes from Portugal, they will be able to quash once and for all suggestions that things were mishandled.
This way they are giving themselves a head - start on SY, whilst working with them to a certain extend.
A very clever strategy that is surely costing them monetarily - but which they obviously consider worthwhile.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id372.html
have a peruse of this lot.
Catch you rater arrigator
-
the Portuguese appear to be like the Japanese with a strong sense of "face" .... mentsu..... and loss of face...mentsu wo ushinau...they will not want to admit that any other police force has shown them the way
-
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id372.html
have a peruse of this lot.
Catch you rater arrigator
Thanks, Estuarine, this is good material. Will have to take some time to read it all properly and get back to you too!
-
Yes, there are teams in Oporto and Faro , and they are both doing slightly different things. Helena Monteiro is the team leader in Oporto; officers in Faro are said to be supporting SY.
Look at this article from the Portugal News re the official re-opening of the case:
http://theportugalnews.com/news/portugal-orders-re-opening-of-madeleine-case/29711
and note in particular the following paragraph:
It is believed the PJ team in Oporto uncovered shortcomings in the initial investigation conducted by their counterparts in the Algarve and were now actively pursuing the theory that Madeleine McCann was abducted from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. Helena Monteiro and her four-man team of detectives, who were handed the case due to their expertise and neutrality, having never worked on it before, are also reported to be keen on speaking to a number of people who were never questioned during the first investigation led by inspectors in the Algarve.[/i]
Thanks, Sherlock:
It is believed the PJ team in Oporto uncovered shortcomings in the initial investigation conducted by their counterparts in the Algarve and were now actively pursuing the theory that Madeleine McCann was abducted from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. Helena Monteiro and her four-man team of detectives, who were handed the case due to their expertise and neutrality, having never worked on it before, are also reported to be keen on speaking to a number of people who were never questioned during the first investigation led by inspectors in the Algarve.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm!
-
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id372.html
have a peruse of this lot.
Catch you rater arrigator
This is a short paragraph from this article dated MAY 2011...
"One plan is for a team of UK detectives - probably from Scotland Yard - to got to Portugal and pore over the police files.
One crucial exercise would be to do the mobile phone cell-site analysis that wasn't done.
And follow up reports of previous intruders into the holiday homes of other Brits, as recorded by Kate in her book."
How can anyone claim that the pj did a proper investigation when these things were not investigated..thank god SY are on the case
-
Thanks, Sherlock:
It is believed the PJ team in Oporto uncovered shortcomings in the initial investigation conducted by their counterparts in the Algarve and were now actively pursuing the theory that Madeleine McCann was abducted from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. Helena Monteiro and her four-man team of detectives, who were handed the case due to their expertise and neutrality, having never worked on it before, are also reported to be keen on speaking to a number of people who were never questioned during the first investigation led by inspectors in the Algarve.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm!
Yes, highly significant, Ferryman.
This is another nail in the coffin for the idea that SY are somehow turning a blind eye to other possibilities.
It is one thing to imagine that British authorities would attempt to protect the McCanns somewhat.
The Portuguese have no reason to pursue the theory of abduction for any other reason than their being credible evidence to suggest it , especially considering the fact that an abduction on Portuguese soil, possibly involving Portuguese nationals and maybe staff at the Ocean Club, could be embarrassing and maybe even harmful to the country.
-
This is a short paragraph from this article dated MAY 2011...
"One plan is for a team of UK detectives - probably from Scotland Yard - to got to Portugal and pore over the police files.
One crucial exercise would be to do the mobile phone cell-site analysis that wasn't done.
And follow up reports of previous intruders into the holiday homes of other Brits, as recorded by Kate in her book."
How can anyone claim that the pj did a proper investigation when these things were not investigated..thank god SY are on the case
As I said yesterday, it remains to be seen if SY manage to do any better.
-
As I said yesterday, it remains to be seen if SY manage to do any better.
The simple act of reviewing old material with fresh eyes, and from a different perspective, could be beneficial, no?
-
The simple act of reviewing old material with fresh eyes, and from a different perspective, could be beneficial, no?
I suppose it would depend on how you define beneficial. If something tangible is achieved, then it will be, otherwise no.
-
Sadie...worry not..red is desperately trying to save face...as are the Portuguese...both are rattled at the thought of losing face
I have nothing to save face about here and not in the remotest sense rattled about anything, that's your wishful thinking or imagination. You posted that the PJ never considered abduction. It was a false and ridiculous statement to make, I wonder why you even bothered to make such a ridiculous assertion, so if there's any saving face going on here, it was you tryng to backtrack later once challenged on it, that's all, very very simple
-
The simple act of reviewing old material with fresh eyes, and from a different perspective, could be beneficial, no?
It is, but do you how many reviews there have been in ths case from "fresh eyes"? loads, well most of them were alledgedly fresh eyes, how true that is is anyone's guess, but yes, lots of cold case reviews, and none an inch further than the Portuguese and uk police got back in 2007
Still we all await with baited breath SYs findings, poor sods lumbered with so much
-
Might be better to read all of it from alpha to omega then form an opinion rather than glom on to a bit that supports a predetermined thesis. The McCanns open letter to the PM in The Sun (spreading all de shite all around) would have thrown the cat in the kitty litter were there negotiations going on behind the scenes. The Home Sec didn't want any part of it until the PM pulled rank on her for whatever reason. Hardly seems to have been a carefully coordinated plan of attack.
-
I have nothing to save face about here and not in the remotest sense rattled about anything, that's your wishful thinking or imagination. You posted that the PJ never considered abduction. It was a false and ridiculous statement to make, I wonder why you even bothered to make such a ridiculous assertion, so if there's any saving face going on here, it was you tryng to backtrack later once challenged on it, that's all, very very simple
according to amaral the whole pj team supported his assertion that the parents simulated an abduction...that means they weren't taking the abduction seriously..they were wrong and incompetent..imo
-
according to amaral the whole pj team supported his assertion that the parents simulated an abduction...that means they weren't taking the abduction seriously..they were wrong and incompetent..imo
What they did in august/september 07 after the dogs were brought in has no bearing on the past 3 odd months when abduction WAS investigated..something you said never considered!....that's that davel, stop labouring your mistake, and give it up! Most of the bloody files are about investigating an abduction, streuth!
@)(++(*
-
What they did in august/september 07 after the dogs were brought in has no bearing on the past 3 odd months when abduction WAS investigated..something you said never considered!....that's that davel, stop labouring your mistake, and give it up! Most of the bloody files are about investigating an abduction, streuth!
@)(++(*
as you are an expert on the files perhaps you can tell us what they did
they didnt do a phone call analysis
they didnt investigate the burglaries
what did they do
-
as you are an expert on the files perhaps you can tell us what they did
they didnt do a phone call analysis
they didnt investigate the burglaries
what did they do
They didn't check the Night Creche records or the Spare Keys.
-
Frequently witnesses and suspects do not cooperate. There are legal rules that allow this. Despite that, all serious cases in the UK (with or without witness cooperation) are kept live, at least nominally.
I cannot believe that the Portuguese system is better where their interviewing recording is still police written statements rather than proper contemporaneous recordings, and where their interviewing process is so old fashioned- still based on gaining a confession rather than evidence gathering and cognitive interviews.
I have been quite surprised about just where the Portuguese system stands currently compared with countries that use more modern and academically backed methods.
Laws are being updated, which is all well and good, and a step forward, but apparently without any strategy or means to drive implementation. As I'd commented on a different thread, change is a slow process.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2969.msg128967#msg128967
-
as you are an expert on the files perhaps you can tell us what they did
they didnt do a phone call analysis
they didnt investigate the burglaries
what did they do
They investigated bogus 'sightings' by the thousand ... all over the world from Disneyland to Vietnam !
Bogus sightings that the McCanns' 'awareness campaign' generated relentlessly, and which may have acted as an overwhelming distraction to the job at hand
-
They investigated bogus 'sightings' by the thousand ... all over the world from Disneyland to Vietnam !
Bogus sightings that the McCanns' 'awareness campaign' generated relentlessly, and which may have acted as an overwhelming distraction to the job at hand
just excuses
-
just excuses
That is your hallmark.
b....r all evidence of abduction.
-
Laws are being updated, which is all well and good, and a step forward, but apparently without any strategy or means to drive implementation. As I'd commented on a different thread, change is a slow process.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2969.msg128967#msg128967
And while police recordings are manual rather than recorded, justice is denied.
-
They investigated bogus 'sightings' by the thousand ... all over the world from Disneyland to Vietnam !
Bogus sightings that the McCanns' 'awareness campaign' generated relentlessly, and which may have acted as an overwhelming distraction to the job at hand
I agree that the 'awareness campaign' has been an exercise in bad judgement, however police work, as guided and dictated by law, established protocols, and as Carana and others remind us, continued academic research, is a separate matter.
-
And while police recordings are manual rather than recorded, justice is denied.
Very important points here, Enola and Carana.
One wonders along what lines these matters are being tackled under the current investigation in Portugal and if anything has changed materially since 2007.
-
Very important points here, Enola and Carana.
One wonders along what lines these matters are being tackled under the current investigation in Portugal and if anything has changed materially since 2007.
For people who believe that one should always answer police questions, there is an excellent video where a US law professor demonstrates why it is never in your interests to do so, and then is supported by a retired senior detective. Me, I would not answer any police questions until well lawyered up.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
-
For people who believe that one should always answer police questions, there is an excellent video where a US law professor demonstrates why it is never in your interests to do so, and then is supported by a retired senior detective. Me, I would not answer any police questions until well lawyered up.
Yes, we have this on another thread, Enola. It is a fantastic piece.
Thanks for finding it.
-
And with regard to the general questioning and interrogation techniques used by the GNR and PJ, do we imagine these having been modified in any way since 2007. Carana's attached information seems to suggest otherwise, but I am just wondering if any of our members in Portugal or with knowledge of Portuguese MO has updated information.
-
And while police recordings are manual rather than recorded, justice is denied.
Interesting concept. Just when did it become mandatory to make recordings in UK. I am sure you can see which way this is going by extension....................
-
Interesting concept. Just when did it become mandatory to make recordings in UK. I am sure you can see which way this is going by extension....................
It became mandatory just before the number of fittings up and torture cases ( see West Midlands Serious Crime Squad) decreased considerably.
-
It became mandatory just before the number of fittings up and torture cases ( see West Midlands Serious Crime Squad) decreased considerably.
Yeah I was living in WMids at the time. WMSCS was disbanded late eighties as I recall. Their notorious case being the alleged pub bombers where statements were crudely changed and pocket books rigged. My point I think is:- are you suggesting that we had no justice at all before interviews were taped or that taping merely eliminated one place that could be open to abuse? Your post reads like you are suggesting the former.
-
Yeah I was living in WMids at the time. WMSCS was disbanded late eighties as I recall. Their notorious case being the alleged pub bombers where statements were crudely changed and pocket books rigged. My point I think is:- are you suggesting that we had no justice at all before interviews were taped or that taping merely eliminated one place that could be open to abuse? Your post reads like you are suggesting the former.
We exchanged loss of police ability to fit people up for a jury system that allowed two people to believe a person innocent, yet still convict them.
One step forward, one step back.
-
Yeah I was living in WMids at the time. WMSCS was disbanded late eighties as I recall. Their notorious case being the alleged pub bombers where statements were crudely changed and pocket books rigged. My point I think is:- are you suggesting that we had no justice at all before interviews were taped or that taping merely eliminated one place that could be open to abuse? Your post reads like you are suggesting the former.
I think the important point is that a Police Force with a long standing reputation for abuse was not forced to do this very much sooner.
One might even assume that they have deliberately avoided it. Taping interviews is hardly rocket science.
It will be interesting to see their conviction rates when they do.
-
We exchanged loss of police ability to fit people up for a jury system that allowed two people to believe a person innocent, yet still convict them.
One step forward, one step back.
The majority verdict has been around since early 1970s. I served on a jury then and it ain't easy to have the judge accept a majority verdict. Our foreman was treated like a recruit who had just dropped his sabre on parade. As for one step forward one step back Gareth Peirce believes it is more like one step back. Anyway drifting off topic interesting though it maybe.
-
Yeah I was living in WMids at the time. WMSCS was disbanded late eighties as I recall. Their notorious case being the alleged pub bombers where statements were crudely changed and pocket books rigged. My point I think is:- are you suggesting that we had no justice at all before interviews were taped or that taping merely eliminated one place that could be open to abuse? Your post reads like you are suggesting the former.
Did you go to school in the west mids
-
The majority verdict has been around since early 1970s. I served on a jury then and it ain't easy to have the judge accept a majority verdict. Our foreman was treated like a recruit who had just dropped his sabre on parade. As for one step forward one step back Gareth Peirce believes it is more like one step back. Anyway drifting off topic interesting though it maybe.
One step forward- recorded interviews, one step back- majority verdicts.
-
Did you go to school in the west mids
No
-
Yeah I was living in WMids at the time. WMSCS was disbanded late eighties as I recall. Their notorious case being the alleged pub bombers where statements were crudely changed and pocket books rigged. My point I think is:- are you suggesting that we had no justice at all before interviews were taped or that taping merely eliminated one place that could be open to abuse? Your post reads like you are suggesting the former.
The West Midlands Crime squad was a thoroughly bad lot - and a law unto themselves IIRC. It was a good day for justice when they were disbanded. IMO Portugal is about 40 years behind the UK and there are pockets of similarly corrupt policemen still around. Since Portugal became a democracy they are gradually moving away from that situation - but it will take time. IMO the days when the word of a policeman was automatically believed by courts over any member of the public - (which is how is used to be in the UK), are numbered - but they still have a long way to go. My own observation is that it has been a case of two steps forward and one step back thus far.
Prosecuting policemen like Amaral and Tavares etc for perjury and torture are examples of 2 steps forward. Prosecuting Leanora Cipriano for not being able to identify her torturers was one step back IMO.
-
The West Midlands Crime squad was a thoroughly bad lot - and a law unto themselves IIRC. It was a good day for justice when they were disbanded. IMO Portugal is about 40 years behind the UK and there are pockets of similarly corrupt policemen still around. Since Portugal became a democracy they are gradually moving away from that situation - but it will take time. IMO the days when the word of a policeman was automatically believed by courts over any member of the public - (which is how is used to be in the UK), are numbered - but they still have a long way to go. My own observation is that it has been a case of two steps forward and one step back thus far.
Prosecuting policemen like Amaral and Tavares etc for perjury and torture are examples of 2 steps forward. Prosecuting Leanora Cipriano for not being able to identify her torturers was one step back IMO.
The UK police were not beyond a little tampering as early as the CND demonstrations in the late 1950s. The Southend force early 1960s, The SPG of the 1970s/1980s didn't help either. There will always be bent coppers. As far as Dr Amaral is concerned it is my belief he was shoved off sideways by his own side because of the potentially forthcoming (at the time) perjury trial which would have made him an unreliable witness in the event the McCann case went to court. It makes more sense than phone calls from Gordon Brown although it is less interesting and has no legs for the conspiracy theorists.