Met given 6 months and £2 million more to find Maddie. Is this the end?

[ferryman]

How do you know what they have or haven't found? Don't you want an investigation to find out what happened to Madeleine? I do and I believe that OG are honest and not involved in any kind of cover up.

In which case, when Andy Redwood stressed that neither the McCanns nor any of their friends are suspects, you believe him?

[Brietta]

If you cannot differentiate between a suspicion over a set of parents and their actions and behaviours (which is NOT a crime btw however much you try to make it sound like one) from the likely fate of an innocent toddler left to fend for herself, then nothng will help much I imagine

You will of course detail in due course, what actions by the Mccanns have been thwarted, what have they tried to do but were stopped from doing due to "virulence against a toddler"?

You may also as well say any policeman or force whose job it is to suspect people, investigate and solve a case who might think some of this just doesn't add up, a Madeleine h ater , to borrow the phrase from one or more of your more salubrious (not) compatriots

 &%+((£

I think there is a possibility that you have failed to take note of the fact that the Polícia Judiciária and Scotland yard investigations have discarded Mr Amaral's flawed theory and are actively looking for the person/s responsible for the crime against Madeleine McCann.

That comes after an extensive review of all the available evidence.  Which has led to people being invited to participate in police inquiries some as witnesses some as arguidos none of whom are Madeleine's family or any of their friends.

That SY have received further funding for a year and the PJ continue also continue with their inquiry is indicative of the fact that they haven't exhausted all investigative possibilities.

There is no doubt neither law enforcement agency are interested in Madeleine's parents or their friends.
There is no doubt both law enforcement agencies are actively pursuing a case of stranger abduction.

If you are content to go along with thinking a bunch of armchair detectives on the internet know better than the professionals ... that is your privilege.

[Brietta]

I'm not qualified to "look into anything further" either in this criminal case or any other particularly when I am not in full possession of all the facts surrounding it.

The people who are qualified and who are in possession of all known facts have just received funding on that basis for another year's pursuit of criminals who stole a little girl from her bed eight years ago .

That is good enough for me and I wish them every success in their endeavours on behalf of Madeleine McCann.

[stephen25000]

I'm not qualified to "look into anything further" either in this criminal case or any other particularly when I am not in full possession of all the facts surrounding it.

The people who are qualified and who are in possession of all known facts have just received funding on that basis for another year's pursuit of criminals who stole a little girl from her bed eight years ago .

That is good enough for me and I wish them every success in their endeavours on behalf of Madeleine McCann.

'..possession of all known facts..'

That means investigating all aspects of the case, and all possible scenarios.

Yet SY certainly don't have appeared to do that.

BHH said it was a murder inquiry.

Redwood was a believer in abduction, no matter there were no forensics to back it up, let alone anything else.

Now we have the 30 letters of request.

[Brietta]

'..possession of all known facts..'

That means investigating all aspects of the case, and all possible scenarios.

Yet SY certainly don't have appeared to do that.

BHH said it was a murder inquiry.

Redwood was a believer in abduction, no matter there were no forensics to back it up, let alone anything else.

Now we have the 30 letters of request.

That is a rather negative approach, Stephen.

It is not for members of the public to 'question' an active police investigation ... particularly one involving a missing child.

You state "Now we have the 30 letters of request." as if it were heinous and as if you knew to whom they were addressed, their content, what issues they were concerned with, when they were sent etc ... so what exactly might your objection be to the police perhaps officially contacting other law enforcement agencies in a missing child investigation?

[stephen25000]

That is a rather negative approach, Stephen.

It is not for members of the public to 'question' an active police investigation ... particularly one involving a missing child.

You state "Now we have the 30 letters of request." as if it were heinous and as if you knew to whom they were addressed, their content, what issues they were concerned with, when they were sent etc ... so what exactly might your objection be to the police perhaps officially contacting other law enforcement agencies in a missing child investigation?

Cliche time again Brietta.

Just tell me if SY has achieved so much in this investigation they needed 30 more letters ?

After all, where do the majority of investigations end up ?

As a matter of record discussing the effectiveness of the Police, I heard on the news the other day, they only solve 4% of reported burglaries.

Do you have any idea of the overall % of reported crimes which do get solved ?

[Mr Gray]

Cliche time again Brietta.

Just tell me if SY has achieved so much in this investigation they needed 30 more letters ?

After all, where do the majority of investigations end up ?

As a matter of record discussing the effectiveness of the Police, I heard on the news the other day, they only solve 4% of reported burglaries.

Do you have any idea of the overall % of reported crimes which do get solved ?

Fortunately your opinion is of no importance. Try listening to the John O'Connor interview...a well respected ex senior policeman. H e explains why Grange should continue...why it has cost so much and why a similar amount has not been given to the Needham case.

[Mr Gray]

Having listened to John O'Connor any idea that Mitchel controls the press is quite ludicrous. In a live interview O'Connor was incredibly supportive of the McCanns yet the press took a couple of his quotes to completely misrepresent him

[jassi]

Is O'Connor's opinion of any value, or is it just yet another 'expert' , albeit one that you clearly favour ?

[Mr Gray]

Is O'Connor's opinion of any value, or is it just yet another 'expert' , albeit one that you clearly favour ?

as an expert his opinion has to have value...expert opinion is classed as evidence.....

[Mr Gray]

Is O'Connor's opinion of any value, or is it just yet another 'expert' , albeit one that you clearly favour ?

when the press claimed he was calling for Grange to be closed he had a lot of support from the "experts" on here

[stephen25000]

Is O'Connor's opinion of any value, or is it just yet another 'expert' , albeit one that you clearly favour ?

Quite right Jassi.

...and just because O'Connor thinks it should carry on regardless of the fact it has failed to find Madeleine, or find how she disappeared.

O'Connor is merely a mouthpiece for the SY team and that's all that he is.

[stephen25000]

as an expert his opinion has to have value...expert opinion is classed as evidence.....

 


So is O'Connor on the case ?

[jassi]

as an expert his opinion has to have value...expert opinion is classed as evidence.....

I seem to recall that John Stalker, another 'expert' had an opinion as well.

[Mr Gray]

So is O'Connor on the case ?

you obviously don't understand the principles of scientific evidence...expert opinion is level 5