Are the statements accurate? Control Risk verses PJ.

[Mr Gray]

So apart from Kate there is absolutely nothing to independently verify that the  statements taken by Control Risks were  substantially different, and more importantly, more accurate than those taken by the PJ. Further the place for the tapas group to iron out any inaccuracies in their original statements was in their rogatory interviews and that didn’t happen...even though they had their original statements to hand.

if you want to assume kate is lying...thats up to you...it doesnt really matter

[faithlilly]

if you want to assume kate is lying...thats up to you...it doesnt really matter

I don’t want to assume Kate is lying but no other member of the tapas has claimed that their statements were inaccurate. In fact the timeline, written in cooperation with Control Risks group, that was handed to the PJ on the 10th of May was not significantly different to the previous statements given to the PJ.

[Robittybob1]

Are these statements in the PJ Files?

Do you mean the "Control Risk" statements?

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Do you mean the "Control Risk" statements?

Yes - there is reference (above) to them being given to the PJ. I'm interested in reading them.

[Robittybob1]

Yes - there is reference (above) to them being given to the PJ. I'm interested in reading them.

Do the PJ have permission to release them in the act of archiving the case?  Maybe that is why they aren't presented to us.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Do the PJ have permission to release them in the act of archiving the case?  Maybe that is why they aren't presented to us.

I don't know - that's why I was asking.

[Robittybob1]

I don't know - that's why I was asking.

I know the UK police never gave the PJ permission to release files they had shared with the PJ, but even though I see the occasional one slipped through.  I was thinking the files from Control Risks could be similar.  But I have not been informed as to why they aren't in the file as such.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

I know the UK police never gave the PJ permission to release files they had shared with the PJ, but even though I see the occasional one slipped through.  I was thinking the files from Control Risks could be similar.  But I have not been informed as to why they aren't in the file as such.

Then it's impossible to debate which statements are more accurate, surely?

[G-Unit]

Then it's impossible to debate which statements are more accurate, surely?

Kate says Control Risks made mistakes too. It makes me wonder if it was a case of others making mistakes or of her forgetting what she told them.

[ShiningInLuz]

I know the UK police never gave the PJ permission to release files they had shared with the PJ, but even though I see the occasional one slipped through.  I was thinking the files from Control Risks could be similar.  But I have not been informed as to why they aren't in the file as such.

Do you have any reason to assume they ever were in the first place?

[Mr Gray]

Do you have any reason to assume they ever were in the first place?

They are mentioned by the PJ in the Brigade of Information report...that proves the PJ saw them

[ShiningInLuz]

They are mentioned by the PJ in the Brigade of Information report...that proves the PJ saw them

I wasn't asking if the PJ saw them.

I was asking if there is reason to believe the Control Risks statements were entered into the PJ Files.

[Mr Gray]

I wasn't asking if the PJ saw them.

I was asking if there is reason to believe the Control Risks statements were entered into the PJ Files.

i was clearing up any confusion that the PJ had indeed seen them. What do you mean by the files...do you mean the released files...we know they are not there....or do you mean the PJ files on the case...obviously if the PJ saw the and referred to them they would have kept a copy in their files.
Thats your question answered

[jassi]

Could it be that the files only contain information collected by or on behalf of the PJ?
As far I'm aware Risk control did nothing at the request of PJ.

[ShiningInLuz]

Could it be that the files only contain information collected by or on behalf of the PJ?
As far I'm aware Risk control did nothing at the request of PJ.

That's part of the point.

It is my understanding, rightly or wrongly, that information in the PJ Files was routinely sent to a prosecutor, to keep the fellow up to date, and to show that the on-going investigation was legal.

This would have meant potential issues re a non-police organisation investigating very early in an active PJ case.  I doubt that material ever entered the PJ Files, so to answer Robbity's question, I doubt there was ever a need to remove it.

A further problem is that Control Risks acted for MW, not the McCanns, which it didn't influence results, it should have.

A final difficulty is the Control Risks did not have access to the McCann PJ statements, or the T7s, at the time of interviewing the McCanns.  This reduces it to Control Risks starting from scratch and using their own methodology.  Non-comparable statements.

I also doubt very much that the UK police had the authority to request that material not sourced by them was pulled from the PJ Files.