So what actual searching was there?

[ferryman]

Viable options which were investigated as was appropriate at the time.  How on earth the initial investigation allowed itself to become bogged down in the 'accidental death, with later hiding of the corpse' thesis is one of the mysteries of Madeleine McCann's case.
There was not one shred of evidence to support pursuing it and only bizarre, convoluted scenarios as to how Madeleine's body was dealt with had to be invented, not one of which was remotely possible to keep the fantasy alive.

All attention appears to have been concentrated on Scotland Yard finding enough evidence to justify reopening the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.

The Policia Judiciaria team from Porto carried out their own review and concluded there was evidence ... which under the terms of the archiving document ... had to be new evidence ... to enable Madeleine's case to be reopened.

It is insulting to both law enforcement bodies for anyone to suggest they bowed to outside influences in order to reach their professional conclusions that evidence was in existence which meant the case should properly be reopened.

One of the first issues which I am sure both reviewing teams would have gone over with a fine tooth comb is the Amaral theory of accidental death.

It is instructive that both SY and the PJ have been pursuing the stranger abduction theory.  Certainly tells me what they are looking for and the fact that neither is the least bit interested in 'nailing' Madeleine's parents despite knowing exactly where they are, should tell other folks something too.

Have the McCanns even been re-interviewed by the second enquiry?

Or any of their friends?

[Brietta]

This is the salient point of the OG remit:
"This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance".

Do you think then that having said that The Met then ignored it and chose not to investigate "the whole" but went off half cocked ?.

I don't understand what you are getting at.  How does one normally conduct a cold case investigation?  Everything without exception is looked at  ... that is the whole point and the only way to identify what has been missed that may be relevant.   

[stephen25000]

Viable options which were investigated as was appropriate at the time.  How on earth the initial investigation allowed itself to become bogged down in the 'accidental death, with later hiding of the corpse' thesis is one of the mysteries of Madeleine McCann's case.
There was not one shred of evidence to support pursuing it and only bizarre, convoluted scenarios as to how Madeleine's body was dealt with had to be invented, not one of which was remotely possible to keep the fantasy alive.

All attention appears to have been concentrated on Scotland Yard finding enough evidence to justify reopening the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.

The Policia Judiciaria team from Porto carried out their own review and concluded there was evidence ... which under the terms of the archiving document ... had to be new evidence ... to enable Madeleine's case to be reopened.

It is insulting to both law enforcement bodies for anyone to suggest they bowed to outside influences in order to reach their professional conclusions that evidence was in existence which meant the case should properly be reopened.

One of the first issues which I am sure both reviewing teams would have gone over with a fine tooth comb is the Amaral theory of accidental death.

It is instructive that both SY and the PJ have been pursuing the stranger abduction theory.  Certainly tells me what they are looking for and the fact that neither is the least bit interested in 'nailing' Madeleine's parents despite knowing exactly where they are, should tell other folks something too.

You are something of a fantasist it seems.

'Viable options which were investigated as was appropriate at the time.  How on earth the initial investigation allowed itself to become bogged down in the 'accidental death, with later hiding of the corpse' thesis is one of the mysteries of Madeleine McCann's case.
There was not one shred of evidence to support pursuing it and only bizarre, convoluted scenarios as to how Madeleine's body was dealt with had to be invented, not one of which was remotely possible to keep the fantasy alive.'

No evidence was found for abduction, as remains the case.

Investigation of the parents was a logical step.

Accidental death has not been disproved.

Remember the dogs.

Whether you like it or not, the dogs indicated. The forensics were inconclusive.

[Mr Gray]

You are something of a fantasist it seems.

'Viable options which were investigated as was appropriate at the time.  How on earth the initial investigation allowed itself to become bogged down in the 'accidental death, with later hiding of the corpse' thesis is one of the mysteries of Madeleine McCann's case.
There was not one shred of evidence to support pursuing it and only bizarre, convoluted scenarios as to how Madeleine's body was dealt with had to be invented, not one of which was remotely possible to keep the fantasy alive.'

No evidence was found for abduction, as remains the case.

Investigation of the parents was a logical step.

Accidental death has not been disproved.

Remember the dogs.

Whether you like it or not, the dogs indicated. The forensics were inconclusive.

doesn't bother me that the dogs barked...they found b****r all

[stephen25000]

doesn't bother me that the dogs barked...they found b****r all

Tough.

Made up abduction, with no evidence that can't be explained by the other logical scenarios, as regards disappearance.


and definitely ZIP as regards forensic evidence of abduction.

Tell me dave, is it true kate mccann was discussing the open doors on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance, when the doors had been locked all day ?

[Mr Gray]

Tough.

Made up abduction, with no evidence that can't be explained by the other logical scenarios, as regards disappearance.


and definitely ZIP as regards forensic evidence of abduction.

Tell me dave, is it true kate mccann was discussing the open doors on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance, when the doors had been locked all day ?

i'll ask her later

[stephen25000]

i'll ask her later

Have you read Angelo's earlier posts ?

[Mr Gray]

Have you read Angelo's earlier posts ?

no I've had some wet paint that needs watching

[Lace]

What is this 'something' ?

'something' over the rainbow perhaps  ?

I don't know Stephen have a look you have a good view from where you are     %£&)**#

[Angelo222]

It might help to read the OG Remit and part of The Portuguese Archiving process in conjunction then explain convincingly  how one reconciles  "whole of the investigations" with only abduction when the PJ investigated more than abduction. Don't work any too well do it?

Op Grange Remit

The support and expertise proffered by the Commissioner will be provided by the Homicide & Serious Crime Command - SCD1. 

The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’.  This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);

•   The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies.
•   UK Law Enforcement agencies,
•   Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.

The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before. 

It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter. Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit.

End

From PJ Archiving Document

The investigation, during more than 13 months, followed all the credible indices related to different hypotheses and, in an impartial manner, continued to analyse, correlate and synthesize them, looking for an explanation for the happenings of the night of 3 May 2007.

Assuming that the minor's disappearance was due to the acts of third parties, the PJ explored various lines of investigation, not excluding any hypothesis considered plausible or hypothetically acceptable.

From the documentation, you will observe that during the investigation various possibilities were contemplated.

As such, consider:

1. abduction, for sexual exploration or other (e.g, later adoption, child trafficking, organ trafficking), without homicide;

2. abduction, followed by homicide with (or without) hiding of the corpse;

3. accidental death, with later hiding of the corpse;

They forgot to add the accidental death without third party participation.

[Angelo222]

However you want to put it, you are talking about a cover up conspiracy on the part of those at the highest level.

A conspiracy is premeditated whereas mitigating their embarrassment is not and that is the difference.

[Angelo222]

I'm sure we all know how weasley these politicians are after the huge amount of dirty PR and spin they have utilised over the years. If it was some kind of cover up, it could be said that the purpose of the review was simply to investigate abduction and nothing to the contrary was said if this is ever questioned.

However, I can't see any possible reason why they would not fully investigate all possibilities and to what benefits it would achieve by doing anything else but that. The government imo would not find it embarrassing if they revealed the truth and that was the McCann's were involved - it would be embarrassing for the McCanns, not the government and a long time in jail.

If such a scenario came to be the government would find it extremely hard to accept that they were sold a pup.

[stephen25000]

I don't know Stephen have a look you have a good view from where you are     %£&)**#

I'm not the one believing in fantasies. 

[Alfred R Jones]

A conspiracy is premeditated whereas mitigating their embarrassment is not and that is the difference.

What embarrassment would be caused and to who?  If the government is instructing the Met to pursue abduction to the exclusion of all else, and not to investigate the parents in case they are embarrassed by the findings then that is a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, and a cover up. 

[Alfred R Jones]

If such a scenario came to be the government would find it extremely hard to accept that they were sold a pup.

What utter nonsense.  "Sold a pup"?  Who by?  You think if the McCanns were arrested and charged and subsequently found guilty for doing away with their child that the government would be embarrassed?  Why ever so?  More or less embarrassed than the investigation into the phone hacking scandal, which resulted in David Cameron's media man going to prison?