Author Topic: So what actual searching was there?  (Read 411416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline G-Unit

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1980 on: June 14, 2016, 08:11:42 PM »
Why was it necessary for the missing child's parents to take on the duties of the State by having to hire their own detectives to carry out the search for her?

Why was it necessary to hire Control Risks Group as early as May 2007?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id376.html
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Brietta

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1981 on: June 14, 2016, 09:04:31 PM »
Why was it necessary to hire Control Risks Group as early as May 2007?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id376.html

In pictures: Search for Madeleine
Intense media interest continues on 10 May as the police say they are scaling back local searches.


&%+((£  Wonder if there might have been a connection ?  Police scale back local searches ... missing child's desperate parents employ private detestives.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline jassi

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1982 on: June 14, 2016, 09:05:33 PM »
In pictures: Search for Madeleine
Intense media interest continues on 10 May as the police say they are scaling back local searches.


&%+((£  Wonder if there might have been a connection ?  Police scale back local searches ... missing child's desperate parents employ private detestives.

Did they search locally?
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline G-Unit

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1983 on: June 14, 2016, 09:51:05 PM »
In pictures: Search for Madeleine
Intense media interest continues on 10 May as the police say they are scaling back local searches.


&%+((£  Wonder if there might have been a connection ?  Police scale back local searches ... missing child's desperate parents employ private detestives.

I don't think so, the parents never seemed to think local searches were useful because they were convinced she'd been abducted, weren't they? Kate never mentioned the searches being stopped, at any rate.

It was 11th May when IFLG came to Portugal to discuss if and how they could help. I assume the McCanns could have turned them away, so it's strange that they seem to have brought Control Risks Group with them.

There were meetings that weekend when the discussions included the possibility of being charged with neglect, the Ward of Court application which would help to overcome data protection laws when asking for records which could 'help their case' [what case; neglect?] and the setting up of the 'fighting fund'.

'Hugh' from CRG attended some of these meetings. An anonymous donor had set aside funds to hire detectives, apparently, the inference being that CRG were the ones hired. By Sunday 13th they were giving their statements to two detectives from CRG, anyway.

So on the weekend of Madeleine's birthday, ten days after her disappearance, the first detectives started work, paid for by an anonymous donor.
All info from Kate's book.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1984 on: June 14, 2016, 10:44:53 PM »
Why was it necessary to hire Control Risks Group as early as May 2007?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id376.html
" because her parents feared that Portuguese police were failing properly to search for their daughter".
NOw perhaps you can explain why the parents would have hired CRG if they had hidden their daughter's body?

Offline Brietta

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1985 on: June 14, 2016, 11:28:37 PM »
I don't think so, the parents never seemed to think local searches were useful because they were convinced she'd been abducted, weren't they? Kate never mentioned the searches being stopped, at any rate.

It was 11th May when IFLG came to Portugal to discuss if and how they could help. I assume the McCanns could have turned them away, so it's strange that they seem to have brought Control Risks Group with them.

There were meetings that weekend when the discussions included the possibility of being charged with neglect, the Ward of Court application which would help to overcome data protection laws when asking for records which could 'help their case' [what case; neglect?] and the setting up of the 'fighting fund'.

'Hugh' from CRG attended some of these meetings. An anonymous donor had set aside funds to hire detectives, apparently, the inference being that CRG were the ones hired. By Sunday 13th they were giving their statements to two detectives from CRG, anyway.

So on the weekend of Madeleine's birthday, ten days after her disappearance, the first detectives started work, paid for by an anonymous donor.
All info from Kate's book.

You asked why it was necessary for the Parents of a missing child to employ private detectives to look for her.

It was necessary because the police were scaling down the search for her as early as seven days after her disappearance.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1986 on: June 14, 2016, 11:33:14 PM »
You asked why it was necessary for the Parents of a missing child to employ private detectives to look for her.

It was necessary because the police were scaling down the search for her as early as seven days after her disappearance.
Compare that with the length of time spent by police in the UK on the hunt for April Jones and Alice Gross.

Offline Brietta

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1987 on: June 14, 2016, 11:51:20 PM »
Compare that with the length of time spent by police in the UK on the hunt for April Jones and Alice Gross.

I think scaling back on the search for a missing child after seven days must be unprecedented, Alfie.

Is there no equivalent of a Public Inquiry in Portugal?  Because there certainly should be.  If ever the conduct of a missing child case warranted public investigation it is Madeleine McCann's case.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline faithlilly

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1988 on: June 15, 2016, 12:11:56 AM »
I don't think so, the parents never seemed to think local searches were useful because they were convinced she'd been abducted, weren't they? Kate never mentioned the searches being stopped, at any rate.

It was 11th May when IFLG came to Portugal to discuss if and how they could help. I assume the McCanns could have turned them away, so it's strange that they seem to have brought Control Risks Group with them.

There were meetings that weekend when the discussions included the possibility of being charged with neglect, the Ward of Court application which would help to overcome data protection laws when asking for records which could 'help their case' [what case; neglect?] and the setting up of the 'fighting fund'.

'Hugh' from CRG attended some of these meetings. An anonymous donor had set aside funds to hire detectives, apparently, the inference being that CRG were the ones hired. By Sunday 13th they were giving their statements to two detectives from CRG, anyway.

So on the weekend of Madeleine's birthday, ten days after her disappearance, the first detectives started work, paid for by an anonymous donor.
All info from Kate's book.

Surely by providing CRG statements the McCanns and their friends were blatantly breaking judicial secrecy.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline faithlilly

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1989 on: June 15, 2016, 12:14:32 AM »
You didn't need to.  It's blatantly obvious.  Why else would sceptics constantly refer to these photos and videos if they didn't think there was something significant about them>?

I have no idea the motivation behind other sceptics posts. My feeling though is that his behaviour was inappropriate in the circumstances.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline mercury

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1990 on: June 15, 2016, 12:57:07 AM »
Surely by providing CRG statements the McCanns and their friends were blatantly breaking judicial secrecy.

Thats ok in the big scheme, at least we know some of the statements were embellished

Tanner apparently suddenly remembered a pink top on the chld when originally she said didnt see it and not so in her roggy interview either

Kate Mccann ran over and opened the curtains rather than them being found open or as in later interviews, blew open via the wind gust


« Last Edit: June 15, 2016, 01:06:25 AM by mercury »

Offline pegasus

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1991 on: June 15, 2016, 02:08:52 AM »
He still seems pretty upbeat to me.
Yes. Look through the glass who is the lady being spoken to? SH possibly?
She bends down to pick something up off the floor to avoid responding to the joke?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VlS-gO5Ask

Offline pegasus

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1992 on: June 15, 2016, 02:20:46 AM »
Why was it necessary for the missing child's parents to take on the duties of the State by having to hire their own detectives to carry out the search for her?
In May 2007 the parents didn't request CRG, and didn't pay for CRG.
Someone else requested them and paid for them.
Possibly one of those top politicians?
Why else would LP happily work alongside them?

Offline mercury

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1993 on: June 15, 2016, 02:35:45 AM »
In May 2007 the parents didn't request CRG, and didn't pay for CRG.
Someone else requested them and paid for them.
Possibly one of those top politicians?
Why else would LP happily work alongside them?

Is it correct that the tapas group statement was taken by crg though? And whats with the plethora of politicians getting involved? I can count at least a dozen off the top of my head
« Last Edit: June 15, 2016, 02:43:56 AM by mercury »

Offline G-Unit

Re: So what actual searching was there?
« Reply #1994 on: June 15, 2016, 06:46:57 AM »
I think scaling back on the search for a missing child after seven days must be unprecedented, Alfie.

Is there no equivalent of a Public Inquiry in Portugal?  Because there certainly should be.  If ever the conduct of a missing child case warranted public investigation it is Madeleine McCann's case.
.
They were searching locally for a live child. They searched for seven days. It wasn't a huge area. How long should the GNR have continued to conduct local searches for a live child Brietta? Fourteen days? A month? How long?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0