UK Justice Forum

I don’t agree that the McCanns received preferential treatment.   Operation Grange is not about them, it’s about their daughter and about investigating her disappearance.  When the investigation was re-opened £14 m wasn’t thrown at it all at once.  But once the investigation established that there were many leads to be followed up then more resources were needed.   Do you think having spent a million or two and establishing loads of new leads they should simply have left it at that because a million or two quid is enough per child?  How much is too much to spend on trying to solve a case in your view?  Should an investigation continue until all avenues have been exhausted or when a pre-determined amount per child has been exhausted?  What’s the betting you don’t answer these questions either?

Absolutely every child should be searched for until the last snippet of information is investigated and discarded but in the real world and with the budget constraints placed on law enforcement agencies this is not feasible and  hard decisions have to be made.

Where is the multi million pound budget set aside to look into the case of Sandy Davidson or Holly Bringan or indeed Daniel Entwistle who went missing only a few short years before Madeleine? Where is their cold case review to see if any new leads have surfaced? Are their parents pleas for some kind of justice for their child any less important than those of the McCanns and if not why have they no police force following leads that may have been missed?

When a child goes missing it is their parents who plead for help and in those pleadings the McCanns were listened to where others weren’t. That is simply a fact. So yes, while  Madeleine was the object of the investigation, the preferential treatment of the parent’s pleas in comparison to many other parents in a similar situation is undeniable.

No…missing child…singular.

Besides HLG was a child abuse investigation not an investigation into missing children.

Why should the nature of the crime against the child be relevant wrt to the amount spent trying to solve the case?

Explain why not.  Your beef appears to be the disparity in the amount of money spent on criminal investigations involving children, no?

No…missing child…singular.

Besides HLG was a child abuse investigation not an investigation into missing children.

Then why were the McCanns given more resources? Both children are still missing.

That’s the question I keep asking you and which you refuse to answer.  What makes the McCannx so special?  You claim preferential treatment so there must be a reason. 

You agree that more money has been spent on this case than the case of any other missing child. Why do you think that was?

Why do you think I should I do you the courtesy of answering your questions when you refuse to answer mine?  Answer my question and I will answer yours.