No Interview This Anniversary ?

[Venturi Swirl]

One has to think about what information the McCanns have that would jeopardise the investigation. none! WOULD BE THE ANSWER.

The SY will not reveal anything to the McCanns regarding the details of  any suspects or very sensitive information. There was no disclosure of any information to the McCanns which could jeopardise this case as this is against police investigations remit. And a lot of nonsense.

The reasons I am very sure are simple. They cannot name a suspect on live TV  for two reasons:
1. against that persons human rights- if this was to go to trial.
2. it would be libellous as they would need evidence and SY would never disclosed this to anyone except the PF office or a Judge for a warrant to search before an arrest.
3. The police have a duty to protect suspects, in case of retribution from family/friends

But we are lead to believe the SY/OG are their  bessy mates and tell them everything.. yeah, I know hahahahaha

IYO.

[Miss Taken Identity]

IYO.

No, not in my opinion. You need to read up on police procedures, the law, the human rights act.  Or  do as I did , and got it from a high ranking police officer. :)

[Mr Gray]

One has to think about what information the McCanns have that would jeopardise the investigation. none! WOULD BE THE ANSWER.

The SY will not reveal anything to the McCanns regarding the details of  any suspects or very sensitive information. There was no disclosure of any information to the McCanns which could jeopardise this case as this is against police investigations remit. And a lot of nonsense.

The reasons I am very sure are simple. They cannot name a suspect on live TV  for two reasons:
1. against that persons human rights- if this was to go to trial.
2. it would be libellous as they would need evidence and SY would never disclosed this to anyone except the PF office or a Judge for a warrant to search before an arrest.
3. The police have a duty to protect suspects, in case of retribution from family/friends

But we are lead to believe the SY/OG are their  bessy mates and tell them everything.. yeah, I know hahahahaha

The McCann's were named as suspects on portugal TV... So that rather contradicts your own post

[Venturi Swirl]

No, not in my opinion. You need to read up on police procedures, the law, the human rights act.  Or  do as I did , and got it from a high ranking police officer. :)

"Under the Victims’ Code of Practice,
which came into effect in 2006, the police in
England and Wales have a statutory obligation
of “keeping victims updated on the progress
of ongoing investigations and their outcome,
including whether or not action is being taken
against any suspect.”3
 The Victims’ Code specifies
that police forces must tell the victim, at least
monthly, about progress in cases being actively
investigated up until the point of the closure of the
investigation. They must also tell victims about key
events in their case such as the arrest, bail, charge,
summons, remand or other disposal of the case".

https://www.victimsupport.org.uk/sites/default/files/Left%20in%20the%20dark%20-%20why%20victims%20of%20crime%20need%20to%20be%20kept%20informed.pdf

[Miss Taken Identity]

The McCann's were named as suspects on portugal TV... So that rather contradicts your own post

The TV reported they were suspects before the McCanns were told? what really? Oh I don't think so.

 Made up story. UNLESS you have evidence.

"Under the Victims’ Code of Practice,
which came into effect in 2006, the police in
England and Wales have a statutory obligation
of “keeping victims updated on the progress
of ongoing investigations and their outcome,
including whether or not action is being taken
against any suspect.”3
 The Victims’ Code specifies
that police forces must tell the victim, at least
monthly, about progress in cases being actively
investigated up until the point of the closure of the
investigation. They must also tell victims about key
events in their case such as the arrest, bail, charge,
summons, remand or other disposal of the case".

https://www.victimsupport.org.uk/sites/default/files/Left%20in%20the%20dark%20-%20why%20victims%20of%20crime%20need%20to%20be%20kept%20informed.pdf

Oh stoopid me. I forgot the bit where the police go to the victims house and tell them we are going to arrest xyz  tomorrow at his/her home address which is 1234   lalalalala land.

But If I read this correctly it really does support what I said.  Victims are not given a blow by blow account of the investigation or are privvy to 'sensitive' information and are only told about suspects arrest AFTER the arrest has been made. The updates are usually 'we have new line of enquiry or a new lead to follow...along those lines. Someone tried the FOI and failed so the McCanns may or may not be seen as victims a a crime has not been established as yet.

[Venturi Swirl]

The TV reported they were suspects before the McCanns were told? what really? Oh I don't think so.

 Made up story. UNLESS you have evidence.

Oh stoopid me. I forgot the bit where the police go to the victims house and tell them we are going to arrest xyz  tomorrow at his/her home address which is 1234   lalalalala land.

But If I read this correctly it really does support what I said.  Victims are not given a blow by blow account of the investigation or are privvy to 'sensitive' information and are only told about suspects arrest AFTER the arrest has been made. The updates are usually 'we have new line of enquiry or a new lead to follow...along those lines. Someone tried the FOI and failed so the McCanns may or may not be seen as victims a a crime has not been established as yet.

It does not support what you said.  It clearly states that the police must update victims of serious crimes  on the progress of the investigation at least monthly.  Are you really having us believe that the McCanns know no more about the progress of Operation Grange than you or I?  Ridiculous assertion IMO.

[Mr Gray]

The TV reported they were suspects before the McCanns were told? what really? Oh I don't think so.

the newspaper certainly did.....

[Mr Gray]

The TV reported they were suspects before the McCanns were told? what really? Oh I don't think so.

 Made up story. UNLESS you have evidence.

Oh stoopid me. I forgot the bit where the police go to the victims house and tell them we are going to arrest xyz  tomorrow at his/her home address which is 1234   lalalalala land.

But If I read this correctly it really does support what I said.  Victims are not given a blow by blow account of the investigation or are privvy to 'sensitive' information and are only told about suspects arrest AFTER the arrest has been made. The updates are usually 'we have new line of enquiry or a new lead to follow...along those lines. Someone tried the FOI and failed so the McCanns may or may not be seen as victims a a crime has not been established as yet.

as the mccanns have not been charged yes they are considered victims of a crime...officially

[Alice Purjorick]

It does not support what you said.  It clearly states that the police must update victims of serious crimes  on the progress of the investigation at least monthly.  Are you really having us believe that the McCanns know no more about the progress of Operation Grange than you or I?  Ridiculous assertion IMO.

In your opinion is that monthly historical or monthly contemporaneous?
Is it furthermore, in your opinion, a broad brush report or a "full dog and pony show"?

[Venturi Swirl]

In your opinion is that monthly historical or monthly contemporaneous?
Is it furthermore, in your opinion, a broad brush report or a "full dog and pony show"?

It is what I stated and quoted directly from the Victims’ Code of Practice, my or your opinion of it is neither here nor there.  The police are duty bound to keep victims of serious crime updated on the progress of a live investigation on a monthly basis at least.  If the information being shared was nothing more than that which was already known to the general public, then why bother with a monthly update at all?  The police would just tell victims to read about any progress in the Sun.

[Alice Purjorick]

It is what I stated and quoted directly from the Victims’ Code of Practice, my or your opinion of it is neither here nor there.  The police are duty bound to keep victims of serious crime updated on the progress of a live investigation on a monthly basis at least.  If the information being shared was nothing more than that which was already known to the general public, then why bother with a monthly update at all?  The police would just tell victims to read about any progress in the Sun.

The bit you cut and pasted does not state whether the progress update was historical monthly or contemporaneous monthly.
Which in your opinion is most likely in the absence of a definitive statement.
As the potential offence took place in Portugal where the Met have no jurisdiction how do you think monthly progress reports by the Met fit in with Portuguese judicial secrecy?

[Venturi Swirl]

The bit you cut and pasted does not state whether the progress update was historical monthly or contemporaneous monthly.
Which in your opinion is most likely in the absence of a definitive statement.
As the potential offence took place in Portugal where the Met have no jurisdiction how do you think monthly progress reports by the Met fit in with Portuguese judicial secrecy?

Updated monthly about the progress of the live, current investigation- I don’t know what you’re driving at, it can’t be clearer.  As for Portuguese Judicial secrecy, does that law extend to the Met in the UK, and who specifically does judicial secrecy include and exclude?  As I recall, even before the McCanns were arguidos they were bound by judicial secrecy not to discuss the investigation which obviously meant they knew more about what was going on thsn the general public.

[Alice Purjorick]

Updated monthly about the progress of the live, current investigation- I don’t know what you’re driving at, it can’t be clearer.  As for Portuguese Judicial secrecy, does that law extend to the Met in the UK, and who specifically does judicial secrecy include and exclude?  As I recall, even before the McCanns were arguidos they were bound by judicial secrecy not to discuss the investigation which obviously meant they knew more about what was going on thsn the general public.

You do not understand the difference between historic and comtemporaneous then?

[Venturi Swirl]

You do not understand the difference between historic and comtemporaneous then?

not in the context of your question, no.

[Mr Gray]

You do not understand the difference between historic and comtemporaneous then?

if they are obliged to keep victims up to date then what relevance has historic information to do with anything