The McCanns will have been interviewed by Operation Grange.

[ShiningInLuz]

First of all, officers are not free to dash off in any direction they wish. There's a hierarchy. Within that are fairly senior officers who assess the evidence and decide what to do next.

If they want to investigate something which exceeds their remit they are not going to do that without the agreement and express permission of those higher up the food chain. After all, if they're wrong, someone is going to carry the can.

If permission is not granted that's the end of it, unless they're brave enough to desert their careers and turn whistle-blower. They would need to be very sure they're right to do that, and until they investigate whatever it is they can't be sure. Mostly they accept the decision of those above them and get on with their jobs, I imagine.

Gotta say, even when I got to close to the top of the food chain, this is roughly how it worked.

[G-Unit]

Gotta say, even when I got to close to the top of the food chain, this is roughly how it worked.

It's how most organisations work. The higher you climb the more you know and the more decisions you are allowed to make. In this case Cameron asked May for action to 'help the family'. May asked the Met. The Met agreed. May is funding the investigation and she is a member of government with Cameron as head man. If the investigation moved in a direction which didn't 'help the family', for example, those funding it would be interested in knowing.

[Benice]

I dont believe SY are limited to the remit...that would be absurd...if evidence points anywhere they will follow it...they have alraedy said maddie may have died in the apartment which shows they are considering other scenarios

I agree.  IMO  It doesn't matter what the remit was - if evidence was found amongst those 40,000 docs which pointed to another scenario rather than abduction then that would have to be followed up.  To deliberately ignore such evidence would mean we have a corrupt team of officers who were conducting a whitewash - not an investigation.   

IMO SY's statement that Madeleine may have died in the apartment was as a result of the info SY received about the sexual predator who attacked several  UK children in their own bedrooms.  The parents of those children will undoubtedly have been interviewed - although that has never been revealed to the public.

The fact that SY have said they will not be giving a running commentary on the investigation seems to have been forgotten by some people.

[stephen25000]

I agree.  IMO  It doesn't matter what the remit was - if evidence was found amongst those 40,000 docs which pointed to another scenario rather than abduction then that would have to be followed up.  To deliberately ignore such evidence would mean we have a corrupt team of officers who were conducting a whitewash - not an investigation.   

IMO SY's statement that Madeleine may have died in the apartment was as a result of the info SY received about the sexual predator who attacked several  UK children in their own bedrooms.  The parents of those children will undoubtedly have been interviewed - although that has never been revealed to the public.

The fact that SY have said they will not be giving a running commentary on the investigation seems to have been forgotten by some people.

You seem to have forgotten that SY  have reached a dead end.

[Benice]

You seem to have forgotten that SY  have reached a dead end.

I don't know that to be fact.

However it is a fact that they have been able to rule out the McCanns and their friends as suspects or persons of interest.    Since then there has not been even a hint that things have changed.    The fact that all the people who have been interviewed in Portugal have no connection to the McCanns is confirmation of that IMO.

[stephen25000]

I don't know that to be fact.

However it is a fact that they have been able to rule out the McCanns and their friends as suspects or persons of interest.    Since then there has not been even a hint that things have changed.    The fact that all the people who have been interviewed in Portugal have no connection to the McCanns is confirmation of that IMO.

How can anyone relevant to the case be ruled out as the crime remains unknown ?

[G-Unit]

I agree.  IMO  It doesn't matter what the remit was - if evidence was found amongst those 40,000 docs which pointed to another scenario rather than abduction then that would have to be followed up.  To deliberately ignore such evidence would mean we have a corrupt team of officers who were conducting a whitewash - not an investigation.   

IMO SY's statement that Madeleine may have died in the apartment was as a result of the info SY received about the sexual predator who attacked several  UK children in their own bedrooms.  The parents of those children will undoubtedly have been interviewed - although that has never been revealed to the public.

The fact that SY have said they will not be giving a running commentary on the investigation seems to have been forgotten by some people.

No it doesn't. Depending on the hierarchical structure it's possible that one person can decide on the direction taken by the investigators.

[jassi]

No it doesn't. Depending on the hierarchical structure it's possible that one person can decide on the direction taken by the investigators.

And the police are very hierarchical. Any  officer who wants any sort of future will not go against the boss - and that goes all the way up the tree.

The only 'rogue' officers are likely to be dishonest ones

[Alice Purjorick]

And the police are very hierarchical. Any  officer who wants any sort of future will not go against the boss - and that goes all the way up the tree.

The only 'rogue' officers are likely to be dishonest ones

The key to getting on anywhere:
Don't bypass the boss.
Pass good news upwards
Cover up bad news by "bubbling" your mates.
 

[Benice]

No it doesn't. Depending on the hierarchical structure it's possible that one person can decide on the direction taken by the investigators.

FGS  G  - we are talking about Detectives here -  not robots who can only do what they are programmed to do.

The idea that professional policeman would be directed to deliberately ignore major evidence - because it didn't fit in with 'a remit' is ridiculous IMO.      That is the opposite of what they are trained to do.       You might as well employ any old members of the public to go through the evidence  - if the expertise of professional policemen is not allowed to be utilised.

Sorry but that's several bridges too far for me.

IMO

[Mr Gray]

so can we trust police to tell thev truth

[G-Unit]

FGS  G  - we are talking about Detectives here -  not robots who can only do what they are programmed to do.

The idea that professional policeman would be directed to deliberately ignore major evidence - because it didn't fit in with 'a remit' is ridiculous IMO.      That is the opposite of what they are trained to do.       You might as well employ any old members of the public to go through the evidence  - if the expertise of professional policemen is not allowed to be utilised.

Sorry but that's several bridges too far for me.

IMO

I think your knowledge of how hierarchical organisations work is fairly unrealistic, as is your understanding of how investigations are conducted.

Just consider the LP rogatory interviews of the T7 for a moment and imagine they were part of a UK investigation. The officers conducting the interviews would pass them on. Job done. Someone higher than them would analyse and assess them, possibly write a report and pass it on. Job done. Someone higher than them would decide if the report was significant and if further action was necessary, and so on and so on.

All these officers may be professional and committed, but not all of them would have the power to decide how the investigation progressed. It's those who can see the whole picture who make the decisions. Those lower down can't see the whole picture so they can't judge which evidence is significant and which isn't.


 .

[Mr Gray]

I think your knowledge of how hierarchical organisations work is fairly unrealistic, as is your understanding of how investigations are conducted.

Just consider the LP rogatory interviews of the T7 for a moment and imagine they were part of a UK investigation. The officers conducting the interviews would pass them on. Job done. Someone higher than them would analyse and assess them, possibly write a report and pass it on. Job done. Someone higher than them would decide if the report was significant and if further action was necessary, and so on and so on.

All these officers may be professional and committed, but not all of them would have the power to decide how the investigation progressed. It's those who can see the whole picture who make the decisions. Those lower down can't see the whole picture so they can't judge which evidence is significant and which isn't.


 .

i think your assumption of how the police work is totally wrong..they certainly would not solve any cases if they operated as you think they do.

[Alice Purjorick]

In the UK a Major Investigation Team has 50 staff, police and civilian, lead by a Detective Chief Inspector.
'tis he/she who will decide how the show is run with his/her reports carrying out the tasks he/she assigns as appropriate and reporting back as required. The DCI will report upwards to a D.Spt as required.
It would be unusual if the remit were not worked out before kick off. The remit like a contract is a live entity.
What will not happen is that up to 50 bods will be out of control lobbing out pseudopodia here and there like so many amoebae.

[Mr Gray]

In the UK a Major Investigation Team has 50 staff, police and civilian, lead by a Detective Chief Inspector.
'tis he/she who will decide how the show is run with his/her reports carrying out the tasks he/she assigns as appropriate and reporting back as required. The DCI will report upwards to a D.Spt as required.
It would be unusual if the remit were not worked out before kick off. The remit like a contract is a live entity.
What will not happen is that up to 50 bods will be out of control lobbing out pseudopodia here and there like so many amoebae.

so who carries out the interview...I would suggest it is a detective who reports to the lead...they have a discussion and go from there. It is not the chain of people who do not talk to each other as gunit is suggesting