Goncalo Amaral.

[Brietta]

12th May 2011 remit released, which refers to "the abduction".

April 2012; Police announced they were quarter way through reviewing 40,000 pieces of evidence.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/madeleine-mccann-aged-nine-yard-detectives-believe-she-could-still-be-alive-7678249.html

Why are there always chosen cut off points and starting points condoning the sceptic mantra while totally ignoring the facts of everything else.

Do you really believe that someone woke up on the 12 May 2011 with the spiffing idea that Madeleine had been abducted.

I find it grossly insulting that you choose to ignore the work that went into Madeleine's case which justified the conclusion and therefore the remit arrived at that Madeleine had been abducted and neither her parents nor their friends were persons of interest in that abduction.

Unlike Amaral the Met officers did not have the luxury of deciding the outcome prior to knowing what the evidence was ... they spent over a year which you know absolutely nothing about studying what the evidence actually was to justify a review and even at that it took until the end of 2013 before her case was officially opened.

During that period numerous interviews took place ... not one of which you know anything about ... so to think the Met officers didn't have a firm grasp of who would and should be interviewed is in my opinion to be living in cloud cuckoo land while displaying total ignorance of police procedures which usually start at the very beginning and in this case a year before you think it did.


Home Office launches secret review into Madeleine McCann's disappearance
The Home Office has secretly begun a review that could lead to a fresh police inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Home Office launches secret review into Madeleine McCann's disappearance

Robert MendickBy Robert Mendick 9:00PM GMT 06 Mar 2010

The move follows the release of 2,000 pages of evidence last week which Portuguese detectives are accused of having failed to fully investigate.

According to sources close to the McCanns, Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, has ordered officials to examine the 'feasibility' of British or Portuguese detectives looking afresh at all the evidence.

Kate and Gerry McCann met with Mr Johnson last year to plead for help in their search for Madeleine, who vanished without trace in May 2007 from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

The couple have also met with John Yates, the Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner, who has headed up a number of high profile inquiries in recent years.

He is said to be "sympathetic" and to have made "general offers of assistance".

Related Articles
Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann 29 Jan 2012
McCanns' detective searching for girl in a wig seen with two 'gipsies' 04 Mar 2010
More than 50 new leads in Madeleine case 03 Mar 2010
McCanns criticise police for failing to follow leads 19 Feb 2010
Portuguese detective loses bid to overturn Madeleine McCann gagging order 19 Feb 2010
McCanns win bid to gag Portuguese detective 18 Feb 2010
The source said: "The latest we have heard from the Home Office is officials are undertaking a 'scoping exercise' to look into the possibility of a review of the case.

"They are looking at all the options. It is basically a feasibility study.

"Kate and Gerry met with Alan Johnson to request a review is done. Hopefully any political intervention can unlock obstructions that might be in the way."

Pressure is now being put on Portuguese authorities to agree in the first instance to a three-day review of the case that could be held at Interpol's headquarters in Lyon in France.

The McCanns will hope the Home Office can persuade their Portuguese counterparts to co-operate in a case review.

The review – were it to go ahead – would involve British police working with Portuguese counterparts as well as experts in child abduction across other European forces.

The Portuguese police have been heavily criticised for their handling of the case which led to detectives naming the McCanns, both doctors from Leicestershire, as arguidos – or suspects – in the case and accusing them of involvement in her disappearance.

Their arguido status was subsequently lifted and the police investigation shelved.

But with the senior officer in charge Goncalo Amaral now widely discredited and facing financial ruin after being sued for libel by the McCanns over a book he wrote, it may become harder for the Portuguese to refuse the request for a thorough review.

The revelation that possible leads – many passed to Portuguese police by the McCanns' own private detectives – had apparently been ignored will add to the clamour.

Last week, details emerged of a series of possible sightings of Madeleine, who was just three when she vanished.

Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.

Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.

A Home Office spokesman said: "We can confirm that the Home Secretary had a private meeting with Kate and Gerry McCann.

"Leicestershire Police stand ready to co-ordinate and complete enquiries if further information comes to light in the UK; or if requested to do so by the Portuguese authorities, who continue to lead on the overall investigation."

The spokesman refused to discuss what talks took place at the meeting or whether there was the chance of a review of the evidence at Interpol.

The spokesman added: "We are not going to comment on the outcome of any private meeting with the McCanns."

Mr Yates was unavailable for comment.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

[Mr Gray]

There's only one verifiable fact imo; that Madeline McCann disappeared on 3rd May 2007.

You are obsessed with facts. there are others who would dispute your statement so is it a fact...can it b eproven 100% ...probably no. So in that case there would be no verifiable facts.

What you fail to realise is that the jutice system is driven by opinion...not facts. If it relied totally  on facts there would be very few convictions

[Brietta]

There are thousands of verifiable facts in the files, or do you dispute every single one of them.  Let’s start with the basics.  Kate and Gerry McCann are the misssing child’s parents.  Has this been verified or not?

PS your post is clearly GOADING.  Give yourself a warning.

Even that fact was subject to dispute.  You simply could not make it up ~ the calumnies emanating from the rumour mill are mind boggling.  Each and every one of which if not started by Amaral usually met with his endorsement.

[Venturi Swirl]

That fact has no bearing on whether Madeleine was abducted.

No goading was intended, but we do have very different posting styles. If I disagree with a post I tend to reply with facts rather than opinions. I may think the post is rubbish, but saying so doesn't achieve anything. A fact which disproves it is more useful imo. In this case in your shoes I would have replied with the verifiable facts which I believed confirm abduction.

Your post claimed there was only one verifiable fact to counter my opinion that abduction was the only plausible and logical theory that fit all the known facts.  There are thousands of known facts and my opinion still stands. 

Oh, and "don't be shy..." is goading.  If it's not, I will make sure to use it in more posts addressed to you.

[Mr Gray]

That fact has no bearing on whether Madeleine was abducted.

No goading was intended, but we do have very different posting styles. If I disagree with a post I tend to reply with facts rather than opinions. I may think the post is rubbish, but saying so doesn't achieve anything. A fact which disproves it is more useful imo. In this case in your shoes I would have replied with the verifiable facts which I believed confirm abduction.

I think you over estimate the value and style of your posts. Detectives investigating a case have to decide who they beleive and combine this with other evidence /facts to reach conclusions.....thats exactly how a trial works. you seem to think tat conclusions can only be raeched based on things taht can be proven to be a 100% factual. that is not how things work. you need to understand and accept reality.

[G-Unit]

Why are there always chosen cut off points and starting points condoning the sceptic mantra while totally ignoring the facts of everything else.

Do you really believe that someone woke up on the 12 May 2011 with the spiffing idea that Madeleine had been abducted.

I find it grossly insulting that you choose to ignore the work that went into Madeleine's case which justified the conclusion and therefore the remit arrived at that Madeleine had been abducted and neither her parents nor their friends were persons of interest in that abduction.

Unlike Amaral the Met officers did not have the luxury of deciding the outcome prior to knowing what the evidence was ... they spent over a year which you know absolutely nothing about studying what the evidence actually was to justify a review and even at that it took until the end of 2013 before her case was officially opened.

During that period numerous interviews took place ... not one of which you know anything about ... so to think the Met officers didn't have a firm grasp of who would and should be interviewed is in my opinion to be living in cloud cuckoo land while displaying total ignorance of police procedures which usually start at the very beginning and in this case a year before you think it did.


Home Office launches secret review into Madeleine McCann's disappearance
The Home Office has secretly begun a review that could lead to a fresh police inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Home Office launches secret review into Madeleine McCann's disappearance

Robert MendickBy Robert Mendick 9:00PM GMT 06 Mar 2010

The move follows the release of 2,000 pages of evidence last week which Portuguese detectives are accused of having failed to fully investigate.

According to sources close to the McCanns, Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, has ordered officials to examine the 'feasibility' of British or Portuguese detectives looking afresh at all the evidence.

Kate and Gerry McCann met with Mr Johnson last year to plead for help in their search for Madeleine, who vanished without trace in May 2007 from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

The couple have also met with John Yates, the Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner, who has headed up a number of high profile inquiries in recent years.

He is said to be "sympathetic" and to have made "general offers of assistance".

Related Articles
Retired lawyer faces jail for 'harassing' Kate and Gerry McCann 29 Jan 2012
McCanns' detective searching for girl in a wig seen with two 'gipsies' 04 Mar 2010
More than 50 new leads in Madeleine case 03 Mar 2010
McCanns criticise police for failing to follow leads 19 Feb 2010
Portuguese detective loses bid to overturn Madeleine McCann gagging order 19 Feb 2010
McCanns win bid to gag Portuguese detective 18 Feb 2010
The source said: "The latest we have heard from the Home Office is officials are undertaking a 'scoping exercise' to look into the possibility of a review of the case.

"They are looking at all the options. It is basically a feasibility study.

"Kate and Gerry met with Alan Johnson to request a review is done. Hopefully any political intervention can unlock obstructions that might be in the way."

Pressure is now being put on Portuguese authorities to agree in the first instance to a three-day review of the case that could be held at Interpol's headquarters in Lyon in France.

The McCanns will hope the Home Office can persuade their Portuguese counterparts to co-operate in a case review.

The review – were it to go ahead – would involve British police working with Portuguese counterparts as well as experts in child abduction across other European forces.

The Portuguese police have been heavily criticised for their handling of the case which led to detectives naming the McCanns, both doctors from Leicestershire, as arguidos – or suspects – in the case and accusing them of involvement in her disappearance.

Their arguido status was subsequently lifted and the police investigation shelved.

But with the senior officer in charge Goncalo Amaral now widely discredited and facing financial ruin after being sued for libel by the McCanns over a book he wrote, it may become harder for the Portuguese to refuse the request for a thorough review.

The revelation that possible leads – many passed to Portuguese police by the McCanns' own private detectives – had apparently been ignored will add to the clamour.

Last week, details emerged of a series of possible sightings of Madeleine, who was just three when she vanished.

Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.

Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.

A Home Office spokesman said: "We can confirm that the Home Secretary had a private meeting with Kate and Gerry McCann.

"Leicestershire Police stand ready to co-ordinate and complete enquiries if further information comes to light in the UK; or if requested to do so by the Portuguese authorities, who continue to lead on the overall investigation."

The spokesman refused to discuss what talks took place at the meeting or whether there was the chance of a review of the evidence at Interpol.

The spokesman added: "We are not going to comment on the outcome of any private meeting with the McCanns."

Mr Yates was unavailable for comment.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

Journalistic speculations are not to be relied on. There is no evidence that members of the Metropolitan Police were doing any work at all on the case. Their involvement began in May 2011.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22918857

Kate McCann was unaware of anything at all being done prior to that except Gamble's 'scoping' exercise.

We are still pressing the British and Portuguese
governments to do more, or at least something. A
year after our request for a review of Madeleine’s
case, Alan Johnson, the second home secretary we
had met, commissioned CEOP to undertake a
‘scoping’ exercise – basically to establish whether
they felt a review may be of benefit. Their report has been with the Home Office since March 2010. Although we have not seen it, it has been widely
reported that it highlights some deficiencies in the
investigation and hence areas that merit further
attention. We have since met the current home secretary, Theresa May, and written to her several times. Currently we do not know whether we are any further
forward, or whether the British government has even
raised the suggestion of a review with the Portuguese authorities. In November 2010 we
started a petition to lobby the two governments to
conduct an independent review. We are at a loss to
understand why such a commonly used procedure
isn’t an obvious option and why our request for such
a review has gone unanswered.
[madeleine]

[Venturi Swirl]

Journalistic speculations are not to be relied on. There is no evidence that members of the Metropolitan Police were doing any work at all on the case. Their involvement began in May 2011.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22918857

Kate McCann was unaware of anything at all being done prior to that except Gamble's 'scoping' exercise.

We are still pressing the British and Portuguese
governments to do more, or at least something. A
year after our request for a review of Madeleine’s
case, Alan Johnson, the second home secretary we
had met, commissioned CEOP to undertake a
‘scoping’ exercise – basically to establish whether
they felt a review may be of benefit. Their report has been with the Home Office since March 2010. Although we have not seen it, it has been widely
reported that it highlights some deficiencies in the
investigation and hence areas that merit further
attention. We have since met the current home secretary, Theresa May, and written to her several times. Currently we do not know whether we are any further
forward, or whether the British government has even
raised the suggestion of a review with the Portuguese authorities. In November 2010 we
started a petition to lobby the two governments to
conduct an independent review. We are at a loss to
understand why such a commonly used procedure
isn’t an obvious option and why our request for such
a review has gone unanswered.
[madeleine]

Which part of the article do you consider "speculation"?  Your bolded section does not suggest that a review had not been carried out by that point, only that the McCanns did not know what the upshot was and that as far as they knew a review in conjunction with the PT authorities had not been conducted. 

[faithlilly]

Journalistic speculations are not to be relied on. There is no evidence that members of the Metropolitan Police were doing any work at all on the case. Their involvement began in May 2011.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22918857

Kate McCann was unaware of anything at all being done prior to that except Gamble's 'scoping' exercise.

We are still pressing the British and Portuguese
governments to do more, or at least something. A
year after our request for a review of Madeleine’s
case, Alan Johnson, the second home secretary we
had met, commissioned CEOP to undertake a
‘scoping’ exercise – basically to establish whether
they felt a review may be of benefit. Their report has been with the Home Office since March 2010. Although we have not seen it, it has been widely
reported that it highlights some deficiencies in the
investigation and hence areas that merit further
attention. We have since met the current home secretary, Theresa May, and written to her several times. Currently we do not know whether we are any further
forward, or whether the British government has even
raised the suggestion of a review with the Portuguese authorities. In November 2010 we
started a petition to lobby the two governments to
conduct an independent review. We are at a loss to
understand why such a commonly used procedure
isn’t an obvious option and why our request for such
a review has gone unanswered.
[madeleine]

‘ Journalistic speculations are not to be relied on.’

Indeed.

[Venturi Swirl]

So MSM news reportage is all speculation as far as the sceptics are concerned.  In which case they should put their money where their mouths are and never again use one as a cite for anything at all. 

[jassi]

Media reporting is mainly what we have to go on, so is acceptable as a cite as the report itself is a fact.
The content should never be taken as gospel - IMO

[Eleanor]

Media reporting is mainly what we have to go on, so is acceptable as a cite as the report itself is a fact.
The content should never be taken as gospel - IMO

So not Cites then.

[Mr Gray]

What matters isn't what some armchair detectives here regard as facts but what the investigators believe to be true.
They clearly see an abduction as being possible
They clearly don't see the parents as suspects
They clearly see CB as a suspect and have evidence to support that suspicion

[jassi]

So not Cites then.

Read again. Cites demonstrate that the poster hasn't just made something up, even if the media content is suspect.

[Eleanor]

Read again. Cites demonstrate that the poster hasn't just made something up, even if the media content is suspect.

So, it's fine if The Media made it up.  This means that Poster can cite it as Fact.

[jassi]

So, it's fine if The Media made it up.  This means that Poster can cite it as Fact.

Yes and no.

The citer can't claim contents as fact but can demonstrate the source
 If readers can see what has been written then they can make their own evaluation as to whether or not the information is valid.


We have posters who scoff at certain sites as sources, but at least one can see what has been claimed.