Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?

[ferryman]

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?

[Wonderfulspam]

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?

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".

[Mr Gray]

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

[ferryman]

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".

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.

[Wonderfulspam]

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

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?

[ferryman]

The fund was set up to search for Madeleine

Precisely.

Finding criminals is the job of the police.

[icabodcrane]

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?

They were withheld from the public for years

...   and the McCanns knew it

[ferryman]

They were withheld from the public for years

...   and the McCanns knew it

The McCanns are not the police.

They had no authority to release the efit.

[icabodcrane]

The McCanns are not the police.

They had no authority to release the efit.

...  so what  'authority'  did they have to release  all the other  e-fits that they  did make public  ?   (  with much fanfare ) 

[Wonderfulspam]

...  so what  'authority'  did they have to release  all the other  e-fits that they  did make public  ?   (  with much fanfare )

The McCanns were apparently unwilling to risk crucifixion for the sake of their daughters life.

[ferryman]

...  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?

[Sherlock Holmes]

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' ?

[Wonderfulspam]

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.

[Wonderfulspam]

Forget it.

They have been crucified by you lot.

Hung, drawn and quartered.

Every single thing they did, or did not do, minutely examined, often twisted, and judgemental and frequently outrageous conclusions drawn. 



They have been crucified alright 

By 'frequently outrageous conclusions' you mean 'anything other than abduction' of course.

[Wonderfulspam]

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'