The justification is that when a little girl vanished without trace an inadequate police investigation occurred which resulted in premature closure of her case while there were investigative opportunities in existence which were missed and therefore ignored.
Years later a review of her case highlighted procedures which had been missed and steps were taken to rectify that situation.
Madeleine McCann or any other missing British national abroad, surely merited that much consideration given the gaps evident in her case initially?
Kindly provide some examples to support this barrage of criticism.
Let me see ....
Reconstruction blocked. Not done by OG to date.
Re-interviewed lots of people interviewed at the time.
Dug up 3 areas in/around Luz, to find that 41 'anomalies' were not anomalous. Learned how hard it is to dig a grave in the Algarve.
Added 2 known plus two unknown men as arguidos. Of the two unknown men, one was 16 at the time. The other is clearly not fit-for-crime-purpose.
Published 2 e-fits not around at the time, and which are positively toxic.
Sterling work. Around 11 or 12 million sterling.
So are you going to state clearly and unequivocally what Paulo Rebelo's team allegedly missed?
Or are you merely broadcasting your opinion that the first investigation does not meet your fancy?