We are probably not too far apart on this.
However, dealing with your point above, bolded, you used the word 'allegedly' and I think that was a wise choice of word.
This allegedly hypercritical report was from Henri Exton.
We know this about him. He was the former Head of the Covert Intelligence for MI5. He also shoplifted a bottle of expensive perfume from Manchester Airport, was convicted after pleading guilty, but then had his conviction set aside. From what we have been told many times, Exton was recruited to the McCann Investigation Team by the corrupt fraudster, con-man and crook Kevin Halligen. Therefore to take ANYTHING which emerges from Exton's mouth as gospel would be very unwise.
Moreover, again from what we learn in dribs and drabs (see, e.g. the 2014 Channel 5 film featuring Halligen and Exton), Halligen didn't pay Exton for his work. Possibly the McCanns didn't pay him properly either. In which case, he would have a very sharp axe to grind and a motive for 'dropping Halligen and Exton right in it'.
To summarise my position on the efits in 8 words: 'They are not what they purport to me'. To which I would add these 5: 'Redwood and Wall know this'.
@ Carana asked (I paraphrase): "What has evidence of widespread senior level corruption in the Met got to do with Operation Grange?"
REPLY: Everything. If people right at the top of the Met are capable of the wicked things shown in the Panorama programme, and much, much more than that, then they are also, prima facie, well capable of conducting a hoax investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
If I were to say that acknowledged thugs (*formerly of the PJ) such as Cristovia (sp), Amaral or convicted torturer Ameidas (so far as I am aware, still serving with the PJ) should be likened in the same bracket as PJ Inspector Dias, or Inspector Ferraria (who justly dismissed the testimony of English social worker Yvonne Martin), I could/
would (justly) be accused of
xenophobia.
To be clear, I make no such allegation or comparison.
I do say that certain elements of the PJ (from the shelved enquiry) made a total pig's-ear of the forensic results, with little or no excuse (they were surrounded by people, including representatives of their own ,Portuguese, forensic laboratory, who understood the forensic results, and would have been only too willing to explain them, if asked, but they never were).
I think sensible Portuguese citizens who post on this board see it much the same.
There is corruption in the English police force.
There is corruption in the police forces of Britain.
Police forces in countries throughout the world (including Portugal!) have corrupt police officers.
None of that is xenophobic.
It is just plain statement of fact.
It is, itself, xenophobic, to accuse those (of us!) who point out that
fact of
xenophobia*Edited to amend
formally with
formerly.
