Have we learnt anything from the Maddie case?

[Robittybob1]

What we know is it wasn't done. What we don't know is why it wasn't done.

From reading the odd file and statement they all emphasise that there didn't appear to have been a forced entry.  Had there been a broken door or jemmy marks on the windows the response hopefully would have been different.
So every one in authority is lulled into thinking "MM has just wandered off on her own, she'll be found soon enough".

OK should Kate's claim that the shutters were up (even though they are now down) have elicited an immediate and different response from the GNR? 
IMO The thought process should have been:
"A kid that age would not have done that on her own - We should activate the kidnapping response rather than the standard missing kid response."

[Robittybob1]

There is no way of knowing so the McCanns, unless the case is solved, will never know that every lead has been followed up.

There were many "sightings" of MM so there is never going to be a claim every lead was followed up.  To follow up every lead became virtually impossible IMO.  Solving the case will never fix this.

[John]

I emphasise that because missing kids happen quite often, and I'm sure police resources would be stretched if they were to set up road blocks and lock down the parents house every time a child went missing. Interesting thought though if this was the standard approach.

In child disappearance cases it can usually be determined quite quickly whether a youngster has been abducted, wandered off on their own or were the victim of something more sinister.  The Madeleine case is interesting in that despite claims that the bedroom shutter had been raised and the window opened, a search was conducted on the basis of a child who had wandered off and it was only later after the Tanner revelation that this switched to searching for an abductor.

[Robittybob1]

In child disappearance cases it can usually be determined quite quickly whether a youngster has been abducted, wandered off on their own or were the victim of something more sinister.  The Madeleine case is interesting in that despite claims that the bedroom shutter had been raised and the window opened, a search was conducted on the basis of a child who had wandered off and it was only later after the Tanner revelation that this switched to searching for an abductor.

What I couldn't make out was the continual emphasis on tracker dog searching till they had searched and area (of was it 7 km around Ocean Club?).  I could never imagine Madeleine walking this distance on her own so either someone would have needed to carry her alive or deceased over that distance.  For that reason I'm not really convinced they ever believed Madeleine had been abducted for the same search area is covered for an abductor on foot or a person on foot looking for a place to dispose of a body.

[Mr Gray]

What I couldn't make out was the continual emphasis on tracker dog searching till they had searched and area (of was it 7 km around Ocean Club?).  I could never imagine Madeleine walking this distance on her own so either someone would have needed to carry her alive or deceased over that distance.  For that reason I'm not really convinced they ever believed Madeleine had been abducted for the same search area is covered for an abductor on foot or a person on foot looking for a place to dispose of a body.

PJ final report...it is highly unlikely that maddie left the apartment herself...it would be reasonable to suppose they ahd reasons to believe that...until we understand those reasons...woke and wandered is considerd highly unlikely

[Robittybob1]

PJ final report...it is highly unlikely that maddie left the apartment herself...it would be reasonable to suppose they ahd reasons to believe that...until we understand those reasons...woke and wandered is considerd highly unlikely

what I found is they the PJ believed the McCanns about somethings but not others.  Like it seems the PJ believe the McCanns when they say Madeleine didn't wake up and wander yet they don't believe they weren't involved with her burial.

So in my study which has been going on for 19 months now I'm finding there is a possibility she left by the front door but possibly someone closes that door after Madeleine has got out, so Kate does not read the signs correctly.  (Normally if she had left by the front door the door would be open but it wasn't.  So she thinks she has NOT left on her own by that door.  The PJ believe that but fail to realise there could have been a visitor who closes that front door.
That visitor does not want to own up for he would be accused of her death, so we never hear about that visit.

I know someone will say that is speculation but the exact same scenario happened to someone I know.
It is an option that can't be discounted.
They have considered it "highly unlikely" but we shouldn't.

[Mr Gray]

what I found is they the PJ believed the McCanns about somethings but not others.  Like it seems the McCanns say Madeleine didn't wake up and wander yet they don't believe they weren't involved with her burial.


So in my study which has been going on for 19 months now I'm finding there is a possibility she left by the front door but possibly someone closes that door after Madeleine has got out, so Kate does not read the signs correctly.  (Normally if she had left by the front door the door would be open but it wasn't.  So she thinks she has NOT left on her own by that door.  The PJ believe that but fail to realise there could have been a visitor who closes that front door.

you are not taking into account all the evidence because you do not know all the evidence,,,so your conclusions are limited

[Robittybob1]

you are not taking into account all the evidence because you do not know all the evidence,,,so your conclusions are limited

True and that is what I said  "I'm finding there is a possibility she left by the front door but possibly someone closes that door after Madeleine has got out, so Kate does not read the signs correctly.  (Normally if she had left by the front door the door would be open but it wasn't.  So she thinks she has NOT left on her own by that door.  The PJ believe that but fail to realise there could have been a visitor who closes that front door.
That visitor does not want to own up for he would be accused of her death, so we never hear about that visit.

I know someone will say that is speculation but the exact same scenario happened to someone I know.
It is an option that can't be discounted."

Half of what I said there is based on evidence that would need to come out.  Every now and then there is a video clip where Kate says "I know more than you" so I presume there is more evidence that could come out at some stage.

[barrier]

From reading the odd file and statement they all emphasise that there didn't appear to have been a forced entry.  Had there been a broken door or jemmy marks on the windows the response hopefully would have been different.
So every one in authority is lulled into thinking "MM has just wandered off on her own, she'll be found soon enough".

OK should Kate's claim that the shutters were up (even though they are now down) have elicited an immediate and different response from the GNR? 
IMO The thought process should have been:
"A kid that age would not have done that on her own - We should activate the kidnapping response rather than the standard missing kid response."

Getting on towards 11 yrs now,that is an all too easy a summation to make.

[Brietta]

Getting on towards 11 yrs now,that is an all too easy a summation to make.

I think the condition Kate found the window and the blind in was certainly an issue a competent investigation would have studied very carefully indeed.

Instead according to Jose Manuel Olivera, Crime reporter for the 'Diario de Noticias' the Portuguese press immediately began to receive leaks from the police that the witnesses' account of events was not believed and was nothing more than a "badly told story".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm

In my opinion knee jerk attitudes like that arrived at so instantaneously and leaked to be prejudicial to the main witnesses, could only have been detrimental to the search for a missing child whoever that child might have been.

[barrier]

I think the condition Kate found the window and the blind in was certainly an issue a competent investigation would have studied very carefully indeed.

Instead according to Jose Manuel Olivera, Crime reporter for the 'Diario de Noticias' the Portuguese press immediately began to receive leaks from the police that the witnesses' account of events was not believed and was nothing more than a "badly told story".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm

In my opinion knee jerk attitudes like that arrived at so instantaneously and leaked to be prejudicial to the main witnesses, could only have been detrimental to the search for a missing child whoever that child might have been.

Mark Rowley May 2017:

Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation.

No matter how much some want it not to be,the first investigation is/was ok with non other than the Assistant Commissioner of the MET police,those tasked with investigating a crime in a foreign country where they have no jurisdiction..

[ShiningInLuz]

From reading the odd file and statement they all emphasise that there didn't appear to have been a forced entry.  Had there been a broken door or jemmy marks on the windows the response hopefully would have been different.
So every one in authority is lulled into thinking "MM has just wandered off on her own, she'll be found soon enough".

OK should Kate's claim that the shutters were up (even though they are now down) have elicited an immediate and different response from the GNR? 
IMO The thought process should have been:
"A kid that age would not have done that on her own - We should activate the kidnapping response rather than the standard missing kid response."

Let me think.  What was the GNR response process in 2007?  Conduct an initial investigation to verify basic facts, then if it looked like an incident outside their sphere of expertise, escalate it to the PJ?

Wasn't that what the GNR did?

Kindly explain what the GNR 'kidnapping response' was in 2007.  I have never heard of that one before.

[Brietta]

Mark Rowley May 2017:
No matter how much some want it not to be,the first investigation is/was ok with non other than the Assistant Commissioner of the MET police,those tasked with investigating a crime in a foreign country where they have no jurisdiction..

The coordinator of the first investigation was sacked and the investigation taken over by Rebelo whose very first task was to clean up the mess left behind and sort the files into some form of digitised order.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488802/Madeleine-New-police-chiefs-fury-mess-inherited-predecessor.html

Incompetence of that scale in a missing child case ~ any case for that matter is absolutely mind boggling.  I think if you study the situation as it was at the time you will find that the bulk of usable material was that recovered after Amaral's departure is entirely due to the Rebelo investigation.  Who in my opinion never quite get the credit they are due for the professionalism they showed in extricating the PJ from the disaster they inherited from Amaral.

But even they could not make up the ground that had been lost.

[barrier]

The coordinator of the first investigation was sacked and the investigation taken over by Rebelo whose very first task was to clean up the mess left behind and sort the files into some form of digitised order.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488802/Madeleine-New-police-chiefs-fury-mess-inherited-predecessor.html

Incompetence of that scale in a missing child case ~ any case for that matter is absolutely mind boggling.  I think if you study the situation as it was at the time you will find that the bulk of usable material was that recovered after Amaral's departure is entirely due to the Rebelo investigation.  Who in my opinion never quite get the credit they are due for the professionalism they showed in extricating the PJ from the disaster they inherited from Amaral.

But even they could not make up the ground that had been lost.

How many interviews were conducted in Portugal after Mr Amarals removal and the archiving?

[Carana]

I think the condition Kate found the window and the blind in was certainly an issue a competent investigation would have studied very carefully indeed.

Instead according to Jose Manuel Olivera, Crime reporter for the 'Diario de Noticias' the Portuguese press immediately began to receive leaks from the police that the witnesses' account of events was not believed and was nothing more than a "badly told story".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm

In my opinion knee jerk attitudes like that arrived at so instantaneously and leaked to be prejudicial to the main witnesses, could only have been detrimental to the search for a missing child whoever that child might have been.

That the PJ was leaking like a sieve is mentioned by several journalists in the Leveson report. I did listen to several of them, but just from the actual report without hunting through all the journalists' testimonies:

1.9 By the summer of 2007, however, what had begun as a sympathetic approach by the press to an ongoing personal tragedy had altered; this change had been prompted by ‘leaks’ from the Portuguese police to the local and British media representing their version or speculation of what might have happened to Madeleine. Some, but certainly by no means all, sections of the press in the UK decided to run with stories which alleged that the McCanns were in some way responsible for the disappearance of their daughter.
http://leveson.robertsharp.co.uk/F/chapter5/#para3-1