"We must reconstruct Maddie’s fateful night" says former Portuguese police chief.

[Brietta]

Agreed, although I assume the child's statement was completely true and therefore there was definitely crying on Wednesday night and that it was significant enough for the child to mention.

What I don't understand is why people can't see that this crying reported by the child was most likely in the period 11.05pm to 11.50pm. There were no listening checks made inside that period. A reconstruction of Wednesday night would confirm this IMO.

I think you may be too inward looking in this, Pegasus. 

Short of having the misfortune of being there and inadvertently becoming main players in a horrific drama, the McCanns and their party have no locus in what may have happened to Madeleine.

Nor is there any evidence to promote that view other than opinion wrongly provided and tirelessly promoted by Mr Amaral.

All of which is designed by default to take the perpetrator/s entirely out of the picture and the public psyche and replacing the notion of guilt from the guilty with the accusation direct and indirect at entirely innocent people.

Dismantling second by second the timeline of the McCanns and their friends is now irrelevant as far as the person actually responsible for taking Madeleine is concerned.
The only timeline which should now be of concern is the timeline of the perpetrator/s and I believe that may be exactly what Scotland Yard are being prevented from investigating and taking forward ~ for whatever reason.

[ShiningInLuz]

you are assuming alice is correct...beware making assunptions
It depends when the remit was drawn up. Both you and alice need to read that link again and see if you think it was written in may 11 when the review started.

That statement was not made in may or june 11...it was made later

Please don't tell me what I am assuming.  I know what I am assuming.  You don't know what I am assuming, unless I tell you what I am assuming.

I have asked for some basic information, before I move to a corroboration stage.  Note there is not a single assumption in sight.

[Mr Gray]

Please don't tell me what I am assuming.  I know what I am assuming.  You don't know what I am assuming, unless I tell you what I am assuming.

I have asked for some basic information, before I move to a corroboration stage.  Note there is not a single assumption in sight.

you thanked alice for his information and ignored mine...poor judgement. Alice is wrong and the link he posted...which he thinks was posted in may 2011...announcing grange and the remit...was not posted in may 2011 but later...
Grange was started in may 2001 and the first time the remit appeared on line was Jan2014...7 months later...ample time for SY to asses the important evidence and decide the mccanns were not suspects


How do i know the link was not posted in May 11...because if you read it ...it talks of paul stephenson in the past tense...he resigned in July 2011...excellent detective work on my behalf

[Benice]

Surely you are not disputing the accuracy of the statement made by the child herself, just eight hours later, that the crying was on the Wednesday night.

But Mrs Fenn heard a child crying on Tuesday night not Wednesday -   and she only heard one child crying - Madeleine said both she and Sean had cried.

[John]

But Mrs Fenn heard a child crying on Tuesday night not Wednesday -   and she only heard one child crying - Madeleine said both she and Sean had cried.

It's hard to tell young children apart when they are crying and especially from the floor above.  But you are right, Mrs Fenn assumed only one child was crying.  After more than an hour she must have thought to herself what sort of parents leave children alone at night in strange surroundings.  So much for the checking routine?

[Eleanor]

I have trouble sussing who is using a chain saw or a lawn mower close by to me because I hear it from both sides.
But I pay attention because it tells me that it's okay to start noisy work again.  Lunch being all around here.

Oh, and on Sundays.  But it could be any of my neighbours from both sides.

[Benice]

It's hard to tell young children apart when they are crying and especially from the floor above.  But you are right, Mrs Fenn assumed only one child was crying.  After more than an hour she must have thought to herself what sort of parents leave children alone at night in strange surroundings.  So much for the checking routine?

Not sure how far sound travels but Russell was at home with his little girl because she was poorly on that night  It could have been her crying on and off and calling for her daddy  if she knew he was in the next room.     I can understand a child crying intermittently for a long time, but I'm not sure they would cry continuously for over an hour. 

It's a pity the PJ didn't think to interview Mrs Fenn until 4 months later  - as she was an obvious candidate for them to visit as a matter of urgency IMO.    it might have all been cleared up at that time.  After 4 months memories will have faded.

 

[ChloeR]

A reconstruction this late on would be pointless. Especially of the night before it happened. Given memories had already started to distort when the statements were taken...how on earth could something 9 years on be taken seriously?

[Eleanor]

A reconstruction this late on would be pointless. Especially of the night before it happened. Given memories had already started to distort when the statements were taken...how on earth could something 9 years on be taken seriously?

It can't.  This is just Amaral exercising his right to Free Speach.  It isn't going to happen.

[Alice Purjorick]

you thanked alice for his information and ignored mine...poor judgement. Alice is wrong and the link he posted...which he thinks was posted in may 2011...announcing grange and the remit...was not posted in may 2011 but later...
Grange was started in may 2001 and the first time the remit appeared on line was Jan2014...7 months later...ample time for SY to asses the important evidence and decide the mccanns were not suspects


How do i know the link was not posted in May 11...because if you read it ...it talks of paul stephenson in the past tense...he resigned in July 2011...excellent detective work on my behalf

I didn't say that I thought it was posted on May 11th 2011. I said O.G was set up on May 11th 2011.
We know Stephenson resigned in July 2011 nonetheless while you were giving yourself high fives you have missed out on the key piece of information.
You seem to be scraping the bottom of the old Bocoy in your bid to prove The MPS had excluded the McCanns before the get go, old chap.

[Mr Gray]

I didn't say that I thought it was posted on May 11th 2011. I said O.G was set up on May 11th 2011.
We know Stephenson resigned in July 2011 nonetheless while you were giving yourself high fives you have missed out on the key piece of information.
You seem to be scraping the bottom of the old Bocoy in your bid to prove The MPS had excluded the McCanns before the get go, old chap.

##
you claimed grange set up and the remit were contemporaneous..remember.. and cited that link to confirm...the link does not confirm anything ....the first time the remit was made public was jan 12 some 7 months after the review started...ample time to look at the evidence and exclude the McCanns

[Alice Purjorick]

Thanks for that.

Please help me out here.

OG, to all intents and purposes, was kicked off in May/June 2011, with a remit of abduction.  Is this the gist?

I am struggling with the idea of how the McCanns could, in this instance, abduct their own child.

Does this mean OG was established with a remit that excludes the parents?  And does the timing sequence of the set-up mean that there was no time to review the case, and decide on the basis of said review that the evidence showed the McCanns were not suspects?

Sorry if I am being a bit slow, but I would genuinely like to know if any police work ruled out the McCanns BEFORE abduction was established as the remit.

The remit says:

Op Grange Remit

The support and expertise proffered by the Commissioner will be provided by the Homicide & Serious Crime Command - SCD1. 

The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’.  This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);

•   The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies.
•   UK Law Enforcement agencies,
•   Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.

The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before. 

It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter. Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit.

End


The argument has long been is the second sentence the ruling phrase covering OG or the bit in parentheses later on.
Faites vos jeux.

[Mr Gray]

Operation Grange was set up on the 12th May 2011 with primacy formally passing from Leicestershire Police to The Metropolitan Police Service on 14th June 2011.
The announcement of Operation Grange, its remit and who was taking over from whom was contemporaneous.
See MPS website.
http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Operation-Grange/1400005508791/35434

so what does that website tell us...not what you say

[Mr Gray]

The remit says:

Op Grange Remit

The support and expertise proffered by the Commissioner will be provided by the Homicide & Serious Crime Command - SCD1. 

The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’.  This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);

•   The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies.
•   UK Law Enforcement agencies,
•   Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.

The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before. 

It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter. Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit.

End


The argument has long been is the second sentence the ruling phrase covering OG or the bit in parentheses later on.
Faites vos jeux.

#the argument now is your claim that the remit was contemporaneous with the setting up of grange...the link you quoted does not confirm this

[stephen25000]

Whilst I await for a new thread to be started on this.................

http://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/carlos-anjos-i-believe-that-there-is.html?m=1