Has Scotland Yard dodged a bullet in the Maddie case?

[Snowgirl]

 Iirc  OG 's remit was to  review  wasn't it  ,  not to interview the McCanns .
Isn't this the reason  they're saying they havn't? 

[Mr Gray]

Iirc  OG 's remit was to  review  wasn't it  ,  not to interview the McCanns .
Isn't this the reason  they're saying they havn't?

They haven't said anything

[Eleanor]

For those of us who can see a little further than the Suns stories... There is only one source for this story which is Sutton... And he talks of being interviewed under caution... It's clear the Sun has made, the rest up

Precisely.

[Eleanor]

As you know davel that isn't the only source of the story. IMO the story came from an interview with Mark Rowley.

Your Opinion is not proof I'm afraid.

[Sunny]

Thank you for all picking apart my posts whilst I was busy.

Here is Mark Rowley

MR: Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the
original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
investigation. The McCanns are parents of a missing girl, we are trying to get to the bottom of. In
terms of Andy using the word abduction, she was not old enough to set off and start her own life.
However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction.

Q: One of the biggest criticisms of the Portuguese investigation, which they acknowledge as well, is
that they did not interrogate the parents from the start, if only to eliminate them. When you started
your investigation, you appear to have done the same. Did you formally interview the McCann’s under
caution, ever consider them as suspects?

MR: So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground
been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start,
all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that
evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress
forward. It would be no different if there were a cold case in London, a missing person from 1990, we
would go back to square one look at all the material and if the material was convincing it ruled out that
line of enquiry we would look somewhere else. So you reflect on the original material, you challenge
it, don’t take it at face value. You don’t restart an investigation pretending it doesn’t exist and do all
the same enquiries again that is not constructive.

http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf

[Mr Gray]

Thank you for all picking apart my posts whilst I was busy.

Here is Mark Rowley

MR: Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the
original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
investigation. The McCanns are parents of a missing girl, we are trying to get to the bottom of. In
terms of Andy using the word abduction, she was not old enough to set off and start her own life.
However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction.

Q: One of the biggest criticisms of the Portuguese investigation, which they acknowledge as well, is
that they did not interrogate the parents from the start, if only to eliminate them. When you started
your investigation, you appear to have done the same. Did you formally interview the McCann’s under
caution, ever consider them as suspects?

MR: So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground
been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start,
all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that
evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress
forward. It would be no different if there were a cold case in London, a missing person from 1990, we
would go back to square one look at all the material and if the material was convincing it ruled out that
line of enquiry we would look somewhere else. So you reflect on the original material, you challenge
it, don’t take it at face value. You don’t restart an investigation pretending it doesn’t exist and do all
the same enquiries again that is not constructive.

http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf

You have posted this before... Rowley does not say the McCann's were not reinterviewed.... You now answer.. He didn't say it but that's what he meant

[Sunny]

You have posted this before... Rowley does not say the McCann's were not reinterviewed.... You now answer.. He didn't say it but that's what he meant

I may say this Davel
MR: So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground
been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start,
all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that
evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress
forward.

Of course they covered old ground when they reinterviewed Robert Murat and it was all over the news at the time.

Remember there is a quote from Clarence Mitchell too Davel. Do you need me to share this too?

Perhaps you can find me a quote where Rowley or someone else says the McCanns WERE interviewed by Scotland Yard.

[Mr Gray]

I may say this Davel
MR: So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground
been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start,
all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that
evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress
forward.

Of course they covered old ground when they reinterviewed Robert Murat and it was all over the news at the time.

Remember there is a quote from Clarence Mitchell too Davel. Do you need me to share this too?

Perhaps you can find me a quote where Rowley or someone else says the McCanns WERE interviewed by Scotland Yard.

You already have shared the quote by Clarence... And like Rowley he doesn't support what you have, said....you have posted all this before

[Sunny]

Have Clarence's anyway Davel

Might not a British interviewer of the McCanns and their friends have picked up on something not spotted by the Portuguese?

Speaking shortly before the tenth anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance, Mr Rowley explained: "We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with, and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that that was a line of investigation."

According to a friend of the McCanns, "it would have been hugely insulting to Kate and Gerry if their original statements had been questioned. There was no need to say anything more because everything had been said".

Whatever you say they weren't questioned by the police, too many people (including "a friend") say otherwise IMO

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11940518

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/top-british-cop-says-madeleine-10295917

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/649059/Madeleine-McCann-parents-friend-new-police-investigation


I am not saying interview them as suspects. I am saying interview them at all Davel.  Or do you have a cite for to show me I am wrong.

[Mr Gray]

Have Clarence's anyway Davel

Might not a British interviewer of the McCanns and their friends have picked up on something not spotted by the Portuguese?

Speaking shortly before the tenth anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance, Mr Rowley explained: "We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with, and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that that was a line of investigation."

According to a friend of the McCanns, "it would have been hugely insulting to Kate and Gerry if their original statements had been questioned. There was no need to say anything more because everything had been said".

Whatever you say they weren't questioned by the police, too many people (including "a friend") say otherwise IMO

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11940518

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/top-british-cop-says-madeleine-10295917

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/649059/Madeleine-McCann-parents-friend-new-police-investigation


I am not saying interview them as suspects. I am saying interview them at all Davel.  Or do you have a cite for to show me I am wrong.

Kate said in her book that the original statements are full of mistakes.... So that particular  claim is false..
Can't you see all these stories are embellishments  of Sutton's statement

[Sunny]

Kate said in her book that the original statements are full of mistakes.... So that particular  claim is false..
Can't you see all these stories are embellishments  of suttobs statement

No I can see what Sutton and the media were responding to....Rowley's statement followed by Clarence Mitchell "a friend".  The original statements may or may not be full of mistakes but haven't the Met spent over a year translating them all and going through these "mistake" laden files themselves? Did you tell Scotland Yard that the PJ files were no use Davel?

[Mr Gray]

No I can see what Sutton and the media were responding to....Rowley's statement followed by Clarence Mitchell "a friend".  The original statements may or may not be full of mistakes but haven't the Met spent over a year translating them all and going through these "mistake" laden files themselves? Did you tell Scotland Yard that the PJ files were no use Davel?

Kate said their statements had errors so they  would not be offended at having them questioned

[Sunny]

Kate said their statements had errors so they  would not be offended at having them questioned

Perhaps someone should have told "a friend" then Davel. He seems explicit that they have not be interviewed by Scotland Yard. - unless you can say otherwise (with a cite) of course.

[Mr Gray]

Perhaps someone should have told "a friend" then Davel. He seems explicit that they have not be interviewed by Scotland Yard. - unless you can say otherwise (with a cite) of course.

No he doesn't.. He's explicit that they would be off ended if their account was questioned... We don't know in what context or even if that statement was, actually made...

[Sunny]

No he doesn't.. He's explicit that they would be off ended if their account was questioned... We don't know in what context or even if that statement was, actually made...

Davel read again

According to a friend of the McCanns, "it would have been hugely insulting to Kate and Gerry if their original statements had been questioned. There was no need to say anything more because everything had been said".

Tell me again what isn't clear to you about "original statements". It's crystal clear to me.