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: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 04:30:19 AM
Title: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 04:30:19 AM
He was a serious 'in the field' expert, afterall ( one of the 'big boys' as Clarence Mitchell described him at the time ) ... ex MI5 and all that
So why did the McCanns ignore his findings ? .... not only ignore them, it appears, but issued him with a warning from their lawyers to 'keep schtum' about them
Why ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: colombosstogey on October 27, 2013, 05:38:21 AM
Because their investigation pointed to the parents.........
They asked them to spy and ask questions they did, but the McCanns did not like the answers or the report that came back, especially the bit about Mr Smith clocking GM carrying his child etc.
The followers of this case knew about the Smith sighting all along.
It always troubled me, that GA was pushing this sighting and the bit about Mr Smith thinking it was GM carrying the child they saw, and before GA COULD do a second interview with Mr Smith he was zapped off the case then in 2008 the sighting by the Smiths was zapped too.
Sometimes people need to be careful what they wish for lol. .....
Of course now this article will be RIDICULED etc because the guy who run agency was convicted of fraud, so therefore the information his detectives gleened will be tainted....and so the white wash bucket gets more and more empty.
I actually often wondered if Mr GM didnt have something to do with eye spy with my little eye, and that is why he is so close to government.............
anyway let the GAMES begin lol.....
EXPLAIN that away Mr & Mrs McCann should keep their PR a bit busy and at least hopefully all the little blonde children sleeping with their Roma families can sleep a bit tighter without fear of official abduction for a few weeks..... ?>)()<
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: colombosstogey on October 27, 2013, 06:01:42 AM
On another note how can the McCanns say GA book hindered the search for their daughter if they too have hidden important leads to the abduction of their child....... 8(0(*
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on October 27, 2013, 07:30:12 AM
this was Exton who worked with Halligan...so what findings did they reject and what is your source
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 13, 2013, 05:51:51 PM
Thinking about it, I suppose what is equally relevant to the McCanns rejecting Exton's expertise is the fact that Scotland Yard, apparently, did not
On Crimewatch they presented Exton's previously suppressed e-fits as crucial new information
Furthermore, they rejected Jane Tanner's sighting as having any relevance to the investigation ... again in line with Exton's report given that he had expressed the opinion that Tanner's witness statement was unreliable
It would appear, wouldn't it, that, unlike the McCanns, Scotland Yard put considerable stock in Henri Exton, and his investigation
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2013, 06:26:11 PM
Thinking about it, I suppose what is equally relevant to the McCanns rejecting Exton's expertise is the fact that Scotland Yard, apparently, did not
On Crimewatch they presented Exton's previously suppressed e-fits as crucial new information
Furthermore, they rejected Jane Tanner's sighting as having any relevance to the investigation ... again in line with Exton's report given that he had expressed the opinion that Tanner's witness statement was unreliable
It would appear, wouldn't it, that, unlike the McCanns, Scotland Yard put considerable stock in Henri Exton, and his investigation
You seem to have ignored the question for 2 months so I will post it again
this was Exton who worked with Halligan...so what findings did they reject and what is your source
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 13, 2013, 06:33:54 PM
Exton submitted his report to Madeleine's Fund in November 2008, recommending the release of the e-fits and the revised timeline, but the relationship between the Fund and the company had soured, and the Fund's lawyers warned Exton that the report and its e-fits had to remain confidential.
The Fund did not release the Smith e-fits; a spokesperson told the Sunday Times that the Oakley report had been "hypercritical of the people involved ... It just wouldn't be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because ... the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting." Instead the Fund focused on the Tanner sighting, even though Tanner had not seen the man's face. Kate McCann did not include the Smith e-fits with the other images of suspects in her book, Madeleine (2011), even though she suggested that both the Tanner and Smith sightings were crucial.
Thinking about it, I suppose what is equally relevant to the McCanns rejecting Exton's expertise is the fact that Scotland Yard, apparently, did not
On Crimewatch they presented Exton's previously suppressed e-fits as crucial new information
Furthermore, they rejected Jane Tanner's sighting as having any relevance to the investigation ... again in line with Exton's report given that he had expressed the opinion that Tanner's witness statement was unreliable
It would appear, wouldn't it, that, unlike the McCanns, Scotland Yard put considerable stock in Henri Exton, and his investigation
What's curious is that Henri Exton, fading Tannerman and underlining Smithman, did nothing that GA hadn't done.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2013, 06:50:09 PM
What I don't understand is how exton did not realise that halligan was a conman...thats why I question his validity. Furthermore is there any evidence that exton was part of MI5...I don't think there is...is there any evidence that the efit was supressed by the McCanns...apart from one article in the ST that has now been removed ... I don't think there is
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Cariad on December 13, 2013, 06:55:40 PM
What I don't understand is how exton did not realise that halligan was a conman...thats why I question his validity. Furthermore is there any evidence that exton was part of MI5...I don't think there is...is there any evidence that the efit was supressed by the McCanns...apart from one article in the ST that has now been removed ... I don't think there is
The Mccanns had access to the e-fits, yet didn't publish them. I guess that that is some form of evidence.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2013, 06:57:48 PM
It always troubled me, that GA was pushing this sighting and the bit about Mr Smith thinking it was GM carrying the child they saw, and before GA COULD do a second interview with Mr Smith he was zapped off the case then in 2008 the sighting by the Smiths was zapped too.
It is indeed troubling. I think that the arguido status was the maximum Portugal was prepared to do concerning the McCanns, unless they had very solid charges that implied the finding of a body. Something like : they're not clear, but we are not here to have them protest, accuse, claim we're incompetent. You better resolve yourselves and if you don't, al-right ! I don't think that GA would have admitted this. He was a potential risk for the policy of burying heads in the sand. Rebelo wasn't called to investigate new avenues (there was none except for aberrant sightings) but basically to review carefully the investigation. He didn't engage his reputation doing so. The media were never interested by him nor insulted him.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Redblossom on December 13, 2013, 07:39:30 PM
Quote
The Telegraph
By Colin Freeman
10:55PM BST 19 Oct 2013
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
Unquote
There is no evidence anywhere that the efits were given to the PJ at the time as alledged, by the unnamed usual "source close to the investigation"
Original thread on this subject for anyone wishing to trawl through
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
Unquote
There is no evidence anywhere that the efits were given to the PJ at the time as alledged, by the unnamed usual "source close to the investigation"
Original thread on this subject for anyone wishing to trawl through
Simon Israel Channel 4 said the efits were not passed on to the Portuguese.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Redblossom on December 13, 2013, 08:55:47 PM
Yes I did Cariad, and posted it in that long thread at least twice....with no comment, surprise surprise from certain people...Thanks WS...thats the one, thanks for digging it out, I would rather have a named senior home affairs correspondent on C4 news any day over an unnamed "source close to the investigation", as we know what the latter has brought us over the years!!
I think its beyond doubt this was suppressed....Mccanns had it, their lawyers gagged Exton,not in Kates book either written years after, not a mention in any interview they gave, they never publicised the efits of a man seen on the night! carrying a blonde small child in pyjamas but they decided to give Gail Coopers creepyman (who she saw two weeks earlier during the morning and nowhere near 5a and without any child) a special conference fanfare, not forgetting another one in 2009 for Vicky Beckham in Spain!
Edited
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Apostate on December 13, 2013, 09:19:27 PM
He was a serious 'in the field' expert, afterall ( one of the 'big boys' as Clarence Mitchell described him at the time ) ... ex MI5 and all that
So why did the McCanns ignore his findings ? .... not only ignore them, it appears, but issued him with a warning from their lawyers to 'keep schtum' about them
Why ?
They didn't like what he had to say. One of the sorriest episodes in this sorry tale.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 13, 2013, 09:39:10 PM
Exton submitted his report to Madeleine's Fund in November 2008, recommending the release of the e-fits and the revised timeline, but the relationship between the Fund and the company had soured, and the Fund's lawyers warned Exton that the report and its e-fits had to remain confidential.
The Fund did not release the Smith e-fits; a spokesperson told the Sunday Times that the Oakley report had been "hypercritical of the people involved ... It just wouldn't be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because ... the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting." Instead the Fund focused on the Tanner sighting, even though Tanner had not seen the man's face. Kate McCann did not include the Smith e-fits with the other images of suspects in her book, Madeleine (2011), even though she suggested that both the Tanner and Smith sightings were crucial.
"We don't know whats happened to Madeleine, erm we don't know who's taken her. Probably our best chance of finding her is identifying that person, and that's why the E-Fits & sketches & the new information tonight are so important to us, erm because that's probably our best chance we've got of finding Madeleine"
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 14, 2013, 11:14:08 AM
I think the significance of these e-fits have been lost to most people but it was quite the eureka moment when the Sunday Times realised the significance of what had been effectively hidden for six years.
The first question I will ask is why has the newspaper chosen to remove the article?
Secondly, was the Sunday Times threatened with legal action?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2013, 11:19:56 AM
I think the significance of these e-fits have been lost to most people but it was quite the eureka moment when the Sunday Times realised the significance of what had been effectively hidden for six years.
The first question I will ask is why has the newspaper chosen to remove the article?
Secondly, was the Sunday Times threatened with legal action?
remember if what the paper printed was true they could not be threatened with legal action..my view is the story was false
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 14, 2013, 11:45:40 AM
remember if what the paper printed was true they could not be threatened with legal action..my view is the story was false
Do you mean the fact claim the McCanns threatened their own private investigators with legal action if they released the details of their investigations or the fact that the e-fits were withheld for six years??
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 14, 2013, 11:47:52 AM
I haven't read anything, aside from that article, to suggest otherwise.
It was Brian Kennedy who commissioned them on behalf of the McCanns. Why wouldn't they have them Carana?
To get back to my original point, it suits the McCanns extremely well to have this issue glossed over because it is one of the few allegations against them which they couldn't deny. Even Clarence couldn't get them out of this one!!
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2013, 11:55:31 AM
Do you mean the fact claim the McCanns threatened their own private investigators with legal action if they released the details of their investigations or the fact that the e-fits were withheld for six years??
Ithink this is another myth...just a standard confidentiality agreement...nothing more
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 14, 2013, 12:02:31 PM
Ithink this is another myth...just a standard confidentiality agreement...nothing more
Why are the parents of a child missing for six years in very suspicious circumstances and, who assured the public that everything to do with the search for that child would be up front and transparent, involved in confidentiality agreements in any event??
The very nature of the beast infers secrecy and hidden agendas and some people wonder why the McCanns attract ridicule. @)(++(*
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2013, 12:08:27 PM
Why are the parents of a child missing for six years in very suspicious circumstances and, who assured the public that everything to do with the search for that child would be up front and transparent, involved in confidentiality agreements in any event??
The very nature of the beast infers secrecy and hidden agendas and some people wonder why the McCanns attract ridicule. @)(++(*
Perhaps its just that you don't understand...papers pay a lot for any tit bits re people in the public eye tahts why they have confidentiality agreements for everyone they employ. This is just another innocent action being interpreted as something sinister..It isn't its standard practice
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 14, 2013, 12:09:52 PM
It was Brian Kennedy who commissioned them on behalf of the McCanns. Why wouldn't they have them Carana?
To get back to my original point, it suits the McCanns extremely well to have this issue glossed over because it is one of the few allegations against them which they couldn't deny. Even Clarence couldn't get them out of this one!!
We don't know the ins and outs of the Halligen saga. I find it plausible that information may have been withheld by subcontractors pending payment by Halligen... which was unlikely to happen.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 14, 2013, 12:15:01 PM
We don't know the ins and outs of the Halligen saga. I find it plausible that information may have been withheld by subcontractors pending payment by Halligen... which was unlikely to happen.
If the Times article was not true, or misleading in any way, then surely the McCanns media controller ( Mitchell ) would have responded with a denial or rebuttal of some sort ?
He did not
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 14, 2013, 12:35:24 PM
If the Times article was not true, or misleading in any way, then surely the McCanns media controller ( Mitchell ) would have responded with a denial or rebuttal of some sort ?
He did not
- It's not an article by The Times, but The Sunday Times. Do they have the same reputation?
- Mitchell made one comment, the other "source" is anonymous.
- I haven't found anything to corroborate the contentious aspects of that article.
- Are the authors known for accurate investigative journalism?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 14, 2013, 12:41:23 PM
If the Times article was not true, or misleading in any way, then surely the McCanns media controller ( Mitchell ) would have responded with a denial or rebuttal of some sort ?
He did not
Could it be because the McCanns have said they are not going to comment on the case? - just as SY have said they are not going to give a running commentary either? Unlike us - the McCanns and SY will know the 'ins and outs' of the situation - however they are not obliged to be at the beck and call of a group of people on the internet who for various reasons want to put every single word uttered on this case under a microscope.
As long as SY are satisfied that they know all the facts regarding this article - then IMO from the MCanns POV - that is all that matters.
That same article claimed that Martin Smith no longer regarded GM as the person he saw. That would seem to be an extremely important revelation - but which has been largely ignored by the same people who for whatever reason have decided there must be something 'sinister' in the rest of the article. Very odd imo.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 14, 2013, 12:57:06 PM
Perhaps its just that you don't understand...papers pay a lot for any tit bits re people in the public eye tahts why they have confidentiality agreements for everyone they employ. This is just another innocent action being interpreted as something sinister..It isn't its standard practice
You're missing the point as per usual. It might be standard practise but they invoked it to prevent information being passed on. That in itself exposes the McCanns to a charge of gross hypocrisy. To take that one step further it effectively means that they are taking donations under false pretences. They ask people to donate to a fund whose declared and much publicised aim is to assist in the search for their missing daughter but by refusing to disclose all the material facts which are in their possession they have damaged that search. Maybe a point for Amaral and his team to pursue since they are being sued for exactly the same reason.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 14, 2013, 01:00:13 PM
You're missing the point as per usual. It might be standard practise but they invoked it to prevent information being passed on. That in itself exposes the McCann to a charge of gross hypocrisy. To take that one step further it effectively means that they are taking donations under false pretences. They ask people to donate to a fund whose declared and much publicised aim is to assist in the search for their missing daughter but by refusing to disclose all the material facts which are in their possession they have damaged that search. Maybe a point for Amaral and his team to pursue since they are being sued for exactly the same reason.
If you could substantiate the Halligen saga beyond what was alleged in that one article, from an independent source that didn't simply copy this so-called scoop, I'd be interested in reading it.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 14, 2013, 01:05:23 PM
Could it be because the McCanns have said they are not going to comment on the case? - just as SY have said they are not going to give a running commentary either? Unlike us - the McCanns and SY will know the 'ins and outs' of the situation - however they are not obliged to be at the beck and call of a group of people on the internet who for various reasons want to put every single word uttered on this case under a microscope.
As long as SY are satisfied that they know all the facts regarding this article - then IMO from the MCanns POV - that is all that matters.
That same article claimed that Martin Smith no longer regarded GM as the person he saw. That would seem to be an extremely important revelation - but which has been largely ignored by the same people who for whatever reason have decided there must be something 'sinister' in the rest of the article. Very odd imo.
Nothing sinister in any of it. Smithman is not Gerry McCann and they withheld crucial e-fits. The only mystery is WHY? The second mystery is what are they hiding and why??
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 14, 2013, 01:13:02 PM
Nothing sinister in any of it. Smithman is not Gerry McCann and they withheld crucial e-fits. The only mystery is WHY? The second mystery is what are they hiding and why??
WHO withheld these e-fits? Who were they sent to? When?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2013, 01:25:02 PM
WHO withheld these e-fits? Who were they sent to? When?
Work it out for yourself. Kennedy commissioned them in junction with Metodo 3 using Martin Smiths eye witness accounts of Smithman, thereafter never produced to the public. Good question...on whose orders were they suppressed until SY unearthed them??
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Benice on December 14, 2013, 03:11:21 PM
Nothing sinister in any of it. Smithman is not Gerry McCann and they withheld crucial e-fits. The only mystery is WHY? The second mystery is what are they hiding and why??
It may be a mystery to us - but it won't be to SY who unlike us have the ability to discover all the facts about what happened and why - concerning these Efits. Just because they haven't divulged that information to the public - doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Without knowing all the facts - then to assume anything has deliberately been hidden can only be pure speculation imo.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 14, 2013, 03:33:00 PM
Someone has withheld them for some reason.
Why weren't they handed to the Portuguese investigation?
Would'nt that have been the sensible thing to do in the all important search for a little girl?
Simon Israel Channel 4 news.
" These are 2 e-fits of the same man. A man who may hold the key to Madeleine McCanns disappearance. They've been shut away in a private investigation file for 5 years.
They were compiled from 2 witness accounts on the night Madeleine disappeared, but never handed over to the Portuguese investigation. Now British police are treating them with the utmost importance"
If she was 'alive when she was taken' as Kate & Gerry 'strongly believed' then someone has seriously 'damaged the search' & potentially abandoned the little girl to her fate by delaying for 5 years 'probably' their 'best chance of finding Madeleine'.
"We don't know whats happened to Madeleine, erm we don't know who's taken her. Probably our best chance of finding her is identifying that person, and that's why the E-Fits & sketches & the new information tonight are so important to us, erm because that's probably our best chance we've got of finding Madeleine"
What a terrible / disgusting thing to do.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 14, 2013, 04:22:34 PM
The key sentence from the article in The Times:
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month’s publication.
The efits were not withheld.
Where's the problem?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 14, 2013, 04:29:20 PM
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month’s publication.
The efits were not withheld.
Where's the problem?
They were not withheld?
That's strange I don't recall having seen them in the 5 years prior to Crimewatch. And Simon Israel described them as having been "shut away in a private investigation file for 5 years".
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2013, 04:36:42 PM
This is a clip from the telegraph article
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
So is there any real evidence that the efits were supressed
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 14, 2013, 04:40:46 PM
That's strange I don't recall having seen them in the 5 years prior to Crimewatch. And Simon Israel described them as having been "shut away in a private investigation file for 5 years".
There was always the necessity for there to be an official enquiry for the efits to be publicised/
The Portuguese authorities agreed to re-open the investigation and that was the opportunity.
The McCanns would have been crucified if they'd released the efit before.
It was always the police's prerogative to do that.
They did.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 14, 2013, 04:44:47 PM
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
So is there any real evidence that the efits were supressed
Had you seen the efits before crimewatch?
Did Mitchell hold them up in a press conference?
Did Kate display them in her book?
Were they in all the papers?
Did they feature alongside bundleman & creepy man on the official find Madeleine page or the facebook page?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 14, 2013, 05:16:01 PM
The fund was set up to search for Madeleine
Precisely.
Finding criminals is the job of the police.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 14, 2013, 05:25:08 PM
... so what 'authority' did they have to release all the other e-fits that they did make public ? ( with much fanfare )
How many others of a man seen carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a at about the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 14, 2013, 06:22:26 PM
When you use a KGB word like 'suppression', you are implying that the McCanns and police do not have the right to engineer an investigation as they see fit.
Just because they (McCanns and SY) are in receipt of public monies does not mean they are bound by public opinion on how to address each minutiae of the case.
The McCanns and police know considerably more about this matter than we do and it would make no sense whatsoever for them to choreograph every single dance step to our tune.
Would that be the definition of 'leaving no stone unturned' ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 14, 2013, 07:00:15 PM
When you use a KGB word like 'suppression', you are implying that the McCanns and police do not have the right to engineer investigation as they see fit.
Just because they (McCanns and SY) are in receipt of public monies does not mean they are bound by public opinion on how to address each minutiae of the case.
The McCanns and police know considerably more about this matter than we do and it would make no sense whatsoever for them to choreograph every single dance step to our tune.
Would that be the definition of 'leaving no stone unturned' ?
Piffle
"that's why the E-Fits & sketches & the new information tonight are so important to us, erm because that's probably our best chance we've got of finding Madeleine"
To think they would pass up on probably their best chance of finding her for the last 5 years for some sort of investigation operational tactics is just total nonsense.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 14, 2013, 07:12:47 PM
When you use a KGB word like 'suppression', you are implying that the McCanns and police do not have the right to engineer investigation as they see fit.
Just because they (McCanns and SY) are in receipt of public monies does not mean they are bound by public opinion on how to address each minutiae of the case.
The McCanns and police know considerably more about this matter than we do and it would make no sense whatsoever for them to choreograph every single dance step to our tune.
Would that be the definition of 'leaving no stone unturned' ?
Can you show me where exactly I used a 'KGB' word like 'suppression'
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 14, 2013, 07:39:17 PM
Let's see.
The efits were in the possession of the police (Portuguese and UK) years before the Crimewatch programme.
So the question is: why did they not release it?
The most likely answer is that at the time those efits came into their possession, there was no official enquiry.
Now, there is, and DCI Redwood choose the moment of the Crimewatch programme to unveil it.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2013, 07:40:50 PM
These e-fits were not in the possession of the Portuguese or British police!!!!
We all know that neither the PJ nor the LC nor SY knew those e-fits that however are far less informative than the feeling of Martin Smith and his wife (a Mr McCann lookalike). We also know that Mr Amaral found Smithman was crucial and that it took 6 years to the UK police (LC then SY) to be interested themselves. But finally they did get there, brilliant !
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 14, 2013, 09:30:15 PM
You might be close there, if you replaced authority with advice (from the lawyers).
Mitchell's press conference was just a piece of theatre. Nobody took his e-fit seriously so nobody worried about the possible repercussions of releasing it. It's different with Smithman.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 14, 2013, 09:52:12 PM
We all know that neither the PJ nor the LC nor SY knew those e-fits that however are far less informative than the feeling of Martin Smith and his wife (a Mr McCann lookalike). We also know that Mr Amaral found Smithman was crucial and that it took 6 years to the UK police (LC then SY) to be interested themselves. But finally they did get there, brilliant !
Do you have any idea why the night crèche records don't seem to have been checked back in May 07?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 14, 2013, 10:07:46 PM
Madeleine disappeared from her parents holiday apartment in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz on 3rd May 2007
THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.
The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.
It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.
But the trail was left to go cold for five years because the McCanns and their advisers sidelined the report and threatened to sue its authors if they divulged the contents.
The report, seen by the Sunday Times, called for the E-Fits to be released immediately and said "anomalies" in statements by the McCanns and their friends must be resolved.
A source close to the McCanns said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if made public.
[Page 4]
The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports
The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by Kate and Gerry McCann to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.
It was the spring of 2008, 10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.
But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public.
Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.
They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.
This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.
One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.
The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.
Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.
An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.
Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”
He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund. A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.
Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.
It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.
The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.
The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.
The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.
Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.
The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes. The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.
"The report questioned 'anomalies' in the McCanns' statements"
The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.
Investigators had E-Fits five years ago
One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.
The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.
Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.
Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?
The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.
As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.
There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.
The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.
He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.
“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
The efits were in the possession of the police (Portuguese and UK) years before the Crimewatch programme.
So the question is: why did they not release it?
The most likely answer is that at the time those efits came into their possession, there was no official enquiry.
Now, there is, and DCI Redwood choose the moment of the Crimewatch programme to unveil it.
SY had to approach the fund to ask if they would give Exton permission to hand over the report and efits, ie once the review had begun. If the report and e-fits had been given to the PJ they would have been in the file handed to SY.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 14, 2013, 11:49:19 PM
"that's why the E-Fits & sketches & the new information tonight are so important to us, erm because that's probably our best chance we've got of finding Madeleine"
To think they would pass up on probably their best chance of finding her for the last 5 years for some sort of investigation operational tactics is just total nonsense.
The charge of using a KGB word like 'suppressed' was not directed at anyone specifically, Wonderfulspam. It was a response to its previous use on these threads, along with words like 'withheld'.
The point is that the situation is not an either/or between leaving out important evidence and deciding on operational tactics. Deciding what to put in and when, and what to leave out, IS operational tactics - tactics which the McCanns and police believe will assist in their investigation.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 14, 2013, 11:54:58 PM
Do you have any idea why the night crèche records don't seem to have been checked back in May 07?
Have you ? I've an idea that the PJ had many sightings to check : on the 4th of May only Lagos, Albufeira, Viseu, Condeixa-a-Nova, Coimbra, Odemira, Vila Nova de Gaia, Alvor, Lisbonne, Coruche, Alcochete, Leiria, Quarteira, Ourique, Marinha Grande, Valença, Peniche, Sintra, in a flight Faro-Gatwick, Amsterdam et Weymouth (Dorset). I've an idea they hardly could think that Tannerman was a Crecheman as he didn't seem to come from there... A intriguing and logical point that SY avoided.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 14, 2013, 11:57:44 PM
Have you ? I've an idea that the PJ had many sightings to check : on the 4th of May only Lagos, Albufeira, Viseu, Condeixa-a-Nova, Coimbra, Odemira, Vila Nova de Gaia, Alvor, Lisbonne, Coruche, Alcochete, Leiria, Quarteira, Ourique, Marinha Grande, Valença, Peniche, Sintra, in a flight Faro-Gatwick, Amsterdam et Weymouth (Dorset). I've an idea they hardly could think that Tannerman was a Crecheman as he didn't seem to come from there... A intriguing and logical point that SY avoided.
It's some litany.
But what detective begins far from the scene of the crime and works backwards?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 14, 2013, 11:59:03 PM
What detective begins far from the scene of the crime and works backwards?
What kind of police officer checks a night creche before sightings of a child, if the suspect, sighted, comes from the opposite direction and if nothing indicates a father using the creche could be an abductor ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 12:09:13 AM
Woe is me Then it's some litany What do you mean ? Would you like the list of the sightings of the following days ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 15, 2013, 12:11:28 AM
What kind of police officer checks a night creche before sightings of a child, if the suspect, sighted, comes from the opposite direction and if nothing indicates a father using the creche could be an abductor ?
But they didn't check the night creche, apparently - until recently.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 12:14:39 AM
What kind of police officer checks a night creche before sightings of a child, if the suspect, sighted, comes from the opposite direction and if nothing indicates a father using the creche could be an abductor ?
Checking who in the vicinity could have been carrying a child that evening might have been useful, if only to eliminate potential suspects, don't you think?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: pegasus on December 15, 2013, 12:18:08 AM
One possible explanation of innocentcrechedad crossing the t junction in direction described by JT. Picks up kid from creche, by chance at same time another parent picks up their kid, they walk back together and chat, they go first to door of other parent's building, then he walks back from there to his building. If other parent is block 4 then this would fit.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 15, 2013, 12:20:26 AM
Woe is me Then it's some litany What do you mean ? Would you like the list of the sightings of the following days ?
Woe is me that an obvious starting point was passed over.
It goes without saying that if movements in PdL had been given more focus and the beginnings of a trail had been established, the need for looking simultaneously in a hundred different directions would have been obviated.
Giving a long list of places where sightings were looked into makes it seem on the face of it that much work was being done.
In reality, it was because of the dearth of leads from source that so many diverse options had to be visited.
A waste of precious resources and precious time - and a situation that remains today.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 15, 2013, 12:22:28 AM
One possible explanation of innocentcrechedad crossing the t junction in direction described by JT. Picks up kid from creche, by chance at same time another parent picks up their kid, they walk back together and chat, they go first to door of other parent's building, then he walks back from there to his building. If other parent is block 4 then this would fit.
It must be something like this.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 12:23:38 AM
The McCanns and police know considerably more about this matter than we do and it would make no sense whatsoever for them to choreograph every single dance step to our tune.
Would that be the definition of 'leaving no stone unturned' ?
Which matter, please, SH ? And what's exactly our tune ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 12:24:43 AM
Checking who in the vicinity could have been carrying a child that evening might have been useful, if only to eliminate potential suspects, don't you think?
Exactly.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 15, 2013, 12:32:04 AM
That would best be described as unnecessarily waiting for years. If they in any way thought the person in the efit was of no interest then they still should have released it if only to rule this person out!
There is no good reason!
Without an official investigation, how could that have been taken forward?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 12:44:08 AM
Woe is me that an obvious starting point was passed over.
It goes without saying that if movements in PdL had been given more focus and the beginnings of a trail had been established, the need for looking simultaneously in a hundred different directions would have been obviated.
Giving a long list of places where sightings were looked into makes it seem on the face of it that much work was being done.
In reality, it was because of the dearth of leads from source that so many diverse options had to be visited.
A waste of precious resources and precious time - and a situation that remains today.
Are you sure that another police would have arbitrarily ignored the sightings ? Do you work for the police ? Are you sure that another police force would have found normal the way Tannerman was carrying the child, exposing it to the cold wind ? Are you sure that, finding it normal, they would have checked all fathers of the creche, neglecting resident fathers in PDL don't use the creche ? Is it normal in the places you've been living in to see a warmly dressed father carry a child in pyjamas and barefoot, in 13°C with wind, chatting with a friend, half a mile ? In Portugal even poor people use a blanket. Ms Tanner knew, hence her feeling of guilt, that it was not normal, that a father would hardly do that. At least Smithman had the little girl against him, warming her.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: pegasus on December 15, 2013, 12:51:12 AM
IMO the crimewatch photo of the clothing of innocent creche dad's child indicates that a pale pink blanket was used to cover the child
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 12:57:05 AM
Without an official investigation, how could that have been taken forward?
Innocentman 2 reads "Madeleine", sees the e-fit, has his memory jogged (one of the purposes of "Madeleine"), calls his State police which, if not the PJ, takes a first statement and sends it to the Portimao PJ. After examining Innocentman 2's first statement, the PJ either shelves or alerts the MP in order to interview Innocentman 2 and possibly resurrect Tannerman.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 01:01:36 AM
Is that supposed to be a serious and logical explanation ?
Delete the word supposed and you're there.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 08:51:54 AM
Considering Smith said he did not see the mans face...considering a quote from smith saying he refused to help make an e fit in jan 08...does anyone know when these efits were made. Al these claims due to one article in the ST which has been removed fro a company led by a jailed fraudster
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Cariad on December 15, 2013, 11:01:06 AM
Alright, lets assume for a minute that the Mccanns didn't have access to the E-fits for whatever reason. They'd been withheld due to none payment by whatisface, or they'd handed over all copies to various police forces*. Why then didn't they try to get more copies when they are faced with someone else suppressing them?
They were happy to take LC to court to try to get access to information about the investigation after all. These were E-fits which their own fund had paid for. Why weren't they shouting on top of their voices that someone else was suppressing vital information that could lead to Madeleine being found?
Even if they didn't think the E-fits were likely to be of the abductor, as someone (davel?) pointed out on a different thread the other day, you grasp at straws when your child has been abducted, you try anything. They released other e-fits, so the argument that they didn't have the authority does hold water. I can't see a legitimate reason for these e-fits not being published.
*I haven't seen a reliable source for these ever being handed to a police force.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 11:04:57 AM
Considering Smith said he did not see the mans face...considering a quote from smith saying he refused to help make an e fit in jan 08...does anyone know when these efits were made. Al these claims due to one article in the ST which has been removed fro a company led by a jailed fraudster
Mr Smith said (apparently!) that he didn't believe he would recognise the man again from photographs.
That was a remarkably fine e-fit ...
Martin Smith's statement 26 May:
— States that it is not possible for him [Mr Smith] to recognise the individual in person or by photograph.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 11:11:05 AM
That would be a convincing argument if the e-fits didn't actually exist and were just rumoured to exist. The fact is however that they do exist and according to Exton they are the same e-fits from his original investigation.
Exton is not a jailed fraudster and it is his claim not Halligan's.
When were the e fits made
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 15, 2013, 11:18:02 AM
This is from Mr Smith's statement dated 30th January 2008:
He [Mr Smith] has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor's letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.
So, Mr Smith assisted in the production of this efit after the end of January 2008.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 11:58:41 AM
It is indeed troubling. I think that the arguido status was the maximum Portugal was prepared to do concerning the McCanns, unless they had very solid charges that implied the finding of a body. Something like : they're not clear, but we are not here to have them protest, accuse, claim we're incompetent. You better resolve yourselves and if you don't, al-right ! I don't think that GA would have admitted this. He was a potential risk for the policy of burying heads in the sand. Rebelo wasn't called to investigate new avenues (there was none except for aberrant sightings) but basically to review carefully the investigation. He didn't engage his reputation doing so. The media were never interested by him nor insulted him.
So why didn't rebelo follow it up
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 15, 2013, 12:39:10 PM
The question I asked in to op was not, "Why did the McCanns suppress the e fits ?"
It was, "Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?"
... they did reject it, afterall, didn't they ?
What reasoning could they have applied when rejecting his expert advice that Jane Tanner's witness statement was unreliable, and that the Smith sighting should be prioritised ?
What reason could there be for the McCanns to ignore that advice, and continue ( for years ) to insist that they believed it was Jane who 'saw' the abductor ?
Why would they do that ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 12:42:52 PM
The question I asked in to op was not, "Why did the McCanns suppress the e fits ?"
It was, "Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?"
... they did reject it, afterall, didn't they ?
What reasoning could they have applied when rejecting his expert advice that Jane Tanner's witness statement was unreliable, and that the Smith sighting should be prioritised ?
What reason could there be for the McCanns to ignore that advice, and continue ( for years ) to insist that they believed it was Jane who 'saw' the abductor ?
Why would they do that ?
because the pj had been so incompetent as to not identify tannerman as sy have done
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 15, 2013, 12:47:56 PM
because the pj had been so incompetent as to not identify tannerman as sy have done
Thing is davel, they aren't Madeleine's parents. One of the reasons why people were so suspicious, and so critical of those defending them like yourself, is that they, and their defenders, appeared to behave more like politicians, or chess players.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 12:58:33 PM
That would be a convincing argument if the e-fits didn't actually exist and were just rumoured to exist. The fact is however that they do exist and according to Exton they are the same e-fits from his original investigation.
Exton is not a jailed fraudster and it is his claim not Halligan's.
Where did Exton, as opposed to an unnamed investigator, actually say that?
The only quote attributable to Exton that I can find in that article is:
[Exton] said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 01:01:39 PM
The question I asked in to op was not, "Why did the McCanns suppress the e fits ?"
It was, "Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?"
... they did reject it, afterall, didn't they ?
What reasoning could they have applied when rejecting his expert advice that Jane Tanner's witness statement was unreliable, and that the Smith sighting should be prioritised ?
What reason could there be for the McCanns to ignore that advice, and continue ( for years ) to insist that they believed it was Jane who 'saw' the abductor ?
Why would they do that ?
Did they?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 15, 2013, 01:09:08 PM
Where did Exton, as opposed to an unnamed investigator, actually say that?
The only quote attributable to Exton that I can find in that article is:
[Exton] said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”
The investigator told a Sunday newspaper: ‘I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme... it most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things... and those E-fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours.’
The investigator told a Sunday newspaper: ‘I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme... it most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things... and those E-fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours.’
One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.
Who was this?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 15, 2013, 01:19:02 PM
One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.
Who was this?
I can't answer that. >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Montclair on December 15, 2013, 01:25:33 PM
After the enquiry that exonerated the McCanns had been shelved.
That's why the efits didn't surface until the crimewatch programme
What inquiry? And the McCanns have NEVER been exonerated. So please, stop saying it. You seem to think that if you repeat something over and over again it will become true.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: pinkblossoms on December 15, 2013, 01:31:35 PM
What inquiry? And the McCanns have NEVER been exonerated. So please, stop saying it. You seem to think that if you repeat something over and over again it will become true.
They are no longer suspects,which part of that can you not get a grip of. 8-)(--)
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 01:32:24 PM
Who said it does nothing to diminish the fact that it was part of the investigation commissioned by the McCann's in 2008. It does nothing to diminish the fact that this e-fit was subsequently presented to the McCann's as part of that investigation in 2008. It does nothing to diminish the fact that after the McCann's promising "As I have stated many times, someone has a key bit of information that can unlock this frustratingly difficult and painful situation." and "Every piece of information is important to us." they then failed and still fail to this day bother publishing the e-fit on their own Find Madeleine website. Finally, it does nothing to diminish the fact that this information which is at this moment in time considered so important to SY was paid for by donations given to the McCann's with the sole intention of finding Madeleine.
Can you seriously not see how the McCann's treating the e-fit with this much disregard and then only going along with the e-fit once SY discover it and force it into the open is not suspicious behaviour?
The reason the McCann's take so much of a bashing is because there is a constant supply of suspicious behaviour which emanates from them. It's like fighting off a swarm of wasps...once one episode of suspicious behaviour is dealt with another one very quickly appears!
Why is it so wrong to question suspicious behaviour?
Posters were citing Exton as being the source. So far, I haven't found anything that could attribute the allegations to him.
Who, then, was the source of these "facts"?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 15, 2013, 02:03:27 PM
Carana, Henri Exton was named as a source by the Sunday Times ... why do you doubt it ?
the article which has now been removed
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 02:09:20 PM
I see no more reason to take the ST article as being 100% correct as taking the latest express article as 100% correct. One thing I have learnt is that we should not believe everything we read in the press...it seems some posters haven't learnt this
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 02:13:07 PM
One of the team of investigators. It could be Exton. It could be another colleague but it was one of the team of investigators. It was Exton's investigation.
If we can generalize the information give by SY as coming from SY rather than naming each and every detective involved then why in this instance can it not be generalized as Exton's expertise?
I understand that "sources" can't always be identified for various reasons. I don't have a problem with that, if anonymity is in the public interest and not used to either invent a "source" or use one who may not actually be credible.
If Exton is not the anonymous investigator in question, Exton may well object to the content of the article, as at least several posters assume that he was the source for allegations. For the moment, all I can deduce is that he replied to an apparently innocent question. Nothing more, so far.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 02:18:51 PM
Carana, Henri Exton was named as a source by the Sunday Times ... why do you doubt it ?
Yes, I'm aware of that, but only on one comment, which is nothing more than a statement of fact concerning what would seem to be a confirmation of a confidentiality agreement. Have you found anything else?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 02:27:31 PM
One of the team of investigators. It could be Exton. It could be another colleague but it was one of the team of investigators. It was Exton's investigation.
If we can generalize the information give by SY as coming from SY rather than naming each and every detective involved then why in this instance can it not be generalized as Exton's expertise?
How about if I confirmed one single - irrelevant - detail with you, and then wrote a whole article as if you were the "source" in question for the rest? Would you be happy with that?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 02:34:39 PM
Really? So Gerry's blog was just pontificating was it?
Here's another quote taken from Gerry's blog on the very same day that the arguido status was lifted, 21st July 2008.
"We look forward to scrutinising the police files to see what has ACTUALLY been done and, more importantly, what can still be done, as we leave no stone unturned in the search for Madeleine. We would once again urge anyone with relevant information to come forward and call our helpline on +44 845 838 4699 or send information to investigation@findmadeleine.com
Finally we would like to thank everyone who has supported us and stayed with us during this particularly difficult period. We assure you we will NEVER give up on Madeleine."
Ever heard the saying "Actions speak louder than words"?
Making a few, cheap, bucks at the expense of The Times.
Nice work if you can get it -- and Exton got it ...
I'm not convinced that Exton was the "source" of anything more than having corroborated that there was indeed a confidentialty agreement, which would seem to be a standard clause to me.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 02:46:25 PM
Well given that Oakley was appointed after then they have clearly been more successful than the tabloids in gaining Smith's trust.
Yes, more successful than Mr Kennedy...
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 02:48:07 PM
It was thoughtful of the McCanns (or the findmadeleine) to lift these onerous restrictions on free speech just in time for Exton to spill the beans to The Times.
Or, if said restrictions weren't lifted, where is the evidence of retaliation by the McCanns, or the findMadeleine fund against The Times, and against Exton?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 02:49:45 PM
2 months and 1 day on from the CW appeal and the e-fit has still not been published on the Find Madeleine website. Is that what you call waiting for the right timing? @)(++(*
?{)(**
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 02:54:29 PM
Yes, I'm aware of that, but only on one comment, which is nothing more than a statement of fact concerning what would seem to be a confirmation of a confidentiality agreement. Have you found anything else?
Would you be happy with two comments ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Admin on December 15, 2013, 02:54:38 PM
This is from Mr Smith's statement dated 30th January 2008:
He [Mr Smith] has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor's letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.
So, Mr Smith assisted in the production of this efit after the end of January 2008.
Oakley International were contracted in March 2008. They managed what Brian Kennedy and Control Risks Group previously failed to achieve.
No doubt Dubliner Kevin Halligen swung it for them.
Mr Moderator is currently writing a complete who's who in relation to the private investigation teams involved in the search for Madeleine; all 6 of them! A new board will open soon...
Control Risks Group - Red Defence International - Oakley International - Metodo 3 - A Crack Team of 12 Detectives - ALPHAIG
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 03:01:16 PM
What inquiry? And the McCanns have NEVER been exonerated. So please, stop saying it. You seem to think that if you repeat something over and over again it will become true.
And the McCanns have NEVER been exonerated.
Dream on ...
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 15, 2013, 03:21:30 PM
It was thoughtful of the McCanns (or the findmadeleine) to lift these onerous restrictions on free speech just in time for Exton to spill the beans to The Times.
Or, if said restrictions weren't lifted, where is the evidence of retaliation by the McCanns, or the findMadeleine fund against The Times, and against Exton?
They could easily clear the matter up, ferry, if things are as simple as you think.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Apostate on December 15, 2013, 03:24:45 PM
Let's face it The Sunday Times article is true.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 03:26:04 PM
So the e-fits are created in 2008 but thanks to a carefully constructed "wait for the right moment" strategy, Madeleine (if still alive) is kept on the missing person's register for 5 more years until October 2013 and then BOOM all systems go with the e-fits! 8@??)(
Well thanks to the perfect timing and carefully considered strategy 5 years may have been potentially wasted. never mind though...it's all about the right timing 8(0(*
You're slowly getting the gist, Buzz.
The efit could only be released in the context of a live, active, police enquiry that could investigate the lead.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 15, 2013, 03:36:38 PM
The efit could only be released in the context of a live, active, police enquiry that could investigate the lead.
Rubbish. Clarence and the McCanns were quite happy to publish and promote images of "suspects" when it suited them. But not the e-fits it seems. In fact they actually took action to suppress them.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 15, 2013, 03:42:08 PM
The efit could only be released in the context of a live, active, police enquiry that could investigate the lead.
That makes no sense at all
Where do you get the idea that the McCanns were, somehow, not 'allowed' to make those e fits public ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Moderator on December 15, 2013, 03:44:23 PM
Remember the comment by the official Madeleine team when challenged about the Sunday Times story...
“The report was hypercritical of the people involved . . . it just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it...and it would have been completely distracting.”
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 03:51:47 PM
Where do you get the idea that the McCanns were, somehow, not 'allowed' to make those e fits public ?
The purpose of an efit is to identify someone -- seen carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a at the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted.
The only legitimate context in which the likeness of such a person could be revealed to the world is in the context of an official enquiry.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 03:53:25 PM
Rubbish. Clarence and the McCanns were quite happy to publish and promote images of "suspects" when it suited them. But not the e-fits it seems. In fact they actually took action to suppress them.
I remember the press release of the Spicegirllookalike ! The solemness of CM still makes me laugh !
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 15, 2013, 03:58:49 PM
The purpose of an efit is to identify someone -- seen carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a at the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted.
The only legitimate context in which the likeness of such a person could be revealed to the world is in the context of an official enquiry.
So what was the point of the McCanns spending hundreds of thousands on private investigators then ?
It was the public's help that the McCanns were enlisting ... they could do that whether there was an official enquiry going on or not
Your claim is not only unsupported ... it makes no sense
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 15, 2013, 04:04:47 PM
ferryman's revising for his spin doctor examinations 8)--))
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 04:18:38 PM
So what was the point of the McCanns spending hundreds of thousands on private investigators then ?
It was the public's help that the McCanns were enlisting ... they could do that whether there was an official enquiry going on or not
Your claim is not only unsupported ... it makes no sense
Yet again I agree with Icabod, s/he* makes the point that I was trying to make earlier. The Mccans released many other E-fits with the help of a police force, why not these ones?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 04:43:17 PM
Remember the comment by the official Madeleine team when challenged about the Sunday Times story...
“The report was hypercritical of the people involved . . . it just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it...and it would have been completely distracting.”
Hmmm. That's one of my problems with this article (amongst many others).
The only attributable comment to the Madeleine Fund seems to be this:
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
Prior to that was "a McCann fund source". There might have been one, but without knowing what that person was actually asked, any reply may have been taken out of context.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 04:45:48 PM
There was no denying.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 04:49:57 PM
It is indeed troubling. I think that the arguido status was the maximum Portugal was prepared to do concerning the McCanns, unless they had very solid charges that implied the finding of a body. Something like : they're not clear, but we are not here to have them protest, accuse, claim we're incompetent. You better resolve yourselves and if you don't, al-right ! I don't think that GA would have admitted this. He was a potential risk for the policy of burying heads in the sand. Rebelo wasn't called to investigate new avenues (there was none except for aberrant sightings) but basically to review carefully the investigation. He didn't engage his reputation doing so. The media were never interested by him nor insulted him.
There might be reasons for that...
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 04:58:38 PM
Hmmm. That's one of my problems with this article (amongst many others).
The only attributable comment to the Madeleine Fund seems to be this:
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
Prior to that was "a McCann fund source". There might have been one, but without knowing what that person was actually asked, any reply may have been taken out of context.
It was of course Mitchell providing a man with two heads response and indeed it's also a standard modus operandi of all spin doctors in general. Put your name to things you have to say to the media but then go unnamed as a source to say the things you want to say unofficially.
It's a well used Mitchell tactic throughout the case. Here's another example where he does it:
Is this just an attempt to muddy the waters? This question has already been dealt with. Smiths statement was jan 2008. The report was created 2008 therefore after Oakley had been hired but before 31st dec 2008. The e-fits were part of the report.
So then why keep making statements referring to only releasing the e-fits once there is an active investigation in progress? It's a non argument and I suspect you probably know it. You're just unprepared to accept it because it would raise questions regarding the McCanns that you either choose to ignore or clearly struggle to answer
Why are you questioning the timing of Scotland Yard in unveiling the efit?
ETA:
From that Sunday Times article again, the crucial part:
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month’s publication.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 05:53:32 PM
I am questioning it because there is a rather large matter of a child who has been missing since May 2007!
Why are YOU stating the e-fits can only be published when there is an official investigation? You know there have been other e-fits released by the McCanns but with this one you all of a sudden require an official investigation.
Because the man was seen carrying a child in the vicinity of apartment 5a at just about the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted.
That is a matter for the police to investigate, and also a matter for police timing as to when to release the e-fit.
The e-fit had been in the possession of both British and Portuguese police some years before the release of the e-fit
Why do you think the McCanns should have gainsaid the police?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 15, 2013, 05:54:20 PM
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 06:06:27 PM
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
crucially the statement did not say when they handed the e-fits over. Indeed the ST article says they were handed over when SY requested them.
The fact they handed them over is not the point. It's why they held them back and why they handed them over when they were asked.
Given the serious implications of the ST's article if it was untrue then a more firm and strongly worded denial would be issued and no doubt swift legal action would have been instigated and publicised to combat the inference of the article.
Bearing in mind SY know all the facts it's hard to deny something that's true with the yard watching.
Which is why they haven't of course.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on December 15, 2013, 06:06:59 PM
It was of course Mitchell providing a man with two heads response and indeed it's also a standard modus operandi of all spin doctors in general. Put your name to things you have to say to the media but then go unnamed as a source to say the things you want to say unofficially.
It's a well used Mitchell tactic throughout the case. Here's another example where he does it:
Yes and it's also interesting that Redwood in the above article speaks of work going on in creating pan-European investigative teams for this case, within a supporting legal framework.
Things are moving very, very slowly on this case, whether by circumstance or by design.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 06:11:56 PM
crucially the statement did not say when they handed the e-fits over. Indeed the ST article says they were handed over when SY requested them.
The fact they handed them over is not the point. It's why they held them back and why they handed them over when they were asked.
Given the serious implications of the ST's article if it was untrue then a more firm and strongly worded denial would be issued and no doubt swift legal action would have been instigated and publicised to combat the inference of the article.
Bearing in mind SY know all the facts it's hard to deny something that's true with the yard watching.
Which is why they haven't of course.
It's why they held them back and why
It's poor debating form to state an uncorroborated assertion as if "fact", then pose all sorts of questions based on said uncorroborated "fact".
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 06:14:54 PM
crucially the statement did not say when they handed the e-fits over. Indeed the ST article says they were handed over when SY requested them.
The fact they handed them over is not the point. It's why they held them back and why they handed them over when they were asked.
Given the serious implications of the ST's article if it was untrue then a more firm and strongly worded denial would be issued and no doubt swift legal action would have been instigated and publicised to combat the inference of the article.
Bearing in mind SY know all the facts it's hard to deny something that's true with the yard watching.
Which is why they haven't of course.
the fact that the article has been withdrawn indicates to me it is inaccurate
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 06:31:52 PM
the fact that the article has been withdrawn indicates to me it is inaccurate
No that isn't how newspapers work. If an article is inaccurate or untrue then they print an apology and a retraction/correction in the newspaper. If that is not satisfactory then legal action is taken.
You yourself quote a court case the ST lost as a result of a story.
So why hasn't the ST apologised and printed a retraction or why haven't the McCann's publicly stated their desire to take legal action against the ST?
The fact you can't find the article online may be because it is behind their paywall.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2013, 06:53:29 PM
No that isn't how newspapers work. If an article is inaccurate or untrue then they print an apology and a correction in the newspaper. If that is not satisfactory then legal action is taken.
You yourself quote a court case the ST lost as a result of a story.
So why hasn't the ST apologised and printed a retraction or why haven't the McCann's publicly stated their desire to take legal action against the ST?
The fact you can't find the article online may be because it is behind their paywall.
I think you are totally wrong...do you have any evidence for what you say
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 06:56:11 PM
Oh but I do but you can't agree with the glaring truth as it doesn't fit in with your pre conceived ideas and beliefs.
Once agin:
ST article criticising parents Limp response not denying the allegations from Mitchell No correction or retraction from the ST No actual or threatened legal action against the ST
All equal ST article being true.
Now I know that's an uncomfortable truth for you but that is the truth of the matter given the above facts.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 07:01:23 PM
I think you are totally wrong...do you have any evidence for what you say
Yes. The evidence is there has been no retraction formally in the ST. The evidence is there has been no actual denial by Mitchell. The evidence is Mitchell has not threatened nor launched legal action against the ST.
That's all the evidence you should need.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 07:03:18 PM
Yes. The evidence is there has been no retraction formally in the ST. The evidence is there has been no actual denial by Mitchell. The evidence is Mitchell has not threatened nor launched legal action against the ST.
That's all the evidence you should need.
The fact that it has been removed is all the evidence I need...shows there is something not right...all the other articles are still there...why only that one removed
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 07:08:00 PM
The fact that it has been removed is all the evidence I need...shows there is something not right...all the other articles are still there...why only that one removed
I repeat it has not been retracted in print or online.
No corrections or apologies have been printed in the paper or online.
So you may think that but you would be wrong.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 07:34:26 PM
The corroboration actually came from Exton. He was forced into confidentiality by the threat of the McCanns lawyers. SY recently requested the report from him. Why would SY request this if they already had it?
So Albertini is quite correct in stating the fact they handed them over is not the point. It is accepted by both sides that SY are in possession of the e-fits.
Albertini's questions.....
Why did they hold the e-fits back? Why did they hand them over when asked?
Firstly they held them back because the report they originated from was hypercritical of them. Secondly it seems as though it was Exton who handed them over when asked. Not the McCanns.
It seems to me as though the McCanns preferred to keep these e-fits hidden because of the accompanying hypercritical report. Perhaps when SY learned of the e-fits they assured the McCanns their main interest was the e-fits and not the content of the report?
Exton almost certainly made a meal of standard confidentiality clauses in any work of this kind.
And despite the confidentiality clauses, Exton spilled, to The Times.
Why is that?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 07:38:55 PM
So why haven't we heard of the parents disgust at his so called libel like we had with amaral? Why hasn't Mitchell come out and stated the parents are considering legal action? Why didn't we get a more strongly worded denial from the parents in the original article or since.
The only proof that the article is wrong would be with either a formal retraction in the paper or the launching of legal action.
What is there to consider to delay action? It's either correct or incorrect and can easily be proven one way or the other by the McCann's confirming with demonstrable evidence exactly when they received the efits and when they passed them on to SY.
If they could prove it then the ST would swiftly issue a formal retraction and no doubt given the implications from an incorrect article pay a donation to the fund.
None forthcoming = you are wrong I'm afraid.
if a libel action is planned there will be no prior comments...it is the only recent article re the McCannns that has been removed..do you really believe that is just a coincidence
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 07:39:32 PM
Exton almost certainly made a meal of standard confidentiality clauses in any work of this kind.
And despite the confidentiality clauses, Exton spilled, to The Times.
Why is that?
You are asking the wrong questions I'm afraid. The real question is why having paid for the report and the efits would the McCann's refuse to release them to the public, like all their other efits, which could help them find their daughter?
Again the uncomfortable truth can only be that the McCanns value protecting their own reputations over and above dong everything in their power to find their daughter.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 07:44:34 PM
if a libel action is planned there will be no prior comments...it is the only recent article re the McCannns that has been removed..do you really believe that is just a coincidence
What like they kept quiet about suing Amaral?
Quote
Daily Telegraph
Kate and Gerry McCann threaten legal action over Madeleine book
Kate and Gerry McCann have threatened legal action over the publication of an explosive account of the investigation into their daughter's disappearance by the former detective in charge of the case.
By Fiona Govan in Lisbon 8:59PM BST 23 Jul 2008
Goncalo Amaral, who led the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance until he was sacked last October, has chosen to speak out about the case within days of it being shelved and the parents cleared of any involvement.
In the book, which will appear in bookshops across Portugal on Thursday, the detective reveals details of first five months of the investigation and presents his theories on what happened to the girl who disappeared shortly before her fourth birthday from a holiday apartment in the Algarve.
The McCanns, both 40, were said to be appalled at the contents of the book after excerpts were leaked to Portuguese newspapers and preparing to sue.
Mr Amaral, 48, also criticises elements of the probe, including contamination of the crime scene at a very early stage by his own officers.
"Gerry and Kate are going to sue over this book," said a source close to the family.
The book reveals intimate details about the life of the couple in the days after their daughter's disappearance.
Clarence Mitchell, the family's spokesman, said: "People should bear in mind that Amaral is a discredited former police officer who was removed from the case for criticising Leicestershire police.
"His own Attorney General ... on Monday, made it very clear there is absolutely no proof that any criminal offence was committed by Kate or Gerry."
He accused the detective of shamelessly attempting to cash in on Madeleine's plight.
"Amaral is seeking to make money out of Madeleine's situation and is seeking publicity – it's quite disgusting," he said admitting that legal advice had been taken.
"The libel lawyers who are representing Kate and Gerry and their friends are assessing every word of this book very closely, and they will not hesitate from taking legal action against Amaral if any passage requires it."
The former chief inspector, who retired from the force earlier this month following criticism over the way he handled the case, explained his motivation to write the book.
"I feel the time has come to restore my reputation after it was publicly sullied and I had no recourse within the institution that is the Policia Judiciaria," he wrote in an author's statement released with the book.
"I also want to contribute to finding out the truth and seek justice for Madeleine," he added.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 15, 2013, 07:46:15 PM
The real question is why having paid for the report and the efits would the McCann's refuse to release them to the public, like all their other efits, which could help them find their daughter?
Again the uncomfortable truth can only be that the McCanns value protecting their own reputations over and above dong everything in their power to find their daughter.
Uncomfortable is the right word, as their reputation is intact.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 07:47:41 PM
You are asking the wrong questions I'm afraid. The real question is why having paid for the report and the efits would the McCann's refuse to release them to the public, like all their other efits, which could help them find their daughter?
Again the uncomfortable truth can only be that the McCanns value protecting their own reputations over and above dong everything in their power to find their daughter.
You are ignoring answers already provided.
The decision to publish the efits was the police's, not the McCanns.
I will repeat a question you have ignored.
Would you be crucifying the McCanns for, themselves and independently, releasing efits actually in the possession of the police, but not released by them?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 07:51:45 PM
if you look at the date..they didn't sue amaral for a year. You can put your head in the sand and ignore the fact that this is the only article re the McCanns to have been removed ...to me thats significant
Forget how long it took them to sue amaral you stated:
Quote
if a libel action is planned there will be no prior comments..
Yet that is precisely what they stated in relation to Amaral.
Once again until a retraction is printed or legal action is threatened or announced he story remains accurate.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 07:54:03 PM
So why haven't we heard of the parents disgust at his so called libel like we had with amaral? Why hasn't Mitchell come out and stated the parents are considering legal action? Why didn't we get a more strongly worded denial from the parents in the original article or since.
The only proof that the article is wrong would be with either a formal retraction in the paper or the launching of legal action.
What is there to consider to delay action? It's either correct or incorrect and can easily be proven one way or the other by the McCann's confirming with demonstrable evidence exactly when they received the efits and when they passed them on to SY.
If they could prove it then the ST would swiftly issue a formal retraction and no doubt given the implications from an incorrect article pay a donation to the fund.
None forthcoming = you are wrong I'm afraid.
Its a newspaper article, which makes some claims but only tells part of a 'story'.
On the other hand I'm sure SY will have known ALL the related facts on that subject for a long time - and that's all that matters IMO.
IIRC when it was announced the PJ would be re-opening the case the McCanns said they would not be commenting on it. Doesn't their FB page say the McCanns won't be commenting on rumours and speculation (or words to that effect)?
If all the above is correct then why is anyone surprised that they haven't commented on it?
It's just a newspaper article written by a couple of reporters with less than impeccable histories and with the aim of selling lots of newspapers, not a statement from SY or the PT team.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 08:03:35 PM
The decision to publish the efits was the police's, not the McCanns.
Correct. But the uncorrected/unretracted article clearly states that the police had to get them from Exton, and the McCann's could have released them at anytime from 2008 BEFORE the Yard began their review and investigation but chose not to, simply because the report was "hypercritical" of the McCanns.
Would you be crucifying the McCanns for, themselves and independently, releasing efits actually in the possession of the police, but not released by them?
That question is not relevant given the McCann's had them before the yard investigation. They should have released them when they first received them in 2008.
I'm not crucifying them I'm saying they have placed their reputations above the search for their daughter.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 08:10:47 PM
Portuguese police hunting for Madeleine McCann’s kidnapper are not “pulling their weight,” a source close her parents said yesterday.
Fears that tension between the country’s Policia Judiciara and Scotland Yard is mounting comes as Britain’s top cop called on the two forces to unite in a joint investigation.
The Met Police’s Bernard Hogan-Howe’s plea is “a polite but public expression of frustration", Kate and Gerry McCann’s close pal believes.
The source added: “They can’t see this ever happening else it would have happened six and a half years ago!
“It seems the PJ are not pulling their weight and are almost working against the Met!
“If Mr Hogan-Howe is at pains to stress that both investigations should run jointly, and not in parallel, it shows his frustration that the present system to find Madeleine and whoever took her is not working.”
The source added: “There are two separate agendas here. The Met recently showed on Crimewatch images of a white suspect they are looking for.
“Just two or three days later the PJ say they are hunting for a black tractor driver! It is completely contradictory to what the Met are saying!
“It seems obvious to us that the PJ are back to their old game, which is not helping the search for Madeleine.”
Heart specialist Gerry and former GP wife Kate, both 45, of Rothley, Leics, declined to comment while the police inquiry is ingoing.
Their spokesperson Clarence Mitchell said: “How the investigations are run is entirely a matter for both police forces to agree themselves.”
Maddie was aged nearly four when she vanished from a holiday apartment in Portugal’s Praia da Luz in May 2007.
Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-portuguese-police-algarve-2859874#ixzz2nZmqXwZq Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 08:11:58 PM
Correct. But the uncorrected/unretracted article clearly states that the police had to get them from Exton, and the McCann's could have released them at anytime from 2008 BEFORE the Yard began their review and investigation but chose not to, simply because the report was "hypercritical" of the McCanns.
That question is not relevant given the McCann's had them before the yard investigation. They should have released them when they first received them in 2008.
I'm not crucifying them I'm saying they have placed their reputations above the search for their daughter.
The article now on the Times site, written by Domonic Kenedy, says no such thing.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 08:13:32 PM
Correct. But the uncorrected/unretracted article clearly states that the police had to get them from Exton, and the McCann's could have released them at anytime from 2008 BEFORE the Yard began their review and investigation but chose not to, simply because the report was "hypercritical" of the McCanns.
That question is not relevant given the McCann's had them before the yard investigation. They should have released them when they first received them in 2008.
I'm not crucifying them I'm saying they have placed their reputations above the search for their daughter.
Did the article say that?
Or did the Article quote Exton as saying that?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 08:14:36 PM
But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 08:20:16 PM
Its a newspaper article, which makes some claims but only tells part of a 'story'.
On the other hand I'm sure SY will have known ALL the related facts on that subject for a long time - and that's all that matters IMO.
IIRC when it was announced the PJ would be re-opening the case the McCanns said they would not be commenting on it. Doesn't their FB page say the McCanns won't be commenting on rumours and speculation (or words to that effect)?
If all the above is correct then why is anyone surprised that they haven't commented on it?
It's just a newspaper article written by a couple of reporters with less than impeccable histories and with the aim of selling lots of newspapers, not a statement from SY or the PT team.
No, Benice, it was a lot more significant than that. That was the first critical article in over five years.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 08:24:50 PM
To use one of your oft used phrases "you don't understand" how newspapers work. You cannot withdraw something that has been printed on paper.
You can only retract or correct in a later printed edition.
That has not happened.
Why is that?
never said the printed article had been withdrawn...I was talking about online...as you are quite aware as you suggested it may be hidden behind a paywall...printed articles are not behind paywalls
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 08:41:28 PM
never said the printed article had been withdrawn...I was talking about online...as you are quite aware as you suggested it may be hidden behind a paywall...printed articles are not behind paywalls
I was quoting about the paywall in reply to your point about the online article. I'm saying that the article if incorrect would be both removed from the web with an apology and would be formally retracted in the print edition with an apology.
Why hasn't that happened in the print edition?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 15, 2013, 08:43:27 PM
I was quoting about the paywall in reply to your point about the online article. I'm saying that the article if incorrect would be both removed from the web with an apology and would be formally retracted in the print edition with an apology.
Why hasn't that happened in the print edition?
Here is the one (and only) article The Times now has about the efits, written by Dominic Kennedy:
Dominic Kennedy Last updated at 12:01AM, October 28 2013 Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed. The e-fits were produced by a private detective agency hired by Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry. The investigators based their pictures on a description provided by an Irish holidaymaker in Praia da Luz, Portugal, where Madeleine vanished shortly before her fourth birthday in 2007. The Irishman’s account was overlooked at the time because it clashed with an earlier sighting by Jane Tanner, one of the McCanns’ dining companions. Scotland Yard has now established that Ms Tanner’s description appeared to match an innocent holidaymaker who had been collecting his child from a crèche. The e-fits were produced as part of an unpublished report by the private detective agency Oakley International that has been seen by The Sunday Times. They were finally broadcast on a Crimewatch programme this month, attracting 1,000 telephone calls and e-mails, some naming the same man. One of the Oakley investigators told The Sunday Times: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme. It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things. And those e-fits you saw on Crimewatch were ours.” The McCanns declined to renew Oakley International’s £500,000 contract in 2008 after suggestions that it was too expensive. The firm’s founder, Kevin Halligen, was alleged to have failed to pass money to an investigator on the McCanns’ case, although he denies this. This summer Halligen was jailed for 41 months by a US judge for an unrelated multimillion-dollar fraud. Nonetheless, Oakley’s e-fits have now become the centrepiece of Scotland Yard’s investigation. The Oakley report deduced that a sighting of Madeleine by Martin Smith from Drogheda, Co Louth, was credible. Mr Smith, returning to his apartment in Praia da Luz about 9.50pm, saw a British-looking man carrying a motionless, barefoot girl in pyjamas. Madeleine was noted to be missing by her mother at 10pm. The Oakley investigation concluded that an over-emphasis had been given to Ms Tanner’s account. She described seeing a man about 9.15pm. There was a potential difficulty with Mr Smith’s version. He estimated that he was 60 to 80 per cent certain that the man he saw was Mr McCann. Mr McCann’s movements for that time have been established: he was seen by witnesses to be in a tapas restaurant. Mr Smith’s suggestion that he might have seen Mr McCann carrying Madeleine shortly before her disappearance was seized on by Gonçalo Amaral, the Portuguese detective leading the search. The McCanns are suing Mr Amaral for alleging in a book that they might have faked their daughter’s abduction. An Oakley source told The Sunday Times that the Find Madeleine fund’s lawyers had required the report to remain confidential. The Portuguese authorities formally cleared the McCanns and have just reopened their investigation. The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month’s publication. Scotland Yard said yesterday: “Where we have been able to make massive steps forward is by drawing together all the material gathered to date and reviewing it as a whole.” • The Sun claimed yesterday that the e-fits resembled the Scottish paedophiles Charles O’Neill and William Lauchlan. Both are serving life sentences for murdering a woman to prevent her from reporting them for child abuse. At the time of Madeleine’s disappearance they were living in Spain and using false passports. Leicestershire police questioned them about Madeleine in jail in 2011
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 08:46:52 PM
Here is the one (and only) article The Times now has about the efits, written by Dominic Kennedy:
Dominic Kennedy Last updated at 12:01AM, October 28 2013 Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed. The e-fits were produced by a private detective agency hired by Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry. The investigators based their pictures on a description provided by an Irish holidaymaker in Praia da Luz, Portugal, where Madeleine vanished shortly before her fourth birthday in 2007. The Irishman’s account was overlooked at the time because it clashed with an earlier sighting by Jane Tanner, one of the McCanns’ dining companions. Scotland Yard has now established that Ms Tanner’s description appeared to match an innocent holidaymaker who had been collecting his child from a crèche. The e-fits were produced as part of an unpublished report by the private detective agency Oakley International that has been seen by The Sunday Times. They were finally broadcast on a Crimewatch programme this month, attracting 1,000 telephone calls and e-mails, some naming the same man. One of the Oakley investigators told The Sunday Times: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme. It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things. And those e-fits you saw on Crimewatch were ours.” The McCanns declined to renew Oakley International’s £500,000 contract in 2008 after suggestions that it was too expensive. The firm’s founder, Kevin Halligen, was alleged to have failed to pass money to an investigator on the McCanns’ case, although he denies this. This summer Halligen was jailed for 41 months by a US judge for an unrelated multimillion-dollar fraud. Nonetheless, Oakley’s e-fits have now become the centrepiece of Scotland Yard’s investigation. The Oakley report deduced that a sighting of Madeleine by Martin Smith from Drogheda, Co Louth, was credible. Mr Smith, returning to his apartment in Praia da Luz about 9.50pm, saw a British-looking man carrying a motionless, barefoot girl in pyjamas. Madeleine was noted to be missing by her mother at 10pm. The Oakley investigation concluded that an over-emphasis had been given to Ms Tanner’s account. She described seeing a man about 9.15pm. There was a potential difficulty with Mr Smith’s version. He estimated that he was 60 to 80 per cent certain that the man he saw was Mr McCann. Mr McCann’s movements for that time have been established: he was seen by witnesses to be in a tapas restaurant. Mr Smith’s suggestion that he might have seen Mr McCann carrying Madeleine shortly before her disappearance was seized on by Gonçalo Amaral, the Portuguese detective leading the search. The McCanns are suing Mr Amaral for alleging in a book that they might have faked their daughter’s abduction. An Oakley source told The Sunday Times that the Find Madeleine fund’s lawyers had required the report to remain confidential. The Portuguese authorities formally cleared the McCanns and have just reopened their investigation. The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month’s publication. Scotland Yard said yesterday: “Where we have been able to make massive steps forward is by drawing together all the material gathered to date and reviewing it as a whole.” • The Sun claimed yesterday that the e-fits resembled the Scottish paedophiles Charles O’Neill and William Lauchlan. Both are serving life sentences for murdering a woman to prevent her from reporting them for child abuse. At the time of Madeleine’s disappearance they were living in Spain and using false passports. Leicestershire police questioned them about Madeleine in jail in 2011
There you are...highlighted in red
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 08:48:14 PM
I'm asking the official admission from he ST that heir article was incorrect.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 08:48:21 PM
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month’s publication
From the sunday times...so which is correct
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 08:49:38 PM
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month’s publication
From the sunday times...so which is correct
No that's from the Times not the Sunday Times (different journalists) and the source of the given years ago was one Clarence Mitchell! The claim it was passed to the Pj was then denied by the PJ.
Quote
" Instead, detectives are now focusing their efforts on a second man seen carrying a child towards the beach just minutes before Kate McCann went to check on Madeleine. An Irishman, Martin Smith, and his wife reported seeing him at the time. Their e-fits, which have only now been released, were originally produced by a private detective agency which was hired by the McCanns in 2008 when they became dissatisfied with the Portuguese police inquiry. At the time, though, it was not published, partly because Portuguese detectives thought the other theory more viable, and partly because Mr Smith himself said he thought the man he had seen looked like Gerry McCann, whom several other witnesses had already said had been at the restaurant table at that point. Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 09:40:00 PM
No that's from the Times not the Sunday Times (different journalists) and the source of the given years ago was one Clarence Mitchell! The claim it was passed to the Pj was then denied by the PJ.
Its whatever you want to believe ..if any...just don't treat any of them as 100% true...we just don't know
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 09:42:58 PM
I repeat again you cannot pull a print article. If the subjects accused by the article have been wronged by said article a simple removal of an online article does not denote a retraction.
If there is no official retraction then the newspaper stands by its article.
If it were true that the McCann's gave the yard and the pj the efits years ago why didn't the McCann's response in the original ST article state that?
That was the perfect riposte to it. Yet they didn't, why could that be?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 09:45:40 PM
I repeat again you cannot pull a print article. If the subjects accused by the article have been wronged by said article a simple removal of an online article does not denote a retraction.
If there is no official retraction then the newspaper stands by its article.
If it were true that the McCann's gave the yard and the pj the efits years ago why didn't the McCann's response in the original ST article state that?
That was the perfect riposte to it. Yet they didn't, why could that be?
I was referring to the online article as you well know re your comment about the paywall
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 09:47:16 PM
Its whatever you want to believe ..if any...just don't treat any of them as 100% true...we just don't know
If there was a formal retraction I would accept that it was incorrect. The fact it hasn't been retracted given the McCann's litigious nature and carter ruck Rottweilers indicates it was indeed true.
Do you hand on heart believe given the way the McCann's have sued in the past they wouldn't sue now for something as damaging to their reputation as this?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 09:48:53 PM
I was referring to the online article as you well know re your comment about the paywall
And I'm saying if they were retracting the story they would have to do so witn both print and digital versions. They haven't so they must be standing by their story.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 09:51:31 PM
And I'm saying if they were retracting the story they would have to do so witn both print and digital versions. They haven't so they must be standing by their story.
you can say what you like..its just your opinion
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 10:00:55 PM
No. It is a fact the article has not been retracted. It's contents stand until such time as an official retraction is printed in both digital and online versions.
I hope this clarifies the situation for you.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 10:02:26 PM
No. It is a fact the article has not been retracted. It's contents stand until such time as an official retraction is printed in both digital and online versions.
I hope this clarifies the situation for you.
the situation was clear to me a week ago ..its you who refuses to accept reality...my last post on the subject...your posts are getting boring
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 15, 2013, 10:15:42 PM
This exchange shows an interesting point. Debate on this forum is futile. No one accepts anything or changes their mind despite overwhelming evidence. The article has been removed from the online edition..its afact...but your head in the sand attitude cant and wont accept it.
I thought your last post was the last on the subject? lol obviously not!
I could say exactly the same about you. An article not being on a website where it was does not equate to the story being untrue.
The only way an article can be accepted as being wrong is if a formal retraction is printed. No formal retraction has ever been made. That means the article stands.
Why can't you accept that?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2013, 10:21:03 PM
I thought your last post was the last on the subject? lol obviously not!
I could say exactly the same about you. An article not being on a website where it was does not equate to the story being untrue.
The only way an article can be accepted as being wrong is if a formal retraction is printed. No formal retraction has ever been made. That means the article stands.
Why can't you accept that?
So we can accept that the expresss article re the satellite photos is correct...unless they print a retraction ...oh dear
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 15, 2013, 11:50:35 PM
They are no longer suspects,which part of that can you not get a grip of. 8-)(--)
Not currently being a suspect is a long way from being exonerated. Barry George is no longer a suspect and he hasn't been exonerated since they would have to pay him £millions if he was.
They can still be made a suspect at any time. Have you ever heard any police officer say they are innocent??
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 16, 2013, 12:37:16 AM
crucially the statement did not say when they handed the e-fits over. Indeed the ST article says they were handed over when SY requested them.
The fact they handed them over is not the point. It's why they held them back and why they handed them over when they were asked.
Given the serious implications of the ST's article if it was untrue then a more firm and strongly worded denial would be issued and no doubt swift legal action would have been instigated and publicised to combat the inference of the article.
Bearing in mind SY know all the facts it's hard to deny something that's true with the yard watching.
Which is why they haven't of course.
Exactly right...Like rabbits caught in the main beam of a cars headlights if you get my meaning. @)(++(*
I read an interesting comment on the new investigators board about Dave Edgar and his claim that Tannerman was really Tannerwoman. I bet he wished he had kept his mouth shut now.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 16, 2013, 07:36:11 AM
No that's from the Times not the Sunday Times (different journalists) and the source of the given years ago was one Clarence Mitchell! The claim it was passed to the Pj was then denied by the PJ.
The same article appears in bothThe Times and The Sunday Times
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 16, 2013, 08:25:17 AM
Probably because the report that he produced 5 years ago contained e-fits that are now considered a breakthrough in the case. Probably because he's been bound and gagged for 5 years by a confidentiality agreement forced upon him by the McCanns lawyers that has done nothing but hinder the search for Madeleine. Probably because he's got a damn good reason to expose the McCanns selfishness in gagging him.
I'd say there's a few good reasons there. What's your take on it?
Plain fact is that the e-fit was not released before the Crimewatch programme because there needed to be the context of an official police enquiry to release it.
Now there is one and the efit has been released.
If the Portuguese officials had agreed to re-open the investigation sooner, the e-fit would have been released sooner.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2013, 08:29:56 AM
Plain fact is that the e-fit was not released before the Crimewatch programme because there needed to be the context of an official police enquiry to release it.
Now there is one and the efit has been released.
If the Portuguese officials had agreed to re-open the investigation sooner, the e-fit would have been released sooner.
Context ???
Madeleiene was missing.
What bigger context do you need ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 16, 2013, 08:33:09 AM
Plain fact is that the e-fit was not released before the Crimewatch programme because there needed to be the context of an official police enquiry to release it.
Now there is one and the efit has been released.
If the Portuguese officials had agreed to re-open the investigation sooner, the e-fit would have been released sooner.
So why did there need to be "the context of an investigation" for this e-fit but not for all ones released since the original investigation closed?
Whats the difference with this one and what's the point of asking for donations to a fund supposedly set up to help find your daughter if you are not going to use the information those funds provided to help find your daughter?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 16, 2013, 08:42:09 AM
So why did there need to be "the context of an investigation" for this e-fit but not for all ones released since the original investigation closed?
Whats the difference with this one and what's the point of asking for donations to a fund supposedly set up to help find your daughter if you are not going to use the information those funds provided to help find your daughter?
You never did answer my question. Given that the efits have long been in the possession of the police, would you have crucified the McCanns for releasing the e-fits, independently and apart from the police, of their own volition, of a man seen carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a, at just about the time Madeleine was abducted?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 16, 2013, 08:42:48 AM
The same article appears in bothThe Times and The Sunday Times
Not in print it doesn't. The two articles, and the one you refer is to dated one day after the Sunday Times article on 28th October (i.e a Monday) was from the Times.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 16, 2013, 08:44:32 AM
You never did answer my question. Given that the efits have long been in the possession of the police, would you have crucified the McCanns for releasing the e-fits, independently and apart from the police, of their own volition, of a man seen carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a, at just about the time Madeleine was abducted?
Your question is invalid. It has nothing to do with the unretracted Sunday Times article.
The McCann's had the e-fits BEFORE the police investigation was reopened and didn't release them. That's the point you don't seem to want to acknowledge.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 16, 2013, 08:50:47 AM
Your question is invalid. It has nothing to do with the unretracted Sunday Times article.
The McCann's had the e-fits BEFORE the police investigation was reopened and didn't release them. That's the point you don't seem to want to acknowledge.
Apart from a police enquiry the McCanns had no business, authority or remit to release the efit especially given that the e-fit was in police hands -- both British and Portuguese.
The McCanns did all they legally or reasonably could by passing the efit onto police
And no my question is not irrelevant.
And yes, the original Sunday Times article has been retracted.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 16, 2013, 08:55:14 AM
More like the police than the police - new tactics in hunt for Madeleine
McCanns employ rhetoric and methodology of authorities as they unveil drawing of suspect, writes MARTYN McLAUGHLIN
IT HAD all the features of an official police press conference: a solemn appeal for sightings, delivered with detective-speak phrases such as "eliminating suspects in the investigation".
However, the man standing behind the lectern was not a senior policeman but a PR consultant hired by a family determined to find answers even if it means going it alone.
Eight months on from the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the private-investigation team sanctioned by her parents is increasingly employing the rhetoric and methodology of the police.
Yesterday, in what Kate and Gerry McCann hope will spark a breakthrough, the couple's official spokesman released, for the first time, an image of a suspect to the media and public.
The distribution of the artist's impression, created by Melissa Little, an FBI-accredited police artist hired by the McCann team, spoke volumes not only about the family's resolve, but their frustration with the official investigation.
The language of Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' public face, was unequivocal as he addressed the media from a lectern in a London hotel. "Who is he? Where is he? What, if any, is his connection to Madeleine's disappearance?" he said. "If he is innocent, we want him to come forward for his own sake so he can be ruled out. We believe this man could be linked to Madeleine's disappearance."
One former senior officer with Strathclyde Police suggested the family's approach was designed to keep public interest in the case buoyant, but said they may still have to rely on the resources of the police.
He said: "The language and the presentation that are being used imitate the police thanks to their PR people. They know that's a good way to catch the public's eye. It's an authoritative approach and it captures people's attention. I don't think there's any real policing expertise, though.
"I'd say it's highly unlikely they have anywhere near the resources of an active policing force. The parents don't know how to conduct an investigation and they're dependent on people they are hiring, who, in some cases, may not be best suited for the job. I think, as time goes on, it's unlikely they will find any new information on their own, outside of the chance someone will respond to this kind of public appeal."
In any case, it appears Mr Mitchell's tactics yesterday were borne largely out of dissatisfaction at the apparent impotency and silence of the Portuguese police, though he was careful not to cast aspersions: "We're not going to criticise the police in any form – they have got a difficult enough job. It seems drawings of this sort are not done as a matter of course in Portugal."
Nonetheless, the private investigation now appears to be regarded by the McCanns as their best hope of tracing their daughter. Having secured the image of the suspect, their team has now drawn up an action plan for how they want the investigation to proceed.
Firstly, they want a worldwide search, co-ordinated by a central phone number manned by their private-detective agency to identify and locate the man in the sketches. All information would be passed on to the Portuguese police.
Secondly, they want a full review of all police records and witness statements, including one taken from a 12-year-old girl who reported sightings of a strange man in the Portuguese resort in May last year.
Thirdly, Mr Mitchell called for complete cooperation between the Portuguese police, Interpol and the authorities in Spain, Morocco and Britain.
With tension between the McCanns and the Portuguese police still evident, the latter demand may not be straightforward. Worse still, they appear to be getting little return on the 50,000 a month being paid out to Metodo 3, the Barcelona-based private-detective agency.
'DISTURBING' MAN IS NEW SUSPECT
THE new suspect in the case of Madeleine McCann's disappearance was spotted by a holidaymaker three times walking around the complex where the four-year-old was last seen.
The sketch was based on an interview with Gail Cooper, a grandmother from Nottinghamshire, who originally gave a statement to police in May last year.
Mrs Cooper described seeing an olive-skinned man with collar-length scraggly hair acting suspiciously on a number of occasions.
On 20 April, Mrs Cooper said, she saw the man walking by himself in heavy rain on the deserted beach at Praia da Luz. Later the same afternoon, Mrs Cooper said she received a visit from the same man, whom she described as "disturbing".
Two days later, Mrs Cooper saw the same man hanging around a children's outing to the beach organised by the Mark Warner resort.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 16, 2013, 08:57:35 AM
Apart from a police enquiry the McCanns had no business, authority or remit to release the efit especially given that the e-fit was in police hands -- both British and Portuguese.
So why did they release, say, the Victoria Beckham likeness in 2009? Then there was no police investigation open but they still released it, why?
The McCanns did all they legally or reasonably could by passing the efit onto police
Only when asked for it though and not when they first had it in 2009. Indeed the article states the Yard had to get it form the authors NOT the McCann's.
And yes, the original Sunday Times article has been retracted.
Great please provide either a link online on the corrections page of the Sunday Times or point me to a print edition with a formally printed retraction.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 16, 2013, 09:09:21 AM
So why did they release, say, the Victoria Beckham likeness in 2009? Then there was no police investigation open but they still released it, why?
Only when asked for it though and not when they first had it in 2009. Indeed the article states the Yard had to get it form the authors NOT the McCann's.
Yes it is.
Great please provide either a link online on the corrections page of the Sunday Times or point me to a print edition with a formally printed retraction.
One way of wriggling out of difficult questions you can't answer is to dismiss them as 'irrelevant'. But it's scarcely proper debating.
And like it or not, the original Times article has been pulled.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Benice on December 16, 2013, 09:35:16 AM
So why did they release, say, the Victoria Beckham likeness in 2009? Then there was no police investigation open but they still released it, why?
Only when asked for it though and not when they first had it in 2009. Indeed the article states the Yard had to get it form the authors NOT the McCann's.
Yes it is.
Great please provide either a link online on the corrections page of the Sunday Times or point me to a print edition with a formally printed retraction.
If you are claiming it was not retracted and the contents are true then why are people ignoring this statement from it:-
Quote The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month's publication. Unquote
Surely that clearly contradicts the claim that the McCanns suppressed the Efits.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 16, 2013, 09:39:11 AM
One way of wriggling out of difficult questions you can't answer is to dismiss them as 'irrelevant'. But it's scarcely proper debating.
And like it or not, the original Times article has been pulled.
No not at all. Your questions relies on the premise that the McCann's handed over the e-fits. This was not stated in the Sunday Times article.
It was actually only stated by Clarence Mitchell in relation to a Telegraph article some 8 days prior to the Sunday Times one.
Interestingly Mitchell chose not to use the same quotes about giving the e-fits in in response to the Sunday Times article some 8 days later.
Why do you think that is?
In relation to the article being "pulled" please read the last few pages until you understand the difference between an article online not being in its original location and a formal retraction.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 16, 2013, 09:44:28 AM
If you are claiming it was not retracted and the contents are true then why are people ignoring this statement from it:-
Quote The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month's publication. Unquote
Surely that clearly contradicts the claim that the McCanns suppressed the Efits.
I'm not ignoring anything from the original ST article.
That line you refer to was in the Times article the following day using the quote from Mitchell from some days previously to an article in the Telegraph.
the PJ flatly denied that they had been passed them, as per Redblossom's link to the C4 article.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 16, 2013, 12:56:44 PM
How the police came by the e-fits i obviously irrelevant.
Hogwash! It is not irrelevant if the e-fits were suppressed by the McCann's and the Yard had to request them from Exton. It is of significant relevance.
Timing of when to release them was obviously the Police's call -- and specifically the Portuguese police's call as the lead force in the investigation.
The Yard could only release them when they had them. The ST article was unequivocal in stating the Yard had to ask for them from Exton.
Quote
The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.
He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.
“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.
And that leads on to another question. Why say they wanted to give precedence to Tanner's sighting when the documentary gave the impression it was the same man?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 16, 2013, 01:46:38 PM
Thursday 6 August 2009
A "Victoria Beckham lookalike" is being sought by private detectives searching for Madeleine McCann, who disappeared from her family's holiday apartment in Portugal in May 2007.
An efit of the woman was released today at a London press conference by a family spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, and David Edgar, the retired detective who now leads the search for the girl.
The McCann team said they would be liaising with British, Australian and Spanish police over the new information.
The Portuguese police say they have closed the case.
I'm not ignoring anything from the original ST article.
That line you refer to was in the Times article the following day using the quote from Mitchell from some days previously to an article in the Telegraph.
the PJ flatly denied that they had been passed them, as per Redblossom's link to the C4 article.
I'm not ignoring anything from the original ST article.
You should!
It was pulled because it was wrong.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 16, 2013, 02:05:01 PM
And that leads on to another question. Why say they wanted to give precedence to Tanner's sighting when the documentary gave the impression it was the same man?
8((()*/ They'll have a job spinning that one, Albertini.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Moderator on December 16, 2013, 03:00:53 PM
References to the McCanns being 'exonerated' have been removed since they are false. The current SY official position is that the McCanns are neither persons of interest or suspects. This of course can change as the investigation proceeds. How many times has history shown us to expect the unexpected? Take nothing for granted.
There is a very big difference between not being a suspect and being exonerated as has already been pointed out. (Ref to Barry George and the Jill Dando unsolved murder case).
For those who haven't already seen the articles.
19 Oct - The Telegraph article. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html
27 Oct - The Sunday Times article (online version subsequently removed) http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258
28 Oct - The Times article http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273561.html#p273561
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2013, 03:23:01 PM
Where is your proof "It was pulled because it was wrong."
Cite please.
It is no longer there...and I predicted when it first appeared that I expected it to be removed...why we don't know but it seems odd that no other articles have been removed re the McCanns
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Jean-Pierre on December 16, 2013, 03:58:39 PM
Of course the McCanns have not been exonerated.
In order to be exonerated, it would first be necessary for them to be in a position from which exoneration is possible.
As far as I know, the McCanns have not been arrested, charged or convicted of anything at all. It is therefore not possible for them to be exonerated.
Now - that was easy, wasn't it.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: lizzibif on December 16, 2013, 04:10:10 PM
In order to be exonerated, it would first be necessary for them to be in a position from which exoneration is possible.
As far as I know, the McCanns have not been arrested, charged or convicted of anything at all. It is therefore not possible for them to be exonerated.
Now - that was easy, wasn't it.
Nope. Mr Mod is not talking about exoneration from arrest, charges or convictions. That isn't what he said nor what the final archiving report said either.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2013, 04:50:54 PM
What's there to challenge when a known fact has been posted..
How many times have we heard ...they have not been cleared
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 16, 2013, 05:00:53 PM
Everyone knows by now that Kate & Gerry had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in their daughters disappearance.
It's obvious by now that the true culprit is any number of blonde haired German men or other interchangeable suspects (preferably dead) but most definitely not Kate & Gerry.
... inappropriate allegation against two dead men removed ...
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 16, 2013, 05:52:57 PM
Everyone knows by now that Kate & Gerry had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in their daughters disappearance.
... inappropriate allegation against two dead men removed ...
Well, so far, and after nearly seven years of one of the most public cases in history, and investigations by two police forces (as well as a lot of armchair detectives), nobody has come up with any credible evidence of the involvement of Madeleine's parents in her disappearance. Neither have they been arrested, charged or convicted.
Of course this will not come as news to the dwindling band of "[ censored word]" who will continue their increasingly futile bleating.
So whilst it is possible that as yet undicovered evidence may yet point to her parents, as things stand it seems that the finger of suspicion must point elsewhere.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 16, 2013, 06:01:27 PM
Well, so far, and after nearly seven years of one of the most public cases in history, and investigations by two police forces (as well as a lot of armchair detectives), nobody has come up with any credible evidence of the involvement of Madeleine's parents in her disappearance. Neither have they been arrested, charged or convicted.
Of course this will not come as news to the dwindling band of "[ censored word]" who will continue their increasingly futile bleating.
So whilst it is possible that as yet undicovered evidence may yet point to her parents, as things stand it seems that the finger of suspicion must point elsewhere.
But where? There really is nothing to point anywhere else, either.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Jean-Pierre on December 16, 2013, 06:07:31 PM
But where? There really is nothing to point anywhere else, either.
That is for the police.
I am sure that, under the circumstances, no member of this forum would wish to add to her parents anguish by continuing to "point the finger of suspicion" at them, without some actual credible evidence.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2013, 06:07:56 PM
Well, so far, and after nearly seven years of one of the most public cases in history, and investigations by two police forces (as well as a lot of armchair detectives), nobody has come up with any credible evidence of the involvement of Madeleine's parents in her disappearance. Neither have they been arrested, charged or convicted.
Of course this will not come as news to the dwindling band of "[ censored word]" who will continue their increasingly futile bleating.
So whilst it is possible that as yet undicovered evidence may yet point to her parents, as things stand it seems that the finger of suspicion must point elsewhere.
'Dwindling band of [ censored word]'.
As an apologist for the Mccanns you should know better than that.
Perhaps when you go out in the real world and inform people of the facts of the case, not counting the whitewash which was the crimewatch program, why don't you you explain to your acquaintances, no evidence of abduction has been found which stands up, and of course explain to those people what the Mccanns did in the first place, when they left their children unsupervised, night after night, in an unlocked apartment, whilst they wined and dined.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 16, 2013, 06:09:42 PM
I am sure that, under the circumstances, no member of this forum would wish to add to her parents anguish by continuing to "point the finger of suspicion" at them, without some actual credible evidence.
I don't point the finger of suspicion at Kate & Gerry . I just reckon it was them.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 16, 2013, 06:11:38 PM
I am sure that, under the circumstances, no member of this forum would wish to add to her parents anguish by continuing to "point the finger of suspicion" at them, without some actual credible evidence.
That is true, but until the issue is resolved, those suspicions will remain.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Jean-Pierre on December 16, 2013, 06:16:09 PM
As an apologist for the Mccanns you should know better than that.
Perhaps when you go out in the real world and inform people of the facts of the case, not counting the whitewash which was the crimewatch program, why don't you you explain to your acquaintances, no evidence of abduction has been found which stands up, and of course explain to those people what the Mccanns did in the first place, when they left their children unsupervised, night after night, in an unlocked apartment, whilst they wined and dined.
How nice to hear from you again Stephen. It is regrettable that the policeman originally charged with investigating Madeleine's disappearance failed to consider properly the possibility of abduction, and therefore did not bother to inestigate properly (if you dont believe me, have a look at his woeful "documentary").
And was seemingly more interested in lining his pockets.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 16, 2013, 06:18:13 PM
I am sure that, under the circumstances, no member of this forum would wish to add to her parents anguish by continuing to "point the finger of suspicion" at them, without some actual credible evidence.
The police just offered us a "prime suspect" that an army of journalists, commentators, TV show hosts, private detectives, libel lawyers - and Madeleine's parents - had hitherto almost completely ignored.
That suggests to us the police really know nothing.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2013, 06:20:20 PM
How nice to hear from you again Stephen. It is regrettable that the policeman originally charged with investigating Madeleine's disappearance failed to consider properly the possibility of abduction, and therefore did not bother to inestigate properly (if you dont believe me, have a look at his woeful "documentary").
And was seemingly more interested in lining his pockets.
There was an investigation with no indication of abduction.
Only inconsistent accounts of events from the witness statements.
As to making money, what monies have Amaral and the Mccanns made from Madeleine's disappearance ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 16, 2013, 06:27:46 PM
Well, so far, and after nearly seven years of one of the most public cases in history, and investigations by two police forces (as well as a lot of armchair detectives), nobody has come up with any credible evidence of the involvement of Madeleine's parents in her disappearance. Neither have they been arrested, charged or convicted.
Of course this will not come as news to the dwindling band of "[ censored word]" who will continue their increasingly futile bleating.
So whilst it is possible that as yet undicovered evidence may yet point to her parents, as things stand it seems that the finger of suspicion must point elsewhere.
In the context of this particular thread the 'finger of suspicion' is very firmly pointed at the McCanns
They have been accused by a British broad sheet of suppressing information that Scotland Yard have deemed crucial to the investigation into the disappearance of their child
It is a very serious charge, which they have yet to deny
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2013, 06:52:41 PM
In the context of this particular thread the 'finger of suspicion' is very firmly pointed at the McCanns
They have been accused by a British broad sheet of suppressing information that Scotland Yard have deemed crucial to the investigation into the disappearance of their child
It is a very serious charge, which they have yet to deny
And the broadsheet has withdrawn the article
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Redblossom on December 16, 2013, 07:21:01 PM
The Sunday Times bombshell can never be whitewashed away...not by other journos with damage limitation exercises trying to rewrite history by just writing text with no sources or proof, and not by internet posters, it is what it is and was and remains so.....
thats IMO
8**8:/:
If it was pulled from online IMO the only reason is that the ST quoted and precied the contents of the confidential Oakley report too much...and some lawyers shenanigans clanged it......but thats what investigative journalists do, they give scoops and exposes of the truth....the Sunday Times is well known and respected in this field....
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 16, 2013, 08:03:07 PM
It seems the two journos who wrote the story are well known for telling lies...as for bombshell..it has had no effect whatsoever...its just that as the McCanns are now in the clear posters with your agenda are desperate for any snippet to try and point guilt back at them...It hasn't worked
The articles were just the icing on the cake davel. It's plain to every journalist in the land the 10pm sighting was almost completely ignored from the moment it hit the UK papers in January 08.
You'll have noticed I'm sure that the papers lost interest in the e-fits and Redwood's "prime suspect" in about three days I think.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2013, 08:33:28 PM
The articles were just the icing on the cake davel. It's plain to every journalist in the land the 10pm sighting was almost completely ignored from the moment it hit the UK papers in January 08.
You'll have noticed I'm sure that the papers lost interest in the e-fits and Redwood's "prime suspect" in about three days I think.
the article has been completely ignored apart from a few forums
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Redblossom on December 16, 2013, 08:59:31 PM
The articles were just the icing on the cake davel. It's plain to every journalist in the land the 10pm sighting was almost completely ignored from the moment it hit the UK papers in January 08.
You'll have noticed I'm sure that the papers lost interest in the e-fits and Redwood's "prime suspect" in about three days I think.
Bit of a grand old mess isnt it....oh dear, oh well, and thats that!
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 16, 2013, 09:09:02 PM
I am sure that, under the circumstances, no member of this forum would wish to add to her parents anguish by continuing to "point the finger of suspicion" at them, without some actual credible evidence.
Nobody bothers to "point the finger of suspicion" at the McCanns. What for ? People bother though to "point the finger of questioning" at the crime that their daughter was victim of. What happened to her ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 11:07:44 AM
In order to be exonerated, it would first be necessary for them to be in a position from which exoneration is possible.
As far as I know, the McCanns have not been arrested, charged or convicted of anything at all. It is therefore not possible for them to be exonerated.
Now - that was easy, wasn't it.
Well, firstly, the fact that the McCanns have never been arrested, charged, or convicted of any crime presents a fallacy of presumption ... it presumes that, ergo, the McCanns must be innocent and there is no other option to consider
In fact, we know, there are many guilty people who have never been 'arrested, charged, or convicted' for the crimes they commited
Additionally, the McCanns are in a position where exoneration is necessary .... the investigation into the disappearance of their child was shelved with the possibility that she died as a result of neglectful homicide being left on the table by the Portuguese Prosecutor
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 12:04:40 PM
Well, firstly, the fact that the McCanns have never been arrested, charged, or convicted of any crime presents a fallacy of presumption ... it presumes that, ergo, the McCanns must be innocent and there is no other option to consider
Absence of charges (or arrest) combined with examination of the facts of the investigation establish the innocence of the McCanns.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 12:06:16 PM
I take it your assumption is based on the times article being correct? In that case perhaps we should be discussing SY's incompetence in requesting items that were already in their possession?
That is the pulled article which was pulled because it was wrong.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 17, 2013, 12:16:25 PM
I'm not sure whether that is supposed to be funny?
You made an unsubstantiated statement about something that wasn't in the article being the reason why the article had been taken off the online ST, so did I. Work it out.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 12:22:34 PM
You made an unsubstantiated statement about something that wasn't in the article being the reason why the article had been taken off the online ST, so did I. Work it out.
My statement was truthful
Your statement was a failed attempt to be funny
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 17, 2013, 12:27:54 PM
Well, firstly, the fact that the McCanns have never been arrested, charged, or convicted of any crime presents a fallacy of presumption ... it presumes that, ergo, the McCanns must be innocent and there is no other option to consider
Absence of charges (or arrest) combined with examination of the facts of the investigation establish the innocence of the McCanns.
I don't see that it does any such thing. It is a subjective decision that you have made - others may not.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 17, 2013, 12:31:49 PM
In what way was the ST article wrong and in what way does the times article prove this?
The original article was wrong because it failed to state that the efits were in the possession of both Portuguese and British police for several years before the crimewatch programme.
So the efits if they were "suppressed" at all, were suppressed by the British and Portuguese police.
More particularly by the Portuguese police, I would say, as the lead force in the investigation.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 12:48:54 PM
The original article was wrong because it failed to state that the efits were in the possession of both Portuguese and British police for several years before the crimewatch programme.
So the efits if they were "suppressed" at all, were suppressed by the British and Portuguese police.
More particularly by the Portuguese police, I would say, as the lead force in the investigation.
Why do you keep propagating such falsehoods?
It has been shown on this board, that the only source for the claim the PJ & SY had the e-fits was taken from a quote Clarence Mitchell gave to the Telegraph approximately 9 days before the Sunday Times article.
The PJ categorically denied they had received the e-fits (as per the C4 news link Redblossom provided) and SY have never confirmed they received them earlier either.
Interestingly Mitchell did not use the same line in the more detailed ST Insight report. If Mitchell's claim in the Telegraph was true why did he not use it in the ST article?
You must either provide some evidence to back up your assertion or cease stating something as fact you cannot justify.
This continued spamming of the forum with your version, completely unsupported, of the truth, with no basis in fact, is becoming tedious.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 17, 2013, 12:58:08 PM
The (original) Sunday Times article is no longer on line
Why did they pull it?
The original print article has not been withdrawn, retracted or corrected.
You are making a mockery of yourself here. You are asking why they pulled it. No one knows. Therefore to state as fact it was pulled because it was wrong, when you have no evidence to back it up, just makes you look well silly.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 01:00:43 PM
It has been shown on this board, that the only source for the claim the PJ & SY had the e-fits was taken from a quote Clarence Mitchell gave to the Telegraph approximately 9 days before the Sunday Times article.
The PJ categorically denied they had received the e-fits (as per the C4 news link Redblossom provided) and SY have never confirmed they received them earlier either.
Interestingly Mitchell did not use the same line in the more detailed Insight report. If Mitchell's claim in the Telegraph was true why did he not use it in the SY article?
You must either provide some evidence to back up your assertion or cease stating something as fact you cannot justify.
This continued spamming of the forum with your version, completely unsupported, of the truth, with no basis in fact, is becoming tedious.
Perhaps you would like to give a link from The Times site to the original Times article?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 01:01:39 PM
Perhaps you would like to give a link from The Times site to the original Times article?
No, this just won't do.
Your obsfucation is really irritating. No one is saying the article is in its original location.
That's not the point, and you know it.
The point at hand is your assertion as fact it was removed "BECAUSE IT WAS WRONG".
You do not have proof to state that as fact you should cease to do so otherwise your continued wumming over this will be reported to the Moderation team.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 17, 2013, 01:06:26 PM
Question for Ferryman:
If the online article was removed "because it was wrong" why has the ST NOT printed an official retraction for the online or more importantly the print version of the paper?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: ferryman on December 17, 2013, 01:08:47 PM
The original print article has not been withdrawn, retracted or corrected.
You are making a mockery of yourself here. You are asking why they pulled it. No one knows. Therefore to state as fact it was pulled because it was wrong, when you have no evidence to back it up, just makes you look well silly.
The original print article was in print.
What appears in transient copy can't be 'removed'.
What appears on line can be and has been.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 17, 2013, 01:13:02 PM
What appears in transient copy can't be 'removed'.
What appears on line can be and has been.
So have you not heard of newspaper correction pages and in print formal apologies / retractions for incorrect articles which is a pre-requisite when a newspaper admits its story was incorrect?
Of course you have heard of those, you just want to ignore them because it doesn't support your own view. Now that's fine you can ignore what you want and believe whatever you want as a consequence, but just because you cling to such a deluded opinion does not mean you can attempt to pass it off as fact on here.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 17, 2013, 01:26:57 PM
The Guardian also stated the efits were done in 2008.
Channel 4. 7pm News 15th October.
"These are 2 e-fits of the same man. A man who may hold the key to Madeleine McCanns disappearance."
"They've been shut away in a private investigation file for 5 years."
"They were compiled from 2 witness accounts on the night Madeleine disappeared, but never handed over to the Portuguese investigation. Now British police are treating them with the utmost importance"
The Sunday Times article was published on 27th October.
Where could Channel 4 have got that information from before the ST published that article?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 03:20:09 PM
"A UK Met Police spokesman said yesterday any withholding of the report was “not an issue for us” because they were not investigating the case at the time."
SHAME ON YOU SCOTLAND YARD!
I would also say that is sufficient confirmation the e-fits were witheld.
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
its not me its from an article in the telegraph
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 17, 2013, 03:28:16 PM
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
its not me its from an article in the telegraph
The source close to the investigation being who? The known spin person they contracted for 70k to deplete all the real news in favour of constructed lies?!
So, the Met had the "important" e-fits, that could help find a live child and yet they chose to sit on them for 2 years?!!!!
At least the PJ final report was more inclined for a death than for an abduction, so time was not so important, but the Scotland Yard assumingly is looking for an abducted child that can be alive - what justifies it siding the suppression of information for 2 years?!
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Lyall on December 17, 2013, 03:35:45 PM
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
its not me its from an article in the telegraph
That's probably the same man speaking who held up other efits in front of the cameras on at least two occasions.
So why those but not the 10pm sighting ones? >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on December 17, 2013, 03:37:14 PM
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
its not me its from an article in the telegraph
It's actually from 'one source close to the McCann investigation'
Who is that then ? ... Clarence Mitchell ? ... and why brief anonymously if the claim is true ?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 03:40:16 PM
It's actually from 'one source close to the McCann investigation'
Who is that then ? ... Clarence Mitchell ? ... and why brief anonymously if the claim is true ?
Its in a well respected newspaper so it has about as much credibility as the article in the times that started this thread. When you want to take your "facts" from newspaper articles then the conclusions you reach may be totally false.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 03:42:22 PM
The source close to the investigation being who? The known spin person they contracted for 70k to deplete all the real news in favour of constructed lies?!
So, the Met had the "important" e-fits, that could help find a live child and yet they chose to sit on them for 2 years?!!!!
At least the PJ final report was more inclined for a death than for an abduction, so time was not so important, but the Scotland Yard assumingly is looking for an abducted child that can be alive - what justifies it siding the suppression of information for 2 years?!
it looks like you need to ask the pj why it was supressed
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Benice on December 17, 2013, 03:45:33 PM
That's probably the same man speaking who held up other efits in front of the cameras on at least two occasions.
So why those but not the 10pm sighting ones? >@@(*&)
There is no probability about it. Mitchell is their spokesperson, so any quote emanating from the McCann's or a source close to the McCann's comes from Mitchell.
Note his two headed approach, often in the same article or piece, where he gives an on the record quote to say the dignified bit, but then gives a quote as "a source close" to the Mccann's to lay the boot in.
Just like he did in that piece about the PJ not co-operating with SY.
Utterly odious.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 03:51:42 PM
It's actually from 'one source close to the McCann investigation'
Who is that then ? ... Clarence Mitchell ? ... and why brief anonymously if the claim is true ?
Dead simple. That was a known lie by Mitchell as the PJ attested. Yet had he put his official name to it then that kind of lie can come back to bite him on the backside.
By quoting off the record as a "source" he has deniability when the brown stuff hits the fan. See my previous post.
It is thoroughly manipulative and repulsive paid lying.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 03:54:39 PM
Dead simple. That was a known lie by Mitchell as the PJ attested. Yet had he put his official name to it then that kind of lie can come back to bite him on the backside.
By quoting off the record as a "source" he has deniability when the brown stuff hits the fan. See my previous post.
It is thoroughly manipulative and repulsive paid lying.
Whers your source for the pj officially denied it
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 17, 2013, 03:55:33 PM
Its in a well respected newspaper so it has about as much credibility as the article in the times that started this thread. When you want to take your "facts" from newspaper articles then the conclusions you reach may be totally false.
"These are 2 e-fits of the same man. A man who may hold the key to Madeleine McCanns disappearance. They've been shut away in a private investigation file for 5 years.
They were compiled from 2 witness accounts on the night Madeleine disappeared, but never handed over to the Portuguese investigation. Now British police are treating them with the utmost importance"
And then after the efits were released the Portuguese investigation reopened because a dead black guy with a fear of employment tribunals might have snatched Maddie.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 04:03:37 PM
There is no probability about it. Mitchell is their spokesperson, so any quote emanating from the McCann's or a source close to the McCann's comes from Mitchell.Note his two headed approach, often in the same article or piece, where he gives an on the record quote to say the dignified bit, but then gives a quote as "a source close" to the Mccann's to lay the boot in.
Just like he did in that piece about the PJ not co-operating with SY.
Utterly odious.
Pure speculation. There are numerous people who can be described as 'close to the McCanns'
Any time the word 'source' is used in an article - I immediately question its credibility. It's a common ploy often used to bulk out articles with material for which they have no real source.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Luz on December 17, 2013, 04:10:10 PM
"These are 2 e-fits of the same man. A man who may hold the key to Madeleine McCanns disappearance. They've been shut away in a private investigation file for 5 years.
They were compiled from 2 witness accounts on the night Madeleine disappeared, but never handed over to the Portuguese investigation. Now British police are treating them with the utmost importance"
And then after the efits were released the Portuguese investigation reopened because a dead black guy with a fear of employment tribunals might have snatched Maddie.
It's amazing isn't it?! Five years. And the McCann want us to believe that their daughter is alive when they couldn't care to have that report investigated!
The PJ doesn't have to deny anything, it's common knowledge that the McCann, from the start, contracted PIs to attempt to divert the official police investigation. The only information they gave to the PJ were e-mails from cucoo psychics.
The insinuation that the McCann gave this report or/and e-fits to the PJ is the same sort of strategy (it is in the same BS category) used by their portuguese lawyer after the first trial against Amaral, when she implied there were 195 sightings that had not been investigated. Then, like now, nobody ever heard about those allegations again...Liar, liar, pants on fire.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 17, 2013, 04:10:28 PM
but we know amaral does because it has been proved in court
You have to learn to read, in my opinion.
However the question is "WHY DID THE MCCANN REJECT (I would use, hide) Henri Exton's expertise?
In my opinion, for the same reason they rejected to respond questions (K.McCann), help with a re-enactment or, most important of all, intervene in July 2008, to keep the investigation open. They needed to keep the investigation closed in order to escape their responsibility in their daughter's disappearance.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 17, 2013, 04:17:07 PM
I didn't say the PJ officially denied it in terms of making an statement.
If you check the C4 News youtube video from the 14th October Simon Israel of C4 news states categorically they were not handed over to the PJ.
Where do you think he got that information from?
Please note that comment was made some 2 weeks before the ST article was published.
On the 19th the Telepgraph followed it up and Mitchell placed his lie out there but under an unnamed source close to the McCann's.
Then it was swiftly dropped as the unofficial or official response in the ST piece.
Why do you think that is?
Your exact words...Or given the PJ offically denied it......then you go on to say that you didn't say this...seeing as you accuse others of lying perhaps you should look at the truthfulness of your own statements...
So the pj haven't officially denied it..fact
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 04:21:03 PM
It's amazing isn't it?! Five years. And the McCann want us to believe that their daughter is alive when they couldn't care to have that report investigated!
The PJ doesn't have to deny anything, it's common knowledge that the McCann, from the start, contracted PIs to attempt to divert the official police investigation. The only information they gave to the PJ were e-mails from cucoo psychics.
The insinuation that the McCann gave this report or/and e-fits to the PJ is the same sort of strategy (it is in the same BS category) used by their portuguese lawyer after the first trial against Amaral, when she implied there were 195 sightings that had not been investigated. Then, like now, nobody ever heard about those allegations again...Liar, liar, pants on fire.
Could you please support that statement?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Luz on December 17, 2013, 04:22:52 PM
It's amazing isn't it?! Five years. And the McCann want us to believe that their daughter is alive when they couldn't care to have that report investigated!
The PJ doesn't have to deny anything, it's common knowledge that the McCann, from the start, contracted PIs to attempt to divert the official police investigation. The only information they gave to the PJ were e-mails from cucoo psychics.
The insinuation that the McCann gave this report or/and e-fits to the PJ is the same sort of strategy (it is in the same BS category) used by their portuguese lawyer after the first trial against Amaral, when she implied there were 195 sightings that had not been investigated. Then, like now, nobody ever heard about those allegations again...Liar, liar, pants on fire.
What a libellous post!
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Luz on December 17, 2013, 04:23:49 PM
perhaps you should apologise to Mitchell when in fact it was you who wasn't telling the truth
Nope not at all.
It has been stated and not withdrawn the efits were not handed over to the PJ before the ST article came out.
Where did Simon Israel of C4 news get this information from? In order to state they were not given to the PJ the PJ must have confirmed to him that they did not receive them. Correct?
Otherwise he has made it up.
Are you accusing him of making it up DaveL?
Why would he say that on TV if it was not true?
If as a journalist you state "they were never passed onto the PJ" you must have received that information from the people you claim haven't received them?
agree?
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 04:25:59 PM
It has been stated and not withdrawn the efits were not handed over to the PJ before the ST article came out.
Where did Simon Israel of C4 news get this information from? In order to state they were not given to the PJ the PJ must have confirmed to him that they did not receive them. Correct?
Otherwsie he has made it up.
Are you accusing him of making it yup DaveL?
Why would he say that on TV if it was not true?
If as a journalist you state "they were never passed onto the PJ" you must have received that information from the people you claim haven't received them?
agree?
Do you have a link because you have stated something that isn't true so I cant really trust anything you say
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Albertini on December 17, 2013, 04:28:18 PM
I wouldn't even bother asking ...they just seem to post what they like and call it the "truth"
Why should I respond to you people that never support your own statements?! Do your own home work. There is plenty of information (objective) in http://www.mccannfiles.com (http://www.mccannfiles.com)
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Luz on December 17, 2013, 04:31:44 PM
There is no probability about it. Mitchell is their spokesperson, so any quote emanating from the McCann's or a source close to the McCann's comes from Mitchell.
Note his two headed approach, often in the same article or piece, where he gives an on the record quote to say the dignified bit, but then gives a quote as "a source close" to the Mccann's to lay the boot in.
Just like he did in that piece about the PJ not co-operating with SY.
Utterly odious.
Yes, this 'media monitoring' is a cynical business isn't it ? ... little wonder that the so-called spin doctors are universally despised, even within their own circles
I wonder what Sclotland Yard makes of it though ( assuming the anonymously sourced quote is untrue )
The reason I ask is that I am reminded of what Matt Tapp ( police media adviser ) said on the Dispatches programme
When refering to the frenzied media speculation surrounding the McCann case, he noted that secrecy laws preventing comment by Portuguese police hampered the case
He stressed how important it was for the media to be given as much accurate information as possible and that it was crucial for the police to speak to the media in order to provide background information
The importance lay, he advised, in the need to ensure the media's approach was focussed, and in line with the investigation ... otherwise, in his words, "The media can be extremely disruptive"
That being the case, I imagine Scotland Yard are not best pleased when 'sources close to the McCanns' feed information to the media that may confuse or muddy the waters
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Luz on December 17, 2013, 04:37:50 PM
It's my conviction that something is not well in the McCann kingdom. After the CW, that I didn't watch and so won't discuss, it seems the alleged relationship between the parents and the SY has suffered a terminal shut down.
It's quite revealing that the donations button in their Ltd Company homepage has been down for quite a while now.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 04:41:18 PM
A respected journalist on C4 has stated the PJ didn't receive them on the 14th October, 2 weeks before the ST article. How does that make it not true?
Here is your link:
I repeat..is this your idea of an"official " statement..Where did the reporter get this information from....it carries no more wight than any other statement re the efits
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 04:45:43 PM
It's my conviction that something is not well in the McCann kingdom. After the CW, that I didn't watch and so won't discuss, it seems the alleged relationship between the parents and the SY has suffered a terminal shut down.
It's quite revealing that the donations button in their Ltd Company homepage has been down for quite a while now.
its your conviction that amaral has been officially cleared which is rubbish...so we take your convictions with a pinch of salt
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 04:49:31 PM
There has been no official statement re the efits either from the pj ...sy...or the mccanns...until there is then all you have is conflicting stories from the media which you decide to accept or reject according to your prejudices
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Luz on December 17, 2013, 04:49:49 PM
I repeat..is this your idea of an"official " statement..Where did the reporter get this information from....it carries no more wight than any other statement re the efits
You have a point there.
But then you have also to accept that the information that the "source close to the McCann" gave about their alleged submission of the Exton report to the PJ has no substance.
I recall that the portuguese General Attorney said that any new relevant evidence would re-open the investigation - if they had sent that report, for sure it would had been considered (not by the PJ, it's not the police that decides, but by the Public Ministry).
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2013, 04:52:23 PM
But then you have also to accept that the information that the "source close to the McCann" gave about their alleged submission of the Exton report to the PJ has no substance.
I recall that the portuguese General Attorney said that any new relevant evidence would re-open the investigation - if they had sent that report, for sure it would had been considered (not by the PJ, it's not the police that decides, but by the Public Ministry).
perhaps it was sent direct to the public ministry...none of us know
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Luz on December 17, 2013, 04:54:16 PM
According to a source close to the McCanns, SY received the report and e-fits 2 years ago http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
According to a source close to the McCanns, the PJ received the report "at the time" which presumably means when the report was completed in 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
The e-fits were produced in 2008 by the McCanns own investigators after becoming dissatisfied with the PJ investigation. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
The PJ ignored it because they thought Tannerman more viable http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html) Even though the PJ denied having the e-fits in the first place http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w21mREDqtI&feature=youtube_gdata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w21mREDqtI&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
The McCanns who were dissatisfied with PJ investigation (who at the time favoured Tannerman) also favoured Tannerman so set the lawyers on the Oakley investigators to keep the e-fits under wraps via a confidentiality agreement http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273561.html#p273561 (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273561.html#p273561) or http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258 (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258)
Once SY opened their own investigation in 2011 they needed to ask permission of the McCanns to get copies of the report http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258 (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258)
Once SY realised the importance of the e-fits 2 years after going to all that trouble to get them in the first place, the McCanns decided to blame the PJ for doing nothing with them. The irony being they themselves had placed a confidentiality agreement on them "at the time" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
Who's to blame?
1.SY for doing nothing for 2 years? 2.The PJ for having the confidentiality bound e-fits since 2008 (which they have denied). 3.The McCanns for wasting donated funds on a report, they then wasted more donated funds on suppressing? 4. Crimewatch for not making a programme in 2011 to launch the e-fits (this ones for Ferryman)
Thank you for that nicely assembled evidence of this charade.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Carana on December 17, 2013, 05:01:38 PM
According to a source close to the McCanns, SY received the report and e-fits 2 years ago http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
According to a source close to the McCanns, the PJ received the report "at the time" which presumably means when the report was completed in 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
The e-fits were produced in 2008 by the McCanns own investigators after becoming dissatisfied with the PJ investigation. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
The PJ ignored it because they thought Tannerman more viable http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html) Even though the PJ denied having the e-fits in the first place http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w21mREDqtI&feature=youtube_gdata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w21mREDqtI&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
The McCanns who were dissatisfied with PJ investigation (who at the time favoured Tannerman) also favoured Tannerman so set the lawyers on the Oakley investigators to keep the e-fits under wraps via a confidentiality agreement http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273561.html#p273561 (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273561.html#p273561) or http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258 (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258)
Once SY opened their own investigation in 2011 they needed to ask permission of the McCanns to get copies of the report http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258 (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post273258.html#p273258)
Once SY realised the importance of the e-fits 2 years after going to all that trouble to get them in the first place, the McCanns decided to blame the PJ for doing nothing with them. The irony being they themselves had placed a confidentiality agreement on them "at the time" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html)
Who's to blame?
1.SY for doing nothing for 2 years? 2.The PJ for having the confidentiality bound e-fits since 2008 (which they have denied). 3.The McCanns for wasting donated funds on a report, they then wasted more donated funds on suppressing? 4. Crimewatch for not making a programme in 2011 to launch the e-fits (this ones for Ferryman)
?{)(** All this "charade", as Luz says, for 2 disparate e-fits supposed to represent the same person!
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 17, 2013, 05:13:18 PM
If you insist....start by revisiting http://www.anorak.co.uk/178458/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-quiet-metodo-3-christmas-with-the-mccanns-and-michaela-walczuch-says.html/ (http://www.anorak.co.uk/178458/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-quiet-metodo-3-christmas-with-the-mccanns-and-michaela-walczuch-says.html/)
and http://www.anorak.co.uk/178412/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-francsico-marco-hopes-god-wills-and-bridget-o%E2%80%99donnell-tells.html/ (http://www.anorak.co.uk/178412/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-francsico-marco-hopes-god-wills-and-bridget-o%E2%80%99donnell-tells.html/), plenty of craxxy references there.
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: jassi on December 17, 2013, 05:31:51 PM
If you insist....start by revisiting http://www.anorak.co.uk/178458/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-quiet-metodo-3-christmas-with-the-mccanns-and-michaela-walczuch-says.html/ (http://www.anorak.co.uk/178458/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-quiet-metodo-3-christmas-with-the-mccanns-and-michaela-walczuch-says.html/)
and http://www.anorak.co.uk/178412/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-francsico-marco-hopes-god-wills-and-bridget-o%E2%80%99donnell-tells.html/ (http://www.anorak.co.uk/178412/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-francsico-marco-hopes-god-wills-and-bridget-o%E2%80%99donnell-tells.html/), plenty of craxxy references there.
I found Anorak's analysis to be quite illuminating at the time.
I'm aware of the media frenzy. I even posted the links here to a documentary of (what I find to be) an excellent analysis of it.
ETA: Links to the documentary are here: http://madeleinemccannthetruth.wordpress.com/2011/08/24/al-jazeera-the-mccanns-v-the-media-may-2008/
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 17, 2013, 05:48:55 PM
Wasn't it also respected UK journalist Keir Simmons who told us Robert Murat would be suing Jane Tanner?
Aren't the articles written by journalist s called stories
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: icabodcrane on May 27, 2014, 03:45:22 PM
I am ressurecting this thread in light of the news that Kevin Halligen is to appear on a TV programme next week to 'give his side of the story'
Something I've been wondering about is whether perhaps it was Henri Exton who uncovered the existence of 'innocent man' ( the father walking home from the creche who Jane Tanner had almost certainly seen )
Exton, in his report to the McCanns, was insistent that Jane's sighting of an 'abductor' was unreliable ... could it be that he already knew who the man in question probably was ? ( creche man )
It's those pyjamas Redwood aired on Crimewatch that have got me thinking
If it was Scotland Yard who tracked him down then how unlikely is it that the parents would still have had the pj's their two year old had been wearing seven years ago ?
Could it be that it was Henri Exton who had spoken to the innocent father years ago and had pictured the PJ's in question. It was only ten months after the event remember, and very likely that those pj's would still be avaiable as evidence
Could it be that Scotland Yard were relaying what Henri Exton had uncovered regarding the innocent father, in the same way they were relaying what he had uncovered regarding Smithman ?
Just a thought
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 27, 2014, 04:54:49 PM
I am ressurecting this thread in light of the news that Kevin Halligen is to appear on a TV programme next week to 'give his side of the story'
Something I've been wondering about is whether perhaps it was Henri Exton who uncovered the existence of 'innocent man' ( the father walking home from the creche who Jane Tanner had almost certainly seen )
Exton, in his report to the McCanns, was insistent that Jane's sighting of an 'abductor' was unreliable ... could it be that he already knew who the man in question probably was ? ( creche man )
It's those pyjamas Redwood aired on Crimewatch that have got me thinking
If it was Scotland Yard who tracked him down then how unlikely is it that the parents would still have had the pj's their two year old had been wearing seven years ago ?
Could it be that it was Henri Exton who had spoken to the innocent father years ago and had pictured the PJ's in question. It was only ten months after the event remember, and very likely that those pj's would still be avaiable as evidence
Could it be that Scotland Yard were relaying what Henri Exton had uncovered regarding the innocent father, in the same way they were relaying what he had uncovered regarding Smithman ?
Just a thought
Bungling police had 'prime suspect' details for 6 years without realising.
The innocent dad came forward in 2007 but mistakenly remained the focus of the hunt until this year when SY detectives tracked him down.
Bungling police had the details of the “main suspect” in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann for SIX YEARS without realising.
The innocent dad came forward in 2007 to say he was the person seen carrying a child in Portugal at the time the three-year-old vanished.
But the information was overlooked and the British holidaymaker remained the main focus of the hunt until this year when Scotland Yard detectives finally tracked him down.
The revelation will be a blow to Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry, as they endure a seventh Christmas without their oldest daughter.
The unnamed dad – spotted in the Praia da Luz resort by McCann family friend Jane Tanner at 9.15pm – was among a number of British witnesses who completed questionnaires for Leicestershire police six years ago.
He is understood to have provided a detailed description of his movements on the night, including the fact he had picked up his own two-year-old daughter from a crèche close to where Madeleine vanished.
But his ‘alibi’ was only looked at this year.
A source said: “He had been clear then that he had picked her up at around the time of the sighting but for whatever reason he was not eliminated as a suspect. The fact the details of the prime suspect have been known all along doesn’t look good.”
Following Madeleine’s disappearance, Leicestershire police were responsible for collating all UK-based inquiries at the request of the Portuguese authorities.
It is not clear if the questionnaires were analysed by the British force or simply forwarded to Portugal.
Ms Tanner, a close friend of Kate and Gerry, previously told officers that she saw the dark-haired man carrying away a child wearing pink floral pyjamas at 9.15pm on May 3, 2007.
One of the so-called “Tapas Seven”, she had been dining with the McCanns in a nearby restaurant when their daughter went missing.
Her sighting meant that from 2007 onwards, Portuguese and British police presumed any abduction most probably took place between 8.30pm, when the McCanns went to dinner, and 9.15pm.
The realisation that it was a false lead has shifted detectives’ focus on to a later sighting at 10pm when an Irish family reported seeing a man walking towards the beach carrying a blonde girl in pyjamas.
The revelation was described by DCI Andy Redwood, the Met officer leading the new investigation called Operation Grange, as a “revelation moment” when it was finally made by his team.
DCI Redwood said in October: “Our focus in terms of understanding what happened on the night of May 3 has now given us a shift of emphasis. We are almost certain that the man seen by Jane Tanner is not Madeleine’s abductor.
“It takes us through to a position at 10pm when we see another man who is walking towards the ocean, close by to the apartment, with a young child in his arms.”
The innocent dad agreed to be pictured in the clothes he wore in Praia da Luz at the time to prove he was the man in the police sketch previously seen as key to cracking the case.
His two-year-old’s pink pyjamas, which were described by Ms Tanner, were also brought to Scotland Yard to help prove his innocence.
The new prime suspect was spotted by Martin Smith from Drogheda, Co Louth, as he returned to his apartment in Praia da Luz about 9.50pm.
He saw a British-looking man carrying a motionless, barefoot girl in pyjamas. Madeleine was noted to be missing by Kate at 10pm.
The Smith family provided two efit images of the man more than five years ago. However, the sighting was viewed as too late to be significant because of Ms Tanner’s sighting– which is why the efits were only released publicly in a Crimewatch appeal broadcast in October.
Detectives from Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange said they received an “overwhelming response” from viewers.
The programme featured a new reconstruction of the hours leading up to the three-year-old’s abduction.
In a statement, Kate and Gerry said at the time: “We are absolutely delighted with the overwhelming public response to Crimewatch. We know that the public desperately want to help the search for Madeleine. We are genuinely hopeful that one or more of these responses will lead to a major breakthrough in the investigation.”
They added: “If anyone was in Praia da Luz around the time of Madeleine’s abduction and has not spoken to the Metropolitan Police, or if they know who any of the Efits might be, please have the courage to come forward and speak to the police in confidence.”
More than 1,000 people have come forward with fresh information and several named the same man as the prime suspect.
Leicestershire Police yesterday refused to comment on the latest revelations.
A spokeswoman said: “The disappearance of Madeleine McCann is being investigated by the Metropolitan Police and it would be inappropriate for us to comment.”
A Scotland Yard spokesman said: “We are not giving a running commentary.”
A spokesman for the McCann’s last night declined to comment saying it is “a matter for Operation Grange.”
Title: Re: Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?
Post by: John on May 28, 2014, 08:24:29 PM
Could it have been private investigators Oakley who kept the pyjamas and not crècheman? Those PJ's look far too tattered to be something which parents would just happen to keep.