Scotland Yard's new progress and BBC Crimewatch programme on 14 Oct 2013

[Montclair]

Can you point to any mistakes they have made in this case?
Do, please, list them for us.

One big glaring mistake SY has made so far is that they have been giving press conferences to let the world know what they plan on doing so that any possible perpetrator will have the chance of fleeing or covering up his tracks. Never saw a police force giving a run by run account of their investigation like this. It makes me believe that they have zilch and want desperately to justify the money spent.

[BigFatBlonde]

Yes, I'm new. Only joined yesterday in fact. But I have followed the forum for a couple of weeks and must say at times it is more akin to a school playground.

I mean seriously, do we all really have to pretend to be SO offended when someone calls someone else a name?

Personally I thought Carly had a point as the comment was a little underhand, but I don't think she or Gillet need anyone to leap to their defence as they are both grownups.

N

[gilet]

I've stepped in things left by dogs in the park whose opinion I care about more than yours.

Why do you think posting such vile abuse is necessary? Do you really think it makes you look clever or better than me that you post such nastiness to fellow posters? My view is that readers see your personality coming through such nastiness, not mine. So I never worry about such uncalled-for nastiness, In fact I have come to expect certain posters to highlight their own inadequacies by their reliance on it.

You still persist in the absolute belief there was an abduction. This is not an opinion shared by all. If you could get that through your demonstrably thick skull then maybe we;d get somewhere. 

You are now totally misrepresenting my position. I have stated over and over but you refuse to read properly, that I believe there is neither proof of abduction, nor of Madeleine being dead. No-one knows what happens. I suspect you have misinterpreted the statement I made about someone taking Madeleine from the apartment as meaning abduction but a little thought would tell you that dead or alive she was taken by someone from the apartment unless she walked herself and was later taken from the street. By repeating this same erroneous allegation about me when I have already corrected you on this forum numerous times, you are showing either a silly obstinacy or some kind of problem with understanding. I don't know which. By being so disgustingly abusive towards me in the same paragraph, once again you tell the reader just how nasty a person you really are.

Yes, there could have been an abduction.  If there was, then the absence of the parents caused it.  Nothing else, it was their fault. They owed a duty of care to Madeleine, they failed and now they are whining that everyone else should be helping them and looking.  They would have a point IF and only of they ever did bother - as you erroneously state they already have - to admit their mistakes unequivocally, without wrapping in an "everyone does it" caveat.  No, everyone does not do it. The VAST majority of the British public do not do it and do not believe the McCanns were responsible in doing so.  Check out the comments on every media story that allows them (and if you're still going to persist in that insane pro myth that a handful of sceptics is responsible for the tidal wave of negative opinion they get then you're an even bigger fool than I think and that's saying something).

You really have a nasty turn of phrase don't you. To describe the heartfelt pleas of the parent of a missing little girl as "whining", like the rest of your nasty post, does you absolutely no credit at all. How nasty such comments appear to readers here?

As for your insistence that the McCanns have not admitted their responsibilty in the case, then you are simply refusing to accept what those who have taken the trouble to listen carefully to the McCanns have seen. I have checked out the comments on such sites as you mention and find the comments, just like many of yours, to be quite disgusting. But unlike you I know from having witnessed the calls to arms on various anti forums and on Twitter that the postings on these sites and news reports are indeed coordinated and do not represent the vast majority of the population. Other evidence of that is the fact that no Anti McCann petition has ever got more than a couple of thousand signatures.

Now if there wasn't an abduction, which is equally likely and - in fact - logically MORE likely then this is where the problem lies.  The parents, being the ones who naturally fall under most suspicion have a responsibility to cooperate (no, they haven't) and to assist the police in their enquiries (no, they haven't.) They also should work tirelessly (not expect others to do so on their behalf) to rule themselves out of suspicion so the police can go and concentrate on other lines of enquiry. That they failed to do so demonstrates why the PJ continued to look closely at them and their associates.  Your assertion that the PJ were wrong to so do is ridiculous as you have no way of knowing if they are right or wrong and obviously they know far more than you.

They were sensibly advised by lawyers not to cooperate with the PJ who in September 2007 were ignoring all possibilities but the parents. That was not an investigation into the disappearance at all.

But you are unable to accept that the parents have since then begged for a review and are now as a result of that review cooperating fully with a properly competent police force which is investigating all possibilities and they are about to undertake a reconstruction as well.

That you should suggest these two parents have not worked tirelessly is simply ludicrous. Have you not followed the case and seen their incessant activity?

I have no idea where you have come up with the notion that I have ever said the PJ should not have investigated the parents. They should have done so but they should have also left open all other options. By mid July they were basing their entire case (as Amaral tells us) on the dogs and we all know how badly confused Amarals' team was over the forensics which did not back up any of the alerts regarding the potential death of Madeleine.  The error of that judgement was proven  by the AG report.

You let your irrational hatred of the former coordinator get in the way of any grains of logic there may be left in your pink fluff-filled head and just assume that he's evil, corrupt, bent, disgraced and, most importantly, wrong just because his opinion differs from yours.  You are displaying a simple tribal response to a perceived threat to your beliefs and reacting like a fundamentalist.

Your inabilty to differentiate between my logical and reasoned and completely accurate descriptions of Amaral's criminal behaviour, his civil offences against his own brother, his threats to his own wife and his incompetence in the McCann case which eventually resulted in him being thrown off the case with some kind of hatred is a great shame. I don't assume anything about him. I read the proof of his actions. 

You are clearly projecting your own reactions about the McCanns who are guilty of no crime, who have not been charged with any crime and who are not even suspects in this crime onto me. I am sorry for that but I understand your frustration that Amaral is the proven criminal while the McCanns are simply parents who are doing their best to find their missing child and are fully cooperating with the police in that activity.

I'm glad you're disgusted by my post. Honestly I am. People like you make me utterly sick and if I'm upsetting you and your cronies then I'm doing something very, very right.

That last comment does not deserve a response other to repeat that it says more about you than it ever will about me. Your need to upset people is quite sickening. The more you post in that manner the more you expose the inadequacies of the anti McCann case.

[Benice]

hit the nail on the head   the pros  dont like being told the truth   do they

Another nasty and uncalled for comment about a whole group of other people.      It would seem your only purpose for being in this forum is to attack everyone who disagrees with you with your spiteful one-liners.    Maybe you should read the forum rules and at least make some attempt to contribute something meaningful to debate instead of this tedious repetitious abuse of other posters.

[carlymichelle]

Yes, I'm new. Only joined yesterday in fact. But I have followed the forum for a couple of weeks and must say at times it is more akin to a school playground.

I mean seriously, do we all really have to pretend to be SO offended when someone calls someone else a name?

Personally I thought Carly had a point as the comment was a little underhand, but I don't think she or Gillet need anyone to leap to their defence as they are both grownups.

N

yep i can speak for myself and swearing is not a sin  not as muc has leaving  3 babies alone and saying it  was a mistake  and everybody does it

[Montclair]

Can we keep on the topic, please? I hate coming in on a thread and having to scroll down for pages because people are calling each other names.

[gilet]

Never mind mistakes...what the hell have they achieved to date in the case except to spend countless £ millions on a ghost.

So you cannot tell us about any of these mistakes which you said existed and you now want us all to forget you posted about them. Did you make the idea of SY mistakes up or can you actually describe any?

As for what they have achieved. Firstly and most importantly they have told us that they have eliminated the McCanns and their friends as suspects. That is major progress in the case. They have told us that they are focussing on stranger abduction. Having narrowed the search down that is clear progress. They have told us that they have persuaded the McCanns to take part in a reconstruction. That is clear progress and something the PJ could not persuade them to do because of their clearly narrow focus.

And once again you cannot help being rude about the missing child, Madeleine McCann, can you. By referring to her as a ghost, you show your own nastiness towards that child. Such rudeness towards a missing child by a supposed "moderator" here does the forum no credit at all.

[Benita]

yep i can speak for myself and swearing is not a sin  not as muc has leaving  3 babies alone and saying it  was a mistake  and everybody does it

you really are pathetic why are you here girl ? if the mccanns left their kids quote is all you can add then zzzzzzzzzzzzz boring!!

[gilet]

He just happens to be a she!! 

And how would you happen to know that? Oh dear, are you certain of that?

[south of the river]

I  thought that this site was above the petty insults and name calling and was a place where some robust debate could take place -

I appreciate that at least here you can have a debate unlike other sites where you have to tow the party line or be banned

Making personal attacks and calling groups of people halfwits seem to me to be just provocative in nature and goading a fight

[BigFatBlonde]

So you cannot tell us about any of these mistakes which you said existed and you now want us all to forget you posted about them. Did you make the idea of SY mistakes up or can you actually describe any?

As for what they have achieved. Firstly and most importantly they have told us that they have eliminated the McCanns and their friends as suspects. That is major progress in the case. They have told us that they are focussing on stranger abduction. Having narrowed the search down that is clear progress. They have told us that they have persuaded the McCanns to take part in a reconstruction. That is clear progress and something the PJ could not persuade them to do because of their clearly narrow focus.

And once again you cannot help being rude about the missing child, Madeleine McCann, can you. By referring to her as a ghost, you show your own nastiness towards that child. Such rudeness towards a missing child by a supposed "moderator" here does the forum no credit at all.

Come on now, be reasonable. I think both sides can agree that the investigations carried out by all parties have been far from stellar. I mean 6 years on and we still don't know if she was abducted, murdered, wandered off or had an accident.

The UK force was helping out at the start as well. The whole thing has been a bit of a dogs dinner really ...

N

[gilet]

One big glaring mistake SY has made so far is that they have been giving press conferences to let the world know what they plan on doing so that any possible perpetrator will have the chance of fleeing or covering up his tracks. Never saw a police force giving a run by run account of their investigation like this. It makes me believe that they have zilch and want desperately to justify the money spent.

Seriously. You expect us to believe that your knowledge both of this particular case and police procedures in general is greater than that of 30 officers at SY (including some senior officers), and of the specialist team of people at SY who deal with press releases.

What expertise do you have in order to trash the behaviour of these experts? Do reveal.

Actually you have no idea why precisely the Met have told us what they have told us. You have no idea what their precise aims were. You simply wish to find some route to trashing the investigation.

I prefer, as I am sure most people do, to trust in the judgement of the cops on such matters rather than the amateurs here.

[carlymichelle]

Your honour, I refer to exhibit 1:
Where is the call for a ban on Benita for abuse?

I'm sick to death of this persistent running around after the referee waving an imaginary card trying to get someone booked or sent off. It's getting faintly ridiculous now. The sanctimonious proselytising from the McCann supporters is getting tedious.

i will continue to say they left the   children alone because they did and   whatever befell   maddie was  due to that neglect and lack of care

[gilet]

Come on now, be reasonable. I think both sides can agree that the investigations carried out by all parties have been far from stellar. I mean 6 years on and we still don't know if she was abducted, murdered, wandered off or had an accident.

The UK force was helping out at the start as well. The whole thing has been a bit of a dogs dinner really ...

N

We know for a fact that the PJ investigation was not stellar but on what basis do you describe the SY investigation as such?

What errors can you suggest in the SY investigation to deserve your clear criticism?

[Cudge]

Yes, I'm new. Only joined yesterday in fact. But I have followed the forum for a couple of weeks and must say at times it is more akin to a school playground.

I mean seriously, do we all really have to pretend to be SO offended when someone calls someone else a name?

Personally I thought Carly had a point as the comment was a little underhand, but I don't think she or Gillet need anyone to leap to their defence as they are both grownups.

N

They are indeed although one appears to be more grown up than the other. And they call us whinging Poms