Was the PJ's biggest mistake not testing the twins straight away?

[G-Unit]

I'm at a loss to understand why you don't consider the FLO's statement, which is in the files, as proof that the question of possible drug use was raised by the McCanns with the PJ via that FLO.

I have seen and quoted those statements. No mention of sedation, no mention of the twins. The FLO's may have asked the PJ the question they were asked and as the Crime unit found no evidence of it the answer would have been 'No';

They also wanted to know whether the PJ had any evidence that would suggest that the person who took Madeleine had used any substance to facilitate the abduction.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN_MARKLEY.htm

[faithlilly]

Do we have any evidence that it was not passed on?    As it was the job of the FLOs to act as intermediaries between the PJ and the McCanns - I can think of no reason why that 'question' would not be passed on . 

Why would a FLO include that question from the McCanns in a statement  if they knew they had failed in their duty  to pass it on.   Surely if that was the case they would know that the PJ could prove from their records that no such 'question'  had been received from the FLO's on behalf of the McCanns - and they would be exposed for making false claims.

Can you think of any credible reason why the FLO would ignore the McCanns request to pass this question on to the PJ?     I can't.

A simple question that requires a simple answer. Do we have any evidence that the FLOs passed the McCann's question to the PJ ?

[Brietta]

Well more examples of your biased opinion.

'Lines of inquiry'. What does that actually mean in reality ?

SY has clearly achieved nothing, and to pretend otherwise is foolish IMO of course.

Likewise there is no proof of abduction, then or now.

Investigation of the parents, was par for the course, with any police force.

You can be relied upon to post a very limited viewpoint.

If investigators do not investigate they will find nothing and very few investigations will be solved and very few perpetrators will be apprehended.

The thread asks if testing the twins was the biggest mistake made by the Policia Judiciaria in the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

I have said it is not they made very many elementary mistakes from start to finish some of greater magnitude than others ... and at the moment I am illustrating that point with reference to their failure to take the opportunity presented to them by the Swiss in relation to Von Aesch.

Everyone seems to think he was investigated and eliminated from the inquiry.

It seems he was not.  Which raises the question of how many others assumed to have been investigated were similarly disregarded.

It certainly occupied the Scotland Yard review team for some time.  We know they went to Switzerland to check what information might remain on this man ... it seems evident that they had to work their way through quite a few others.

I would imagine that few cold cases involve sorting the way through the volume of information which it is apparent was ignored in 2007 by the initial investigation.

[Benice]

A simple question that requires a simple answer. Do we have any evidence that the FLOs passed the McCann's question to the PJ ?

No Faith.

Another simple question that requires a simple answer.  Do we have any evidence that the FLO's did not pass the McCanns question to the PJ?

One more simple question.   As it was the FLO's job to act as intermediaries between the PJ and the McCanns do we have any reason to believe they failed in their duty to do that  - in this particular instance?

[stephen25000]

You can be relied upon to post a very limited viewpoint.

If investigators do not investigate they will find nothing and very few investigations will be solved and very few perpetrators will be apprehended.

The thread asks if testing the twins was the biggest mistake made by the Policia Judiciaria in the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

I have said it is not they made very many elementary mistakes from start to finish some of greater magnitude than others ... and at the moment I am illustrating that point with reference to their failure to take the opportunity presented to them by the Swiss in relation to Von Aesch.

Everyone seems to think he was investigated and eliminated from the inquiry.

It seems he was not.  Which raises the question of how many others assumed to have been investigated were similarly disregarded.

It certainly occupied the Scotland Yard review team for some time.  We know they went to Switzerland to check what information might remain on this man ... it seems evident that they had to work their way through quite a few others.

I would imagine that few cold cases involve sorting the way through the volume of information which it is apparent was ignored in 2007 by the initial investigation.

Well I never expected that first comment either, did I.

The limited viewpoint is well established from the perspective of the 'mccann' supporter, 'abduction' or nothing.

Your far from subtle digs at other posters, including me,  are well known.

It is already known and admitted some time ago that UK detectives from different forces hindered the 'investigation'.

You can keep repeating your mantra about the PJ, but anyone doing research will show very few investigations are flaw free.

However, you as a stoic mccann backer try to pretend the whole of the PJ's actions were incompetent.

They weren't.

[Brietta]

Well I never expected that first comment either, did I.

The limited viewpoint is well established from the perspective of the 'mccann' supporter, 'abduction' or nothing.

Your far from subtle digs at other posters, including me,  are well known.

It is already known and admitted some time ago that UK detectives from different forces hindered the 'investigation'.

You can keep repeating your mantra about the PJ, but anyone doing research will show very few investigations are flaw free.

However, you as a stoic mccann backer try to pretend the whole of the PJ's actions were incompetent.

They weren't.

Then it should be simple enough for you to illustrate exactly why failure to test the twins was not the biggest mistake made by the Policia Judiciria and to argue a point along those lines.

I have made my case that there were far greater omissions and oversights and shall continue to do so while the thread runs.

None more so than the example of ignoring information sent via Interpol from the Swiss police at a time, subsequently confirmed by the Portuguese at the archiving of the case, when they had no other evidence in the case.

You must have a huge catalogue of exactly what you think the PJ did get right in relation to the topic to post up for us here ... you certainly haven't gone out of your way to contribute anything pertinent to Carana's thread on the matter last time I looked.

[Eleanor]

All posts containing insults will be deleted in full.

[faithlilly]

No Faith.

Another simple question that requires a simple answer.  Do we have any evidence that the FLO's did not pass the McCanns question to the PJ?

One more simple question.   As it was the FLO's job to act as intermediaries between the PJ and the McCanns do we have any reason to believe they failed in their duty to do that  - in this particular instance?

Thank you Benice.

So the FLOs were the bridge between the McCanns and the PJ at this time, presumably before Pavia was assigned to them, so they would have relayed the answer as well as broaching the question with the PJ. Why is the answer not in the FLO's statement ? Further why no mention from the McCanns that although they asked the question no answer was forthcoming ? If the answer was so important why no mention of them trying to follow it up with the FLOs ?

[G-Unit]

Thank you Benice.

So the FLOs were the bridge between the McCanns and the PJ at this time, presumably before Pavia was assigned to them, so they would have relayed the answer as well as broaching the question with the PJ. Why is the answer not in the FLO's statement ? Further why no mention from the McCanns that although they asked the question no answer was forthcoming ? If the answer was so important why no mention of them trying to follow it up with the FLOs ?

We know what the answer was, too;

No, there is no evidence that any substance was used to facilitate the 'abduction'.

[Alice Purjorick]

Not "any suspect".

A man whose vehicle was made available for their inspection and a man whose associates might have been well worth following up.

The Swiss police thought it worthwhile enough to alert the Portuguese investigation via Interpol.  But the Portuguese were not interested.  All that concerned them was getting Madeleine's parents to "confess".

We now know that there was no evidence to justify making either an arguido.  Nor was there any evidence against them involving them in any way in the disappearance of their daughter.

If there had been no firearms incident in the Swiss forest with one dead and one wounded ... what evidence would there have been against Von Aesch in the abduction of Ylenia?

Ylenia's clothing and possessions would not have been found and his DNA would not have been found on them.

The Swiss police searched the forest where his body was found and eventually located Ylenia some time later.

Without the unidentified seriously injured man stumbling onto the road to seek assistance and the investigation into that ... I doubt we would ever have heard of Von Aesch or Ylenia Lenhard in relation to Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

The failure of the PJ to investigate the information received via Interpol must surely rank as a far greater omission than their failure to check the twins.

I am amazed that the sceptics posting on this thread are incapable of recognising the dereliction of duty exemplified in this one deliberate omission.

There is little point in deriding the generic "suspect" ... how else do proper police detain perpetrators if they don't look for them in the first instance and ignore all information relating to them??

Were it me like, I would have had a rattle with the geezer on the old dog like and if after that I thought  the game wanna worth the candle I would have written a note recording who, what, where, when and why then stuck it in the file. Do you have evidence that was not done?

[Benice]

Thank you Benice.

So the FLOs were the bridge between the McCanns and the PJ at this time, presumably before Pavia was assigned to them, so they would have relayed the answer as well as broaching the question with the PJ. Why is the answer not in the FLO's statement ? Further why no mention from the McCanns that although they asked the question no answer was forthcoming ? If the answer was so important why no mention of them trying to follow it up with the FLOs ?

 I can only presume it was because no answer from the PJ was forthcoming.    If it had been - then IMO the response would have been recorded in the FLO's statements or by the PJ at that time.   

I note you have declined to answer my simple question - which like yours - also only required a simple answer.  i.e. Is there any evidence that the FLO's failed in their duty to pass on the question to the PJ?

[stephen25000]

Then it should be simple enough for you to illustrate exactly why failure to test the twins was not the biggest mistake made by the Policia Judiciria and to argue a point along those lines.

I have made dmy case that there were far greater omissions and oversights and shall continue to do so while the thread runs.

None more so than the example of ignoring information sent via Interpol from the Swiss police at a time, subsequently confirmed by the Portuguese at the archiving of the case, when they had no other evidence in the case.

You must have a huge catalogue of exactly what you think the PJ did get right in relation to the topic to post up for us here ... you certainly haven't gone out of your way to contribute anything pertinent to Carana's thread on the matter last time I looked.

You need to read more thoroughly.

Both the PJ and especially the McCann's, given their background should have insisted on tests being carried out.

Meanwhile there is nothing in this case to show abduction that can't be explained by other possibilities.

[G-Unit]

 I can only presume it was because no answer from the PJ was forthcoming.    If it had been - then IMO the response would have been recorded in the FLO's statements or by the PJ at that time.   

I note you have declined to answer my simple question - which like yours - also only required a simple answer.  i.e. Is there any evidence that the FLO's failed in their duty to pass on the question to the PJ?

We know the question was asked by the parents because the FLO's said so. They did not say they asked the PJ and got no answer. Therefore it's quite possible that the question was asked and answered and the parents were satisfied with the answer. (which would have been 'no')

It is not, by the way, the duty of FLO's to pass on questions raised by relatives. Their job is to inform the families of anything they need to know, and to inform the investigation if they discover anything relevant to the investigation when interacting with the families.

Although FLOs offer support, their main role is to gather evidence and information from the family to help with the investigation.

Read more: http://www.healthtalk.org/peoples-experiences/dying-bereavement/bereavement-due-traumatic-death/police-family-liaison-officers-role#ixzz3xbDcuA[Name removed]
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives
Follow us: @healthtalkorg on Twitter | healthtalk.org on Facebook

[Brietta]

Were it me like, I would have had a rattle with the geezer on the old dog like and if after that I thought  the game wanna worth the candle I would have written a note recording who, what, where, when and why then stuck it in the file. Do you have evidence that was not done?

According to the email from the Swiss police dated three days prior to the Drs McCann being constituted arguidos they didn't leave themselves a lot of time to rattle with anyone (or whatever it is your rather quaint wording is trying to convey ? ?).

If it had been done as you suggest ?? - I do wish you would use standard English in your posts ~ it is tiresome enough struggling with Google and Portuguese - why would the Scotland Yard review team have taken time out to visit Switzerland to check on what they might have?
Which unsurprisingly drew a blank ... which might not necessarily have been the case way back in 2007.

[faithlilly]

 I can only presume it was because no answer from the PJ was forthcoming.    If it had been - then IMO the response would have been recorded in the FLO's statements or by the PJ at that time.   

I note you have declined to answer my simple question - which like yours - also only required a simple answer.  i.e. Is there any evidence that the FLO's failed in their duty to pass on the question to the PJ?

What kind of evidence ?