So without analysing the timeline or the group's activity he just took a punt at it anyway. The more I learn about the Met the less they impress.
I may be mixing Mr Horrocks up with guy allegedly told to steer clear of OG. So I may be doing him a disservice.
However, as a retired police officer he is at certain advantages to us, in others on a par with us, and in others at a disadvantage to us.
I see Mr Horrocks has visited the scene, and has worked out with accuracy where such a scheme could be implemented, how long it would take, and one escape route that shows how quickly a perpetrator would be safe from the Tapas 9.
I know there are other escape-to-safety routes dotted around 5A.
Having worked out that an abduction could be executed in 2 minutes, with safety taking around 30 seconds, Mr Horrocks has no need to analyse the time frame further. The published time frames have plenty of 2 minute gaps. In this respect, Mr Horrocks is on a par with us, as neither he nor we have access to the people who might be able to refine the time line.
Mr Horrocks is at a disadvantage to us in a key respect. Talking Heads are expected to chop and change between cases as the media requires. The one and only case I am interested in is Madeleine.
I have yet to review the Panorama special, but there is one small segment that may, indirectly, have originated with me. That comes with focus on this one case, plus some input from forum members who are rigorous in their cross-checks, plus a lot more knowledge of Luz than Mr Horrocks.