Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"

[Benice]

I can judge OG by its actions, which are more important than the words it issues.

Based on its actions nothing has emerged "which clearly pointed a finger at the McCanns".  This is hardly surprising, given that the remit puts them off-limits.

So what do you think OG would do if I sent them the methods by which the McCanns could have disposed of a body or could have concealed a body?  Would they put it into their 'to be investigated' pile, or would they look at the remit and stick it in 'the no further action' pile.

In the purely hypothetical situation where the MCanns concealed or disposed of a body, they have got away with it for 10 years and there is no reason to assume the MCanns, or any of the T7, are now going to break rans and produce the magic bullet you are hypothesising.  I don't do 'magic bullet' scenarios any more than I do massive conspiracy scenarios.

And that leaves us with the McCanns are off-limits and OG has not found anything on them because OG is not looking.

The because part is verifiable by what OG has not done - actions not words.

It makes no difference what the remit was - all the evidence and information available to SY for investigation remained exactly the same.    And until they went through it they wouldn't know what was in it.    It follows that if there was evidence against the McCanns contained within it - then it would have come to light.     To deliberately and wilfully  ignore such evidence once it had been found would be perverting the course of justice imo.

I do not believe that the many SY police officers involved in sifting through the evidence would agree to be part of  a huge conspiracy to protect people whom the evidence had indicated could be guilty of a crime.

Way too far fetched for me.

[ShiningInLuz]

I re read the remit today
It specifically says it is the remit of the review...fact
Your ideas are plain bonkers

FOI response from the Met dated 21 Dec 2015.

"Operation Grange is an ongoing MPS 'investigative review' of the investigation(s) that have been conducted into the circumstances of Madeleine McCann's disappearance."

[stephen25000]

One has to wonder has the increased activity on here as regards trying to persuade people, especially that Madeleine is still alive, is linked to the 3 rd of May, and the tenth year of her having disappeared without trace.

There will be a media blitz in line with that.

Also,  I find it quite nauseating when certain people imply, that merely because many people believe she is dead, it is somehow  an inhumane attitude to take.

One does get the impression that certain parties on here would like to control activity in favour of a pro-Mccann stance at all times.

[stephen25000]

It makes no difference what the remit was - all the evidence and information available to SY for investigation remained exactly the same.    And until they went through it they wouldn't know what was in it.    It follows that if there was evidence against the McCanns contained within it - then it would have come to light.     To deliberately and wilfully  ignore such evidence once it had been found would be perverting the course of justice imo.

I do not believe that the many SY police officers involved in sifting through the evidence would agree to be part of  a huge conspiracy to protect people whom the evidence had indicated could be guilty of a crime.

Way too far fetched for me.

So you are happy that members of SY , and other forces contributed to Amaral's  fund.

Now why would they do that if they believed in an abduction.

[ShiningInLuz]

Somewhere on the forum you have opined that the general opinion in Luz coincides with Amaral's theory.

A child whose only attribute shared with Madeleine is age ... not appearance or language ... is hardly going to be remarked upon by people who believe Madeleine McCann is dead.

I have no information that people in Luz support Amaral's theory, so if I gave that impression, it was wrong.

I have stated that in Luz, the starting position is the McCanns dunnit, which is not the same, given the variety of dunnits possible.

Someone  (ferryman?) on here posted a link to a CdM article that appeared the day after the McCanns were arguidoed.  It has been pruned, I think because we were all miles off-topic at the time.  Another possible reason is I would rate that article as libellous.  I am surprised CdM still has it on-line.

It is a particularly useful report in terms of assessing public opinion in Portugal at that time and some other facts that are debated erroneously.

I am trying to assess whether it could survive the libel requirements here, and we could debate its import.  Or whether I need to take it to SiningInLuz, where I can 100% control it re libel.

[John]

One has to wonder has the increased activity on here as regards trying to persuade people, especially that Madeleine is still alive, is linked to the 3 rd of May, and the tenth year of her having disappeared without trace.

There will be a media blitz in line with that.

Also,  I find it quite nauseating when certain people imply, that merely because many people believe she is dead, it is somehow  an inhumane attitude to take.

One does get the impression that certain parties on here would like to control activity in favour of a pro-Mccann stance at all times.

I hope she is still alive, it would be wonderful if she were and could be reunited with her family some day but I fear the signs aren't good.

[ShiningInLuz]

That's just it, John.  Madeleine McCann was coming up on four years when she vanished.  That was ten years ago.

English may not be her native language any more, she may not even understand it very well by now if she hasn't heard it spoken over that space of time.
Her skin may be darkened by the sun ... her hair colouring may have been changed also.

The only external feature which could not be changed is the iris of her eye ... and it is not unique to her.

Should Madeleine be alive today, the one thing we can be certain of is that she will no longer be recognisable as the little girl whose photograph became so familiar to us in 2007.  Age alone will have seen to that.

I firmly believe that Madeleine was alive and well when she was removed from the McCann apartment;  Dave Edgar and others have stated that it is usual for a predator to discard a child shortly after abduction, whether alive or if dead leaving the body to be found usually nearby.

There is therefore every possibility Madeleine may remain 'hidden' in the last place anyone would look for her ... and that is not too far from where she vanished.

The idea that Portuguese people do not use English is a non-starter.  I speak to my Dutch neighbour in English because my knowledge of Dutch does not extend much beyond 'Edam'.

English is the lingua Franca in Portugal.

[Brietta]

One has to wonder has the increased activity on here as regards trying to persuade people, especially that Madeleine is still alive, is linked to the 3 rd of May, and the tenth year of her having disappeared without trace.

There will be a media blitz in line with that.

Also,  I find it quite nauseating when certain people imply, that merely because many people believe she is dead, it is somehow  an inhumane attitude to take.

One does get the impression that certain parties on here would like to control activity in favour of a pro-Mccann stance at all times.

There is nothing extraordinary for people to think that a child who has been missing for ten years may possibly be dead.

It only becomes questionable if they endeavour to proselytise that view in countless, untiring efforts to 'educate' others in that view.

Cui bono?

If no-one is looking for a missing child ... the individual who took her and who may still be holding her isn't going to be looking over his or her shoulder.

Makes them rather obvious candidates for who may be 'protecting' a kidnapper. 

[Alfie]

So in view of your claim that the McCanns are 'off limits'  - how do you think SY would deal with any evidence in the files which emerged during the investigation which clearly pointed a finger at the McCanns?   Would they ignore it on the grounds they have been told the  McCanns are 'off limits' ?     Surely not.

I already asked this question and was given a clear "yes" in response. 

[Brietta]

The idea that Portuguese people do not use English is a non-starter.  I speak to my Dutch neighbour in English because my knowledge of Dutch does not extend much beyond 'Edam'.

English is the lingua Franca in Portugal.

Goncalo Amaral does not speak English ... or so we have been told.

[John]

That's just it, John.  Madeleine McCann was coming up on four years when she vanished.  That was ten years ago.

English may not be her native language any more, she may not even understand it very well by now if she hasn't heard it spoken over that space of time.
Her skin may be darkened by the sun ... her hair colouring may have been changed also.

The only external feature which could not be changed is the iris of her eye ... and it is not unique to her.

Should Madeleine be alive today, the one thing we can be certain of is that she will no longer be recognisable as the little girl whose photograph became so familiar to us in 2007.  Age alone will have seen to that.

I firmly believe that Madeleine was alive and well when she was removed from the McCann apartment;  Dave Edgar and others have stated that it is usual for a predator to discard a child shortly after abduction, whether alive or if dead leaving the body to be found usually nearby.

There is therefore every possibility Madeleine may remain 'hidden' in the last place anyone would look for her ... and that is not too far from where she vanished.

I can agree with some of that Brietta but I don't believe anyone removed her from the apartment.  Like Exton I believe she left the apartment under her own steam but got into trouble thereafter. I personally don't think she survived but like you I think she can be found nearby.  That said however, the family have to maintain hope and it is hope which takes them forward.

[ShiningInLuz]

It makes no difference what the remit was - all the evidence and information available to SY for investigation remained exactly the same.    And until they went through it they wouldn't know what was in it.    It follows that if there was evidence against the McCanns contained within it - then it would have come to light.     To deliberately and wilfully  ignore such evidence once it had been found would be perverting the course of justice imo.

I do not believe that the many SY police officers involved in sifting through the evidence would agree to be part of  a huge conspiracy to protect people whom the evidence had indicated could be guilty of a crime.

Way too far fetched for me.

To the part I have bolded - no the evidence and information does not remain the same.  It is very different indeed.

For example, the checking routine influences what went on not to a minor extent but to a major extent.

For example, the state of the children's bedroom influences what went on to a major extent.

For example, the McCann phone calls that night influence what went on to a major extent.

And answers are not likely to turn up soon if the remit says abduction.

[G-Unit]

Doesn't the Tanner sighting of a male Caucasian sort of rule out Monteiro or are we to accept Redwood's unverifiable and unproven claim that Tannerman may have been Crècheman?

No-one is suggesting he kidnapped a child.

[stephen25000]

There is nothing extraordinary for people to think that a child who has been missing for ten years may possibly be dead.

It only becomes questionable if they endeavour to proselytise that view in countless, untiring efforts to 'educate' others in that view.

Cui bono?

If no-one is looking for a missing child ... the individual who took her and who may still be holding her isn't going to be looking over his or her shoulder.

Makes them rather obvious candidates for who may be 'protecting' a kidnapper.

...up you should also include the possibility then, there was no abduction, kidnapping or burglary.

That is also the view of many people.

For those who wish to search though, I would add this.

Stop typing about it,  don't castigate others, and do it yourself.

[ShiningInLuz]

Goncalo Amaral does not speak English ... or so we have been told.

Whether he does or not is immaterial, one swallow does not make a summer.

Which language do you think US and UK movies and TV shows are broadcast in here?

When 2 of the 3 major TV broadcasting channels wanted to buy the broadcasting right to Crimewatch 2013, which language do you think it would have been aired in?