UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Other High Profile Cases and Persons of Interest => Twenty years on, the mystery of who shot Jill Dando still prevails. => Topic started by: John on June 28, 2013, 04:03:56 AM
-
I have severe reservations about the ability of Scotland Yard to conduct a proper investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann given that several members of the team were involved in the wrongful conviction of Barry George who as a consequence of their actions served a term of some 8 years in prison.
It is bad enough that someone of sound mind should serve time in prison for a crime they did not commit but to implicate a guy with learning difficulties in what was most probably a professional assination is despicable in my book.
120
-
That is a matter of faith, and no more than that.
-
Yes, faith in SY.
-
Yes, faith in SY.
Did you have faith in the conviction of Barry George by the same team ?
All I see largely in the mccann supporters is blind faith.
-
I bet you did when they found him guilty.
Remember he was not alone in that decision.
He was not sacked he is still working and thought highly of or he wouldn't be in charge of this review.
By the way my faith is not blind, they are getting somewhere, they have found new evidence and are progressing with the review.
Sorry if it is a disappointment to you Stephen that SY are doing so well and saying that they believe that Madeleine was abducted, but don't be bitter, they might find a little girl and reunite her with her parents.
-
I bet you did when they found him guilty.
Remember he was not alone in that decision.
He was not sacked he is still working and thought highly of or he wouldn't be in charge of this review.
By the way my faith is not blind, they are getting somewhere, they have found new evidence and are progressing with the review.
Sorry if it is a disappointment to you Stephen that SY are doing so well and saying that they believe that Madeleine was abducted, but don't be bitter, they might find a little girl and reunite her with her parents.
It was wrong.
Fact.
-
SY believe Madeleine was abducted.
Fact.
-
SY believe Madeleine was abducted.
Fact.
SY got it wrong in the Dando case.
FACT.
Do you have idea of the percentage of cases solved by SY ?
Likewise, do you have any idea of how many times they get it wrong ?
As to the SY view on abduction, well that's simple.
All they have to do is find Madeleine.
-
The Yard investigation is not complete ( i believe Redwood said they were two thirds of the way through the review) so we do not know what, at the end of their investigation, they are going to determine happened (if indeed they can solve the case).
As such the theory put forward by the PJ is still valid for discussion in a discussion forum about the case.
It comes back to what i said yesterday, you seem to want to stifle debate about the case so that this forum becomes one of a myriad of closed talking shops, which seem to dominate the web about this case.
Provided the issues from both sides can be discussed in a civil and respectful manner this forum provides a refreshing change in that there are posters from both sides of the spectrum, debating and increasing each others knowledge.
I, for example, are learning more about the abduction scenarios and i value that in terms of my understanding of the overall case.
-
You are quite wrong about my wanting to stifle debate, providing it is proper debate. There are perfectly valid issues for discussion about this case - issues for which there is some evidence, but pointless to discuss anything that was just a figment of Amaral's (or even the collective PJ's) mind in the first place, and for which there is not a scintilla of evidence.
The investigation has moved on since 2007 when the "accident" hypothesis was first mooted, and in any case, it is absolutely impossible to debate what someone else may or may do in a given hypothetical situation, as was proposed in Icabodcrane's post above.
-
You are quite wrong about my wanting to stifle debate, providing it is proper debate. There are perfectly valid issues for discussion about this case - issues for which there is some evidence, but pointless to discuss anything that was just a figment of Amaral's (or even the collective PJ's) mind in the first place, and for which there is not a scintilla of evidence.
The investigation has moved on since 2007 when the "accident" hypothesis was first mooted, and in any case, it is absolutely impossible to debate what someone else may or may do in a given hypothetical situation, as was proposed in Icabodcrane's post above.
I don't think i am wrong, this is the second time in two days you have tried to stifle debate regarding the PJ's theories.
Theories, lest we forget, which have never been superceded since in Portugal (for if they had the case would have been reopened).
You claim the case has moved on since 2007 but as i have previously stated the PJ have never sought to reopen the case as new evidence to support either scenario has not been found or presented since then.
Given the gaps in the evidence gathered, on the basis that the investigation was incomplete at the point of archiving it, hypotheticals are what forums dedicated to discussing the case have to rely on in the absence of concrete information.
Indeed based on what is in the files, and based on the lack of detail the Yard have presented hypotheticals are all the abduction scenario has to support it.
If you want us not to discuss hypotheticals then that, by your definition, removes the ability to discuss the abduction scenario, doesn't it?
-
You are quite wrong about my wanting to stifle debate, providing it is proper debate. There are perfectly valid issues for discussion about this case - issues for which there is some evidence, but pointless to discuss anything that was just a figment of Amaral's (or even the collective PJ's) mind in the first place, and for which there is not a scintilla of evidence.
The investigation has moved on since 2007 when the "accident" hypothesis was first mooted, and in any case, it is absolutely impossible to debate what someone else may or may do in a given hypothetical situation, as was proposed in Icabodcrane's post above.
Now by 'proper debate' what you really mean is the abduction only scenario, and as to figments of the imagination, that's what the abduction remains, without a scintilla of proof.
-
Now by 'proper debate' what you really mean is the abduction only scenario, and as to figments of the imagination, that's what the abduction remains, without a scintilla of proof.
Your debate consists of 'there is no evidence of abduction'. So if as you say there is no evidence of abduction, tell me why this it the route that SY is taking?
Also please could you give me your theory if you believe Madeleine was not abducted.
-
Your debate consists of 'there is no evidence of abduction'. So if as you say there is no evidence of abduction, tell me why this it the route that SY is taking?
Also please could you give me your theory if you believe Madeleine was not abducted.
If SY had a 'clue' , the case would be over.
However, like you, SY literally don't have a clue.
Don't you remember Redwood asking the public to look for Madeleine ?
Now does that sound like a man on top of the case ?
-
If SY had a 'clue' , the case would be over.
However, like you, SY literally don't have a clue.
Don't you remember Redwood asking the public to look for Madeleine ?
Now does that sound like a man on top of the case ?
Those who believe the abduction scenario have everything invested in Andy Redwood's recent words.
I asked a question the other day which never received an answer.
If Redwood comes back to us and says that all the 38 persons of interest have been checked out and cleared and if he says there is no evidence that the Yard can find to support abduction or an abductor, then will the McCann supporters be happy for Redwood to go back and look at the group?
-
Those who believe the abduction scenario have everything invested in Andy Redwood's recent words.
I asked a question the other day which never received an answer.
If Redwood comes back to us and says that all the 38 persons of interest have been checked out and cleared and if he says there is no evidence that the Yard can find to support abduction or an abductor, then will the McCann supporters be happy for Redwood to go back and look at the group?
Good question Albertini.
Something tells me implicitly the answer will be no.
-
Your debate consists of 'there is no evidence of abduction'. So if as you say there is no evidence of abduction, tell me why this it the route that SY is taking?
Also please could you give me your theory if you believe Madeleine was not abducted.
Don't hold your breath Lace, Stephen has been asked numerous times for his opinion on what he thinks happened, but always side-steps the request.
-
Don't hold your breath Lace, Stephen has been asked numerous times for his opinion on what he thinks happened, but always side-steps the request.
Is that the best you can do.
As to the 'insulting', don't preach on that. It's called hypocrisy.
-
Those who believe the abduction scenario have everything invested in Andy Redwood's recent words.
I asked a question the other day which never received an answer.
If Redwood comes back to us and says that all the 38 persons of interest have been checked out and cleared and if he says there is no evidence that the Yard can find to support abduction or an abductor, then will the McCann supporters be happy for Redwood to go back and look at the group?
The McCanns and their friends have been checked and cleared.
There's your answer ...
-
The McCanns and their friends have been checked and cleared.
There's your answer ...
Terrific, can you show me clear evidence that they have been checked?
I know what Redwood said, that they are not suspects, but i did not see him state categorically they have been checked out and that their statements have been put through HOLMES II.
-
Those who believe the abduction scenario have everything invested in Andy Redwood's recent words.
I asked a question the other day which never received an answer.
If Redwood comes back to us and says that all the 38 persons of interest have been checked out and cleared and if he says there is no evidence that the Yard can find to support abduction or an abductor, then will the McCann supporters be happy for Redwood to go back and look at the group?
Why would he do that? He has looked at the group, he has said the McCann's and their friends are not suspects.
You say if Redwood checked out and clears all 38 persons. He has checked out and cleared the McCann's and their friends.
-
The McCanns and their friends have been checked and cleared.
There's your answer ...
No we don't know they've been checked.
As to the 'competence' of SY, that was adequately displayed in the Jill Dando case.
-
Is that the best you can do.
As to the 'insulting', don't preach on that. It's called hypocrisy.
Nothing hypocritical in pointing out the truth Stephen.
Of course you could always prove me wrong and answer Lace's polite request to give her your theory on what YOU think happened if you don't believe Madeleine was abducted?
-
No we don't know they've been checked.
As to the 'competence' of SY, that was adequately displayed in the Jill Dando case.
Then how do you imagine that SY have come to the conclusion that the McCann's and their friends are not suspects?
Of course they have been checked.
-
Nothing hypocritical in pointing out the truth Stephen.
Of course you could always prove me wrong and answer Lace's polite request to give her your theory on what YOU think happened if you don't believe Madeleine was abducted?
I already have stated my belief that she had an accident in the apartment.
As to what happened next I don't know for sure, but there are 'possibilities'.
-
Why would he do that? He has looked at the group, he has said the McCann's and their friends are not suspects.
You say if Redwood checked out and clears all 38 persons. He has checked out and cleared the McCann's and their friends.
We know he has said the group are not suspects but we do not know for certain that the Yard have checked out their statements either partially or fully.
I am comfortable with letting the Yard get on with their work.
I also know that the focus of investigations change through the investigative course. I am putting forward a suggestion that at this moment in time the group are not suspects or persons of interest BUT that may change once these 38 leads and "persons have interest" have been identified and eliminated from the enquiry.
What concerns me about Redwood's statement is this. Let us say Madeleine was abducted and someone is holding the poor child now.
For Redwood to say there are "38 persons of interest" instantly puts Madeleine's life in jeopardy. Because if an abductor has her then he will not know if he is on this list and whether he's going to get a knock on the door from the boys in blue.
As such it is a very real fear that any abductor hearing Redwood's words would instantly dispose of the poor child, and for want of a better expression regarding a child "get rid of the evidence".
I cannot accept that the Yard would take that risk which leads me to suspect Cider Andy isn't giving us the whole picture.
-
If Redwood comes back to us and says that all the 38 persons of interest have been checked out and cleared and if he says there is no evidence that the Yard can find to support abduction or an abductor, then will the McCann supporters be happy for Redwood to go back and look at the group?
Once eliminated the 38, Mr Redwood will likely be sorry they tried it hard but couldn't identify for sure the perpetrators nor determine exactly what happened to Madeleine. They of course will keep in touch with the Portuguese in case anything comes up et patati et patata.
Operation Grange will have come to an end stating the abduction issue stays unresolved and nothing more.
(I'm afraid) no other operation will supersede OG.
-
Why would he do that? He has looked at the group, he has said the McCann's and their friends are not suspects.
You say if Redwood checked out and clears all 38 persons. He has checked out and cleared the McCann's and their friends.
The very first thing Andy Redwood and his team would want to do is check over all the information they have on the McCanns and their friends in order to eliminate them or not - as the case may be.
It would be vital to establish that first - in order to know which direction to go in.
It's quite obvious that as a result of those enquiries they have been eliminated - therefore there would be no point in revisiting old ground - only to come up with the same results.
(must go out now)
-
Then how do you imagine that SY have come to the conclusion that the McCann's and their friends are not suspects?
Of course they have been checked.
Perhaps because the Yard are looking at the abduction scenarios first with a view to ruling them out before moving backwards??
I described it the other days as an "outwards then inwards" investigation rather than the opposite which the PJ undertook.
-
My fear is that too much time has elapsed for any significant clues to be unearthed at this stage. If she is still alive the only hope really is that at some stage she comes across a media article or reads something on the internet and realises who she is.
If she is dead I can't see the secret of that death or the location of her final resting place ever being discovered.
-
In fact the Yard never claimed they had examined and eliminated one by one the possible crimes listed by the AG to find out that abduction was the only explanation.
It would be a great finding, but I don't think they'll afford it.
The main reason why they focused on abduction is that it leaves a chance for Madeleine to be alive. None of the other possible crimes does.
Only that hope can legitimate the huge amount of money and human energy spent by OG. In the abduction scheme it's hard to see how the parents could be suspects.
-
My fear is that too much time has elapsed for any significant clues to be unearthed at this stage. If she is still alive the only hope really is that at some stage she comes across a media article or reads something on the internet and realises who she is.
If she is dead I can't see the secret of that death or the location of her final resting place ever being discovered.
Do you accept that Redwood's words, have put her life in danger (if of course she is still alive)?
I generally agree with you although that being said IF at some point in the future the Yard go back to the group and interview them individually then breakthrough's may occur.
Miss Tanner in particular springs to my mind.
-
Do you accept that Redwood's words, have put her life in danger (if of course she is still alive)?
What if Redwood's words encourages someone to come forward with evidence of who abducted her? They can see that SY are getting too close for comfort and want to make sure they get in first before they seek them out? Show that they want to help and so securing a lighter sentence for their part in it?
Why would the abductor kill Madeleine? If the abductor knows that SY are eventually going to catch up with him, then it would be stupid to kill her, he would have a sentence for murder.
-
Do you accept that Redwood's words, have put her life in danger (if of course she is still alive)?
What if Redwood's words encourages someone to come forward with evidence of who abducted her? They can see that SY are getting too close for comfort and want to make sure they get in first before they seek them out? Show that they want to help and so securing a lighter sentence for their part in it?
Why would the abductor kill Madeleine? If the abductor knows that SY are eventually going to catch up with him, then it would be stupid to kill her, he would have a sentence for murder.
This case has been in the news on a regular basis for over 6 years and nothing.
I remember when the so called 'eye defect' came up and it was stated then, by advertising that, it would be risky, because if she had been alive , it would be a means of identifying her.
-
Wonder how much of this is true. Shocking, if it is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2372265/Jill-Dando-shot-dead-olive-skinned-assassin-says-eyewitness.html
-
Wonder how much of this is true. Shocking, if it is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2372265/Jill-Dando-shot-dead-olive-skinned-assassin-says-eyewitness.html
Excellent find Redblossom. 8((()*/
The Jill Dando case and Scotland Yards botched investigation of it just gets worse and worse. The Daily Mail is to be applauded for running this exposé since it reveals another botched investigation.
-
It's your police force.
I wouldn't condemn a whole corporation for the miss or under-dids of some. The SY has a place in the world police forces and because there are some bad apples we cannot and must not tinge the work of thousands. Scotland Yard is and always will be praised as an example (come on, I grew up reading novels about those guys).
Unfortunately corruption (or more acurately, politics pressure) permeates even our most sacred institutions. I've watched it in our PJ (which 10 years ago I would have sworn would never oblige) and it's very clear in this late PR attempt to justify the millions expended on an operation they knew would lead nowhere.
Grange Operation is an hoax of the neo-liberals, or conservatives, or whatever they call themselves nowadays (if they know what to respond to)
-
The Barry George fiasco was a disgrace. Little doubt about that .
I think that time will show that the Madeleine Mccann fiasco was also a disgrace. Not your average cop; he worked hard.
Just the top guys ... many / most of them
-
It just isn't good enough that police officers who target innocent individuals are allowed to carry on with their careers as if nothing had happened. I find it gutwrenchingly appalling what those b........s did to poor Barry George. What a bunch of shits and to now deny him some sort of decent compo, those judges are just as bad.
In my opinion the Barry George and the Stephen Lawrence cases have revealed just what SY is about these days.
-
I would agree that it is unfair to qualify entire police forces as incompetent/corrupt or whatever else because of a few bad apples.
If a police force still has an underlying brutal/quick-conviction/corrupt/racist/nationalistic culture... that may require longer-term change, which may be underway to different degrees in various jurisdictions.
Even so, I wouldn't find it fair to tar everyone with the same brush.
-
This is an interesting read:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2007/2722.html
The successful appeal seemed to rest on the likelihood/unlikelihood of that particle in his pocket coming from the bullet of the fired gun that murdered Ms Dando
-
This case has been in the news on a regular basis for over 6 years and nothing.
I remember when the so called 'eye defect' came up and it was stated then, by advertising that, it would be risky, because if she had been alive , it would be a means of identifying her.
If she had been your daughter/niece/grandchild, what would you have proposed to ask concerned citizens to be attentive to in order to distinguish her from every other little blonde 3-year-old?
-
told officers they needed to find a man with olive skin, dark hair and who looked like he was of Mediterranean origin,' he told the Sunday Mirror.
'But straight off, they said "We are looking at a local guy over this murder. He is called Barry George." They asked if I knew him and described what he looked like.'
I'm appalled if it's true that police said that ...
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2372265/Jill-Dando-shot-dead-olive-skinned-assassin-says-eyewitness.html#ixzz2Zn7FBlSd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
-
Why would the abductor kill Madeleine? If the abductor knows that SY are eventually going to catch up with him, then it would be stupid to kill her, he would have a sentence for murder.
Well if SY were knocking on his door they would have a harder task convicting him without the child than with the child, wouldn't they?
And really, given the case do you think an abductor would be worried about the length of sentence he'd get between this kidnapping and murder? There will be no difference other than being caught without the evidence gives you more of a chance than being caught with the evidence.
It's common sense!
The simple answer is "yes" he has endangered her life if she is still alive.
-
Oh and in reply to the question posed in the thread i would suggest this is the best answer for the majority of this forum:
"Yes we should have faith whilstever the Yard are pursuing an abduction, but that faith will mysteriously vanish to be replaced with contempt and cries of no faith if the Yard come back to investigate the parents or their friends!"
8(0(*
-
Well if SY were knocking on his door they would have a harder task convicting him without the child than with the child, wouldn't they?
And really, given the case do you think an abductor would be worried about the length of sentence he'd get between this kidnapping and murder? There will be no difference other than being caught without the evidence gives you more of a chance than being caught with the evidence.
It's common sense!
The simple answer is "yes" he has endangered her life if she is still alive.
it was the tabloids that said that they were about to "swoop", which I find irresponsible. They've identified 38 or so people who they'd like to question... they may all be innocent, but simply need to be eliminated.
-
Oh and in reply to the question posed in the thread i would suggest this is the best answer for the majority of this forum:
"Yes we should have faith whilstever the Yard are pursuing an abduction, but that faith will mysteriously vanish to be replaced with contempt and cries of no faith if the Yard come back to investigate the parents or their friends!"
8(0(*
What on earth makes you think that they haven't already got every bit of information possible about the T9? It really would be dim if they hadn't, wouldn't it?
At the same time, they would be negligent if they hadn't also been checking on potential paedos who could strike again.
Wouldn't that suggest a multi-pronged approach?
-
What on earth makes you think that they haven't already got every bit of information possible about the T9? It really would be dim if they hadn't, wouldn't it? At the same time, they would be negligent if they hadn't also been checking on potential paedos who could strike again.
Wouldn't that suggest a multi-pronged approach?
I've no doubt SY know everything there is to know about the T9. That would have been their first task.
Also everything the McCanns have done in the last 6 years is the complete opposite of how guilty people would behave. You would have to be totally incapable of even an iota of common sense and logical thought to deny that.
-
I've no doubt SY know everything there is to know about the T9. That would have been their first task.
Also everything the McCanns have done in the last 6 years is the complete opposite of how guilty people would behave. You would have to be totally incapable of even an iota of common sense and logical thought to deny that.
In order to convey innocence the guilty should act in a way that they should not be expected to act.
-
In order to convey innocence the guilty should act in a way that they should not be expected to act.
Do you really think that any normal person, let alone two of them - could keep up such a public 'pretence' for 6 years - when everything you said in public had to carefully practised first because it was a lie - and you had to spend a massive part of your life doing things -which had no purpose at all because none of it was based on the truth. Where you had to watch every word you said every minute of every day, and organise events and attend events which were actually meaningless to you, but which you were forced to do - to keep up the pretence.
What sort of life would that be? It wouldn't be one worth living IMO. For a start the constant pressure alone would be unbearable.
If the McCanns were guilty they would have come home thanking their lucky stars that they had got away with it and kept their heads down until it had all died away from the public's mind - and we would not be here discussing them now.
Guilty people do not spend years of their lives keeping their 'crime' as high as possible in the public's mind or pleading for their case to be reviewed and re-examined by one of the best police forces in the world. As someone else said - that would be like turkeys voting for Christmas.
-
Benice, you make a good point and THIS is the ONLY potentially convincing IMO argument that they were not involved.
But they couldnt keep their head down could they? When the story was in the papers every single day for years. It has never gone from the public mind.
And you dont know their personal pyschologies, do you? What goes on. I bet you may act for the cameras if you had not told the truth and if it kept you out of jail, maintained your family life, avoiding a massive tsunami of public wrath, andnesting the millions. Hmm??
-
Going back to the OP, the SY if anything are tenacious, lets hope it wont take that long to solve this case
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10194318/PC-Keith-Blakelock-murder-new-charge-after-28-years.html
Scotland Yard will bring murder charges over the killing of PC Keith Blakelock during the Broadwater Farm riots in the next few days, it has been confirmed.
Pc Keith Blakelock was attacked during the Broadwater Farm riots in 1985 (PA)
By Ben Bryant, and David Barrett7:00AM BST 22 Jul 2013
A man who was under 18 at the time of the Broadwater Farm riots in 1985 will be prosecuted over his involvement in one of Britain’s most notorious unsolved murders.
Metropolitan Police disclosed to the Telegraph last year that after reviewing the evidence against the man, two QCs agreed there is a realistic prospect of conviction – the hurdle which investigators must clear in order to win the backing of the Crown Prosecution Service.
This week the police confirmed that five men aged between 40 and 51 who were arrested in 2010 have been re-bailed to an unspecified date in July.
The development follows a new inquiry into PC Blakelock's death. A three-year review, which started in 2000, uncovered leads and resulted in a new investigation in 2003.
The reinvestigation cost taxpayers millions of pounds and spanned 13 years.
More than 6,000 statements were examined and cutting edge DNA techniques were used to scrutinise evidence, the Daily Mail reported.
Police also compiled video of the scene using police and press photographs taken on the night.
Winston Silcott and two other men were jailed for the crime in 1987 but later had their convictions quashed on the grounds they were considered unsafe.
Detectives are understood to have had their confidence buoyed by the conviction in January of Gary Dobson and David Norris for the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence.
The officers believe that if such a long standing and legally complex case can be resolved then justice can also finally be secured for Pc Blakelock.
Pc Blakelock, 40, was attacked as he tried to protect firefighters who were tackling a supermarket blaze at the height of the riot on October 6, 1985.
After stumbling, the father of three was surrounded by a mob screaming “Kill the pig”.
He was stabbed dozens of times and the machete-wielding killers then tried to decapitate him. A later trial heard the mob intended to parade the constable’s head on a pole to taunt other officers.
Winston Silcott, Mark Braithwaite and Engin Raghip were convicted in March 1987 of Pc Blakelock’s murder but all three convictions were quashed four and a half years later, after forensic tests on pages of key interview records suggested they had been fabricated.
Silcott accepted £50,000 compensation from the Home Office but remained in prison for an unrelated murder and was released in 2003. None of the three men originally convicted is the suspect in the new case.
It was revealed on the 25th anniversary of his murder, in October 2010, that 10 men had been arrested in London and Suffolk for questioning over the crime.
All were aged in their 40s or 50s and had lived in the Tottenham area at the time of the riot.
New forensic tests were carried out on Pc Blakelock’s flame-retardant overalls, which for years had been on show to criminologists and trainee police officers at Scotland Yard’s “Black Museum”.
The garment and more than a dozen murder weapons – several machetes and a kitchen knife found embedded up to the hilt in the constable’s neck – were analysed using updated DNA techniques for the first time.
Glen Smyth, former chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, welcomed the decision to put a new suspect on trial.
He told the Daily Mail: "The brutal murder of Keith Blakelock shocked the Met to its core.
"The attack on him was motivated by evil and hatred, and committed by people who have no regard for human life."
Pc Blakelock’s widow Elizabeth said at the time of the October 2010 arrests: “I desperately hope this leads to something. It will bring the closure that we have never been able to get.
“There’s never, ever been a day goes past when I do not think of Keith and this has been hanging over us every day for the past 25 years.”
-
Benice, you make a good point and THIS is the ONLY potentially convincing IMO argument that they were not involved.
But they couldnt keep their head down could they? When the story was in the papers every single day for years. It has never gone from the public mind.
And you dont know their personal pyschologies, do you? What goes on. I bet you may act for the cameras if you had not told the truth and if it kept you out of jail, maintained your family life, avoiding a massive tsunami of public wrath, andnesting the millions. Hmm??
The media attention only carried on because the McCanns chose to stay in the public eye in order to keep Madeleine's profile high If they had come home and done nothing - eventually there would have been nothing for the press to write about.
I don't believe that the professional highly experienced trauma counsellors like Alan Pike who IIRC kept in close contact with them even after they came home would have been taken in by them if they were putting on an act.
There isn't a scrap of evidence that 'financially' speaking their lifestyle has drastically changed for the better in the last six years. Their income from Gerry's job is quite considerable and they can live a very comfortable life on that and they have Kate's earnings potential, if she decides to go back to work. If they were the kind of people who were that 'mad for money', then IMO they would not have had children in the first place.
-
I didnt say there was! The money would be a sideline, the main serious issues are what I raised in my previous post, which you did not address. End of the day you have no idea what happened so cannot rule out the possibilities.
-
If she had been your daughter/niece/grandchild, what would you have proposed to ask concerned citizens to be attentive to in order to distinguish her from every other little blonde 3-year-old?
Ludicrous ! Her own mother said you had to be very close to notice the eye defect, because Madeleine had no clear eyes.
-
The media attention only carried on because the McCanns chose to stay in the public eye in order to keep Madeleine's profile high
Let's start from the very beginning. Do you have a link for that statement ? A audio statement if possible ?
-
Those who believe the abduction scenario have everything invested in Andy Redwood's recent words.
I asked a question the other day which never received an answer.
If Redwood comes back to us and says that all the 38 persons of interest have been checked out and cleared and if he says there is no evidence that the Yard can find to support abduction or an abductor, then will the McCann supporters be happy for Redwood to go back and look at the group?
Do you have any evidence that Redwood has not already looked at the group?
-
Do you have any evidence that Redwood has not already looked at the group?
Nope, but i am not the one saying the yard have DEFINITELY cleared them.
I am saying there is no evidence to support that assertion.
-
Nope, but i am not the one saying the yard have DEFINITELY cleared them.
I am saying there is no evidence to support that assertion.
The yard has not cleared anyone
The yard has never stated madeleine was a victim of a stranger abduction
These are just interpretations and wishful thinking of what redwood has actually said
-
The yard has not cleared anyone
The yard has never stated madeleine was a victim of a stranger abduction
These are just interpretations and wishful thinking of what redwood has actually said
Quote from DCI Redwood.
Neither her parents or any of the members of the group who were with her are either persons of interest or suspects.
Red - What could possibly be clearer than that?
-
Quote from DCI Redwood.
Neither her parents or any of the members of the group who were with her are either persons of interest or suspects.
Red - What could possibly be clearer than that?
He and his colleagues got the Barry George case wrong. How clear is that ?
Meanwhile it has been confirmed that the '38 suspects' are in fact potential suspects and no more.
As to solving the case, we shall see.
-
Theresa May asks permission for Met to start Madeleine McCann inquiry in Portugal
(http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/article8738019.ece/ALTERNATES/w620/12maysplit3007.jpg)
Search: an image of Madeleine McCann as she might look on her ninth birthday and Home Secretary Theresa May
Martin Bentham
Published: 30 July 2013
Updated: 12:26, 30 July 2013
Home Secretary Theresa May has sent an official request to Lisbon for permission for Scotland Yard to begin a new investigation in Portugal into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
It follows the disclosure that the Met has identified 38 potential suspects — including 12 Britons — who are “of interest” because of their presence in Portugal when Madeleine vanished.
In the letter, drawn up for Mrs May by the Crown Prosecution Service, she asks the Portuguese authorities for their help in gathering new evidence. But, in a more significant step, she also requests permission for Met detectives to be stationed in the country.
That will effectively allow Scotland Yard to take control of the previously stalled investigation, and raise hopes of a possible breakthrough.
A response from Portugal is expected within two weeks. Last month, after a two-year review of evidence, the Met announced it was launching a full-scale investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance. She was nearly four when she went missing from her family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz on the Algarve in 2007, as her parents dined with friends nearby.
A Portuguese probe was shelved in 2008 but the Yard began a review in 2011, following the intervention of David Cameron at the request of the McCann family.
Last month the Met said that the review, which cost £5 million, had identified 38 “persons of interest” from four European countries, including Portugal. They will be the subject of the new probe. Twelve are Britons who were in Portugal at the time.
Scotland Yard has said neither the McCann family nor the friends who were staying with them were among those they have identified for further inquiries.
If Portuguese approval is given, the Met is expected to seek new forensic evidence in the country, and pursue hundreds of possible leads the review is understood to have uncovered. However, sources caution that there remains no prime suspect and the Met’s inquiries are still at an early stage.
The new Yard inquiry began partly because Portuguese authorities are unable, under their law, to reopen their probe unless compelling new evidence emerges. Met detectives will hope to uncover this, and believe it could eventually lead to the case being solved. The new investigation also raises the possibility of a trial in the UK, if a British national is identified and arrested.
The Home Office declined to comment on the letter, but confirmed that Mrs May remained determined to offer every assistance to Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry as they seek to find their daughter.
A spokesman added: “The Home Office remains committed to supporting the search for Madeleine McCann, and we have always said we would provide the Metropolitan police with the resources they need to investigate her disappearance.”
-
'....as her parents dined with friends nearby.'
Well surprise, they missed out the word drinking again.
'If Portuguese approval is given, the Met is expected to seek new forensic evidence in the country,'
That should prove interesting. I wonder if they will use dogs ?
All hypothetical of course, unless the Portuguese agree.
-
'....as her parents dined with friends nearby.'
Well surprise, they missed out the word drinking again.
'If Portuguese approval is given, the Met is expected to seek new forensic evidence in the country,'
That should prove interesting. I wonder if they will use dogs ?
All hypothetical of course, unless the Portuguese agree.
Not only did they miss out the word drinking, they also missed out how it is now necessary to take steps because of the hash job made of the investigation in Portugal. Gosh I wonder which one holds more importance!? Drinking or not, doesn't change the way the case was managed, but botching the investigation up does.
-
Not only did they miss out the word drinking, they also missed out how it is now necessary to take steps because of the hash job made of the investigation in Portugal. Gosh I wonder which one holds more importance!? Drinking or not, doesn't change the way the case was managed, but botching the investigation up does.
Prove they botched the investigation.
Rhetoric not included.
-
Prove they botched the investigation.
Rhetoric not included.
1. Removal of Amaral from the investigation because of the bad management of the investigation.
2. Damning statements by Scotland yard highlighting failures.
3. Acknowledgement by none other than Amaral himself (mentions failures in his book).
4. Information that was made evident during the Leveson Inquiry, highlighting the failures in the investigation as well as the unprofessional police practises.
Let me think...
5. Parents made arguido when there were no clear grounds for doing so.
6. Parents 'threatened' with so called positive proof of cadaver dogs during interviews. Proof of Madeleine DNA found in the hire care, etc.....all false.
7. Leaks to the press while case was still under secrecy law.
8. Failure to follow up witness statements or take statements.
9. Failure to follow up persons of interest.
10. Crime scene management
the list goes on and on and on...........
-
UK turns to Portugal in Maddie case
London's authorities want to question 38 people in the Madeleine McCann case.
The police want to interrogate Portuguese and English, so we asked for help to the PGR, because any diligence in our country can only be made if accompanied by prosecutors.
Maddie vanished in Praia da Luz in the Algarve in 2007.
Reino Unido pede ajuda a Portugal no caso Maddie
As autoridades londrinas querem interrogar 38 pessoas no caso Madeleine McCann.
A polícia inglesa quer interrogar portugueses e, por isso, pediu ajuda à PGR, pois qualquer diligência no nosso país só poderá ser feita se for acompanhada pelo Ministério Público.
Maddie desapareceu na Praia da Luz, no Algarve, em 2007.
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/nacional/portugal/reino-unido-pede-ajuda-a-portugal-no-caso-maddie182832173
-
1. Removal of Amaral from the investigation because of the bad management of the investigation.
2. Damning statements by Scotland yard highlighting failures.
3. Acknowledgement by none other than Amaral himself (mentions failures in his book).
4. Information that was made evident during the Leveson Inquiry, highlighting the failures in the investigation as well as the unprofessional police practises.
Let me think...
5. Parents made arguido when there were no clear grounds for doing so.
6. Parents 'threatened' with so called positive proof of cadaver dogs during interviews. Proof of Madeleine DNA found in the hire care, etc.....all false.
7. Leaks to the press while case was still under secrecy law.
8. Failure to follow up witness statements or take statements.
9. Failure to follow up persons of interest.
10. Crime scene management
the list goes on and on and on...........
1. The removal of Amaral would appear to have been political.
2. Damning statements of Scotland Yard. Bearing in mind their history of cock-ups they shouldn't preach. Likewise I've already asked what success rate SY have in solving crimes. No answer to date ?
3. Very few investigations are perfect, look at SY for that.
4 Leverson was a joke and then some.
5. It was the parents themselves who effectively made themselves arguidos, not the other way round.
6 Parents weho released information into the press which broke secrecy laws. Km blaming Murat with no foundation, and wanting him 'dead'.
7 The Mccanns leaked like sieves too.
8.Given the circumstances and the lack of cooperation of the Mccanns and associates, they hindered the investigation.
9. Failure to follow up persons of interest. So who are they exactly ? Bunnyman , Moustacheman, Spottyman, Braindeadman, ?
10. As to crime scene mangament, damaged before the local police even got there by the Mccanns and associates , trampling the apartment.
11.Claiming Amaral was making money from a book ?, claiming libel when the PJ had the same views ?
She writing a book and then claiming as with the fund , the money would be used on searching. In the accounts, 13% of the funds were used to search.
etc., etc. etc.
-
UK turns to Portugal in Maddie case
London's authorities want to question 38 people in the Madeleine McCann case.
The police want to interrogate Portuguese and English, so we asked for help to the PGR, because any diligence in our country can only be made if accompanied by prosecutors.
Maddie vanished in Praia da Luz in the Algarve in 2007.
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/nacional/portugal/reino-unido-pede-ajuda-a-portugal-no-caso-maddie182832173
This is already known and depends whether the Portuguese agree.
Even if they do, any UK police have to be under the supervision of the Portuguese.
-
This is already known and depends whether the Portuguese agree.
Even if they do, any UK police have to be under the supervision of the Portuguese.
That's OK
Most PT cops will be honest.
-
Better than being wrongfully pursued for a murder I suppose as was done to Barry George. ?8)@)-)
As far as hostility goes, he and his former pals brought that down upon themselves by pursuing a wrongful conviction against an innocent man.
-
Better than being wrongfully pursued for a murder I suppose as was done to Barry George. ?8)@)-)
when will you realise it was the jury who found George guilty..based on the evidence supplied...the main part being the forensics...nothing to do with SY....furthermore the appeal judges did not award compensation because they thought he could still have been found guilty without the forensics
-
when will you realise it was the jury who found George guilty..based on the evidence supplied...the main part being the forensics...nothing to do with SY....furthermore the appeal judges did not award compensation because they thought he could still have been found guilty without the forensics
False evidence supplied.
The main suspect by witnesses was blond.
George wasn't.
That is called inept police work.
-
when will you realise it was the jury who found George guilty..based on the evidence supplied...the main part being the forensics...nothing to do with SY....furthermore the appeal judges did not award compensation because they thought he could still have been found guilty without the forensics
The case would never have got to a courtroom had the police done their job properly. You dont have to be a DCI at SY to know that the Dando murder was an execution shooting.
-
The case would never have got to a courtroom had the police done their job properly. A proper stitch up it was!
that's not what the judge at the trail said but perhaps you are not familiar with the facts of the case...the police don't decide to prosecute its the CPs
-
The case would never have got to a courtroom had the police done their job properly. A proper stitch up it was!
Precisely the case.
In this situation the wrong suspect.
-
that's not what the judge at the trail said but perhaps you are not familiar with the facts of the case...the police don't decide to prosecute its the CPs
Yep, based on the info the police supplied.
-
Yep, based on the info the police supplied.
And what info did SY supply that was wrong..do some proper research...it was the forensic evidence that was suspect...nothing to do with the police.
-
And what info did SY supply that was wrong..do some proper research...it was the forensic evidence that was suspect...nothing to do with the police.
George wasn't blond Dave, was he ?
and that has nothing to do with forensics.
-
I see no reason to criticise any individual police officer - I'm sure he did everything that was required of them by their superiors.
-
I see no reason to criticise any individual police officer - I'm sure he did everything that was required of them by their superiors.
What was that?
-
George wasn't blond Dave, was he ?
and that has nothing to do with forensics.
more rubbish from Stephen...the convincing evidence was the gunpowder residue...that's what overturned the conviction...do some research
-
What was that?
You would need to refer that question to SY
-
more rubbish from Stephen...the convincing evidence was the gunpowder residue...that's what overturned the conviction...do some research
No Dave.
Keep trying.
It's you who needs to research.
Mind you, what's new about that.
-
You would need to refer that question to SY
something to do with Mr Innuendo...a renowned conspiracy theorist
-
more rubbish from Stephen...the convincing evidence was the gunpowder residue...that's what overturned the conviction...do some research
Was George blond Dave ?
According to the witnesses, the suspect was blond.
-
No Dave.
Keep trying.
It's you who needs to research.
Mind you, what's new about that.
You must be referring to another Barry George and another SY then....because the reversal of the original verdict in the Dando case was down to flawed forensic evidence...gunpowder residue...fact
-
Was George blond Dave ?
According to the witnesses, the suspect was blond.
I don't suppose we could have a cite for that, could we?
-
try this...
Barry George has been found not guilty of murdering BBC television presenter Jill Dando outside her London home.
Mr George, 48, of Fulham, west London, denied shooting 37-year-old Miss Dando on her doorstep on 26 April 1999.
He was first convicted in 2001 but an Old Bailey retrial was ordered after doubt was cast on the reliability of gunshot residue evidence.
-
You would need to refer that question to SY
Why so? You made the statement.
-
I don't suppose we could have a cite for that, could we?
Just type on google......
'Witnesses said the suspect in the Jill dando case was blonde'
-
Just type on google......
'Witnesses said the suspect in the Jill dando case was blonde'
you provide a quote showing that witnesses said the suspect was blonde...you cannot..you are talking rubbish as ujsual and again you have been found out
-
&%+((£ Twas Campbell who led that investigation folks.
Ian Horrocks also.
-
I don't suppose we could have a cite for that, could we?
Neither of the two witnesses who saw a man in the street at the exact moment of the shooting identified Barry.
The only positive identification was a woman who said she'd seen him in the street... four and a half hours before the shooting.
She identified him 17 months after the day of the shooting.
Not very convincing is it. &%&£(+
-
So you are saying SY misinterpreted the forensic information which convinced the CPS to prosecute?
-
you provide a quote showing that witnesses said the suspect was blonde...you cannot..you are talking rubbish as ujsual and again you have been found out
-----------------------------------------
Nick Ross founded the ‘front’ Crimestopper’s helpline. This helpline conveniently stopped working following an appeal for witnesses to Jill’s murder.
' One of the first journalists at the scene was Clarence Mitchell, who is employed by the intelligences services and was later the spokesperson in the mysterious disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Mitchell is a notorious master of the dark art of spin and lies, a talent shared by Labour ####, Alastair Campbell, who was strangely also quizzed by the Met at the time of the murder.
Eye witness Barry Lindsey who saw the murderer says he felt the Police "didn’t want to listen" Police had no interest in his evidence they " brushed it aside because they were obsessed with nailing Barry George" he said.
Officers conveniently forgot to question Jill’s neighbours and also botched the e-fit photo of the suspect by making his hair brown when it was actually blond. '
and to add to that two witnesses who saw a man with a Mediterranean complexion including lindsay '
------------------------------------------
'Former top police officer, John Stalker, was so shocked by the Met’s cack-handed investigation into Jill Dando’s murder, that he wrote an article outlining their ineptitude.
What’s very revealing about his analysis is the idea that the suspected killer had blonde-hair but police bizarrely issued an e-fit of a dark-haired man.
” It’s 100 days since the assassination of Jill Dando – yet Scotland Yard seem no closer to finding her killer.
They have not even uncovered a motive for her murder.
The lack of police success is not for want of endeavour. There’s no doubt Jill Dando’s killers have had incredible luck in escaping arrest.
But the police have made mistakes. Some of them operational misjudgments, others public relations cock-ups.
These are 12 of the most significant blunders I believe the inquiry team has made.
Confusion surrounds the E-fit issued. Most people believe it is of the killer.
It isn’t.
It is a composite likeness of a man seen running along Fulham Palace Road.
Nothing more.
A police E-fit has not been issued of the prime suspect – a blond haired man seen loitering outside her home. He is the probable killer. '
-
Try this for starters, that Barry George was fitted up
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jill-dando-murder-witness-comes-2071046
Redwood was not in charge of the Dando case dave, that is already known. That was Horrocks and Campbell.
-
I have 2/3 bits of information, that will hopefully help settle the Redwood/ dando arguments. A bit for both sides of the argument. And a few other bits too..................................................some snippets
Hamish Campbell was Initially the head of the team and as I have read, responsible for the arrest of B George, Two individuals connected with the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann were also connected with the investigation into the murder of Jill Dando.
Clarence Mitchell - who was at the time working for the BBC as their senior crime reporter. He was apparently the very first reporter at the scene of the crime, and covered the investigation into Jill Dando’s murder in the months following her death
Hamish Campbell - who was the investigation’s IO - placed in charge of the day-to-day investigation into Jill Dando’s murder in 1999. He was primarily responsible for the arrest and charging of Barry Bulsara, known also as ‘Barry George’, with the murder of Dando. Bulsara was sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering Jill Dando but subsequently acquitted, seven years later, on appeal.
Ian Horrocks, the ex-detective, hailed as one of Britain’s foremost investigators, who was sent out to the Algarve by Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper in February 2012 and delivered reports to the Sun and SKY NEWS backing the McCanns’ abduction claims and heavily criticising the Portuguese police.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1040718/The-trail-led-Barry-Georges-door.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-detective-in-charge-of-search-128683
On multiple occasions George has won substantial damages from tabloid newspapers over various allegations published about him, at least twice pursuing these libel claims to the High Court. In December 2009, following mediation, he accepted an undisclosed amount from Rupert Murdoch's News Group Newspapers over articles published in The Sun and the News of the World.[24] In May 2010 Mirror Group Newspapers settled with George after claims, unrelated to the Dando murder, that he had developed an obsession with singer Cheryl Cole and newsreader Kay Burley.[25]
In April 2010 it emerged that the Ministry of Justice had denied a claim of £1.4 million compensation made by George in respect of his wrongful imprisonment for Jill Dando's murder.[26] The decision was made by Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary at the time, and in August 2010 the High Court ruled that George is entitled to a judicial review of the matter.[27]
On 11 May 2011 in a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court defined "miscarriage of justice" as evidence "so undermined that no conviction could possibly be based upon it". This decision cleared the way for George's solicitor, Nicholas Baird, to request that the then Justice Secretary Ken Clarke "consider afresh" George's claim for compensation, applying the new test set out by the Court.[28] The claim was heard in the High Court, but in their summing up, judges Lord Justice Beatson and Mr Justice Irwin said: "There was indeed a case upon which a reasonable jury properly directed could have convicted the claimant of murder", and, on the strength of this, denied George compensation for wrongful incarceration.[29]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Dando
-
I have 2/3 bits of information, that will hopefully help settle the Redwood/ dando arguments. A bit for both sides of the argument. And a few other bits too..................................................some snippets
Hamish Campbell was Initially the head of the team and as I have read, responsible for the arrest of B George, Two individuals connected with the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann were also connected with the investigation into the murder of Jill Dando.
Clarence Mitchell - who was at the time working for the BBC as their senior crime reporter. He was apparently the very first reporter at the scene of the crime, and covered the investigation into Jill Dando’s murder in the months following her death
Hamish Campbell - who was the investigation’s IO - placed in charge of the day-to-day investigation into Jill Dando’s murder in 1999. He was primarily responsible for the arrest and charging of Barry Bulsara, known also as ‘Barry George’, with the murder of Dando. Bulsara was sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering Jill Dando but subsequently acquitted, seven years later, on appeal.
Ian Horrocks, the ex-detective, hailed as one of Britain’s foremost investigators, who was sent out to the Algarve by Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper in February 2012 and delivered reports to the Sun and SKY NEWS backing the McCanns’ abduction claims and heavily criticising the Portuguese police.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1040718/The-trail-led-Barry-Georges-door.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-detective-in-charge-of-search-128683
On multiple occasions George has won substantial damages from tabloid newspapers over various allegations published about him, at least twice pursuing these libel claims to the High Court. In December 2009, following mediation, he accepted an undisclosed amount from Rupert Murdoch's News Group Newspapers over articles published in The Sun and the News of the World.[24] In May 2010 Mirror Group Newspapers settled with George after claims, unrelated to the Dando murder, that he had developed an obsession with singer Cheryl Cole and newsreader Kay Burley.[25]
In April 2010 it emerged that the Ministry of Justice had denied a claim of £1.4 million compensation made by George in respect of his wrongful imprisonment for Jill Dando's murder.[26] The decision was made by Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary at the time, and in August 2010 the High Court ruled that George is entitled to a judicial review of the matter.[27]
On 11 May 2011 in a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court defined "miscarriage of justice" as evidence "so undermined that no conviction could possibly be based upon it". This decision cleared the way for George's solicitor, Nicholas Baird, to request that the then Justice Secretary Ken Clarke "consider afresh" George's claim for compensation, applying the new test set out by the Court.[28] The claim was heard in the High Court, but in their summing up, judges Lord Justice Beatson and Mr Justice Irwin said: "There was indeed a case upon which a reasonable jury properly directed could have convicted the claimant of murder", and, on the strength of this, denied George compensation for wrongful incarceration.[29]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Dando
"There was indeed a case upon which a reasonable jury properly directed could have convicted the claimant of murder", and, on the strength of this, denied George compensation for wrongful incarceration.[29]'
George was clearly found guilty as a result of an incompetent investigation which choose a man infatuated with Jill Dando.
The distinct impression was that he was fitted up.
However, no witnesses placed George at the scene of the crime at the time of her murder and the witnesses as we have seen saw others.
He clearly had every right to compensation, so the question is why was he refused.
The excuse given was APPALLING. It was a clear miscarriage of justice on a man with major psychological problems
'
-
"There was indeed a case upon which a reasonable jury properly directed could have convicted the claimant of murder", and, on the strength of this, denied George compensation for wrongful incarceration.[29]'
George was clearly found guilty as a result of an incompetent investigation which choose a man infatuated with Jill Dando.
The distinct impression was that he was fitted up.
However, no witnesses placed George at the scene of the crime at the time of her murder and the witnesses as we have seen saw others.
He clearly had every right to compensation, so the question is why was he refused.
The excuse given was APPALLING. It was a clear miscarriage of justice on a man with major psychological problems
'
George had already been convicted of sexual assault and attempted rape on other women...for which he served a prison sentence...he was not the innocent, harmless victim you try to portray him as
-
George had already been convicted of sexual assault and attempted rape on other women...for which he served a prison sentence...he was not the innocent, harmless victim you try to portray him as
He was in this case.
A cock-up by SY.
-
He was in this case.
A cock-up by SY.
wrong again as usual...can you show me where he has been declared innocent
-
wrong again as usual...can you show me where he has been declared innocent
I thought it was claimed that people are declared 'not guilty', rather than innocent.
-
wrong again as usual...can you show me where he has been declared innocent
This has been gone through before.
His conviction was quashed.
End of.
Are you a bit slow on that one ?
and why are you so desperate to try and convince people George was guilty ?
-
This has been gone through before.
His conviction was quashed.
End of.
Are you a bit slow on that one ?
and why are you so desperate to try and convince people George was guilty ?
Wrong again Stephen...you are very good at that at least. I have never tried to convince anyone that George is guilty...just pointing out the truth...he has not been declared innocent and according to the judge there was sufficient evidence to find him guilty....au contraire....you continually try to convince people that he is innocent. He may well be ...we don't really know.
So there is ...according to the judge....enough evidence to convict George of this crime. He has also been convicted and jailed for several sexual assaults...both these statements are factual..
-
Wrong again Stephen...you are very good at that at least. I have never tried to convince anyone that George is guilty...just pointing out the truth...he has not been declared innocent and according to the judge there was sufficient evidence to find him guilty....au contraire....you continually try to convince people that he is innocent. He may well be ...we don't really know.
So there is ...according to the judge....enough evidence to convict George of this crime. He has also been convicted and jailed for several sexual assaults...both these statements are factual..
George's conviction was quashed in this case, NO DOUBT OF THAT.
He was the fall guy.
Why don't you refer to the other witnesses in the George case whose testimony was ignored by the Police, including several members of the current team.
and you do know what Jill Dando was working on at the time of her death, DON'T YOU?
-
I thought it was claimed that people are declared 'not guilty', rather than innocent.
Beat me to it!
-
Beat me to it!
That's the point I have been making for the past 12 months...at last someone has understood..so George has not been declared innocent
-
That's the point I have been making for the past 12 months...at last someone has understood..so George has not been declared innocent
As I pointed out on here what now seems eons ago:
In strict terms guilty and innocent are absolutes. Either you are or you aren't.
Then we have the law which deals only in guilt. One may only be found guilty or not guilty at law. Not guilty does not equal innocent in strict terms. An unsafe conviction is just that.
I do however find it odd that Barry George was denied compensation on the grounds supposedly stated.
-
That's the point I have been making for the past 12 months...at last someone has understood..so George has not been declared innocent
His conviction was quashed Dave.
What part don't you get ?
He didn't murder Jill Dando.
She was assassinated.
-
As I pointed out on here what now seems eons ago:
In strict terms guilty and innocent are absolutes. Either you are or you aren't.
Then we have the law which deals only in guilt. One may only be found guilty or not guilty at law. Not guilty does not equal innocent in strict terms. An unsafe conviction is just that.
I do however find it odd that Barry George was denied compensation on the grounds supposedly stated.
the law does not deal in absolutes...guilty or not guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on the evidence..
OJ was found both guilty and not guilty...that should be easy for posters to understand
-
the interesting point about George is that despite two trials, he was not able to "demonstrate his innocence"...yet the archiving report and posters here thought that by simply taking part in a reconstruction the McCanns could prove their innocence...how stupid is that.
-
the interesting point about George is that despite two trials, he was not able to "demonstrate his innocence"...yet the archiving report and posters here thought that by simply taking part in a reconstruction the McCanns could prove their innocence...how stupid is that.
Again a stupid post.
His conviction was quashed.
He was charged as a result of incompetent police woirk, and as we know, some of the same team are involved in the current investigation.
ENOUGH SAID.
-
Again a stupid post.
His conviction was quashed.
He was charged as a result of incompetent police woirk, and as we know, some of the same team are involved in the current investigation.
ENOUGH SAID.
You seem unable to follow the discussion...his conviction was overturned but that does not make him innocent....just as his original conviction did not make him guilty(in an absolute sense)
-
the law does not deal in absolutes...guilty or not guilty beyond reasonable doubt based on the evidence..
OJ was found both guilty and not guilty...that should be easy for posters to understand
I don't believe I have ever said otherwise ?>)()<
-
You seem unable to follow the discussion...his conviction was overturned but that does not make him innocent....just as his original conviction did not make him guilty(in an absolute sense)
His conviction was overturned, he is no longer serving a sentence for a crime committed by an assassin.
What part don't you get ?
-
His conviction was overturned, he is no longer serving a sentence for a crime committed by an assassin.
What part don't you get ?
What do you think of people who continue to assert publicly that George definitely dunnit despite the sentence having been overturned?
-
What do you think of people who continue to assert publicly that George definitely dunnit despite the sentence having been overturned?
Is there anyone saying that?
In actual fact almost all observers of the first trial expected a not guilty verdict.
-
'Jill Dando was shot dead by olive-skinned assassin but police ignored my evidence', says grandfather who saw Crimewatch presenter moments before doorstep murder.
A grandfather who saw Jill Dando moments before she was shot dead claims police ignored his evidence about the murder.
Barry Lindsey said Miss Dando, 37, was confronted by her 'Mediterranean' killer on her doorstep in 1999 seconds before she was killed.
Mr Lindsey, now 61, told detectives to search for an olive-skinned man - but he claims they were only interested in evidence linking Barry George to the murder.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/21/article-2372265-1AD9F1EF000005DC-121_306x479.jpg) (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/21/article-2372265-1AD9F208000005DC-68_306x479.jpg)
Released: Barry George wrongly served eight years in prison for the murder of Jill Dando before he was acquitted
at a retrial. An eyewitness told police that Miss Dando's killer was in fact a man of Mediterranean appearance
Mr George served eight years behind bars for the killing before being acquitted after a retrial in 2008.
The 53-year-old was recently denied up to £500,000 compensation for being wrongly jailed after the Court of Appeal agreed with a minister that Mr George was 'not innocent enough' to be eligible for a pay-off.
Eyewitness Mr Lindsey told police in the days after the murder on April 26, 1999, that Mr George was not the man responsible for the murder outside the Crimewatch presenter's home in Fulham, west London.
'I told officers they needed to find a man with olive skin, dark hair and who looked like he was of Mediterranean origin,' he told the Sunday Mirror.
'But straight off, they said "We are looking at a local guy over this murder. He is called Barry George." They asked if I knew him and described what he looked like.'
He added that when he told police that Mr George was definitely not the man responsible they 'didn't want to listen any more'.
Read full story here... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2372265/Jill-Dando-shot-dead-olive-skinned-assassin-says-eyewitness.html#ixzz2Zn7FBlSd)
-
Very interesting thread about SY in the dando case. It does look a pretty unsafe conviction to start with, but it is difficult to tell how worthy the witness was who IIRC was looking out of the window when he heard a noise that sounded like an excited greeting, but couldn't see the victim.
I wonder how far away he was from the front door, if he couldn't hear a gunshot?
A gunpowder speck found in a pocket and a fibre, I believe was the total of evidence, for convicting him, except for his obsessions.
There was also talk of corruption in SY and higher at the time, that I have read about, very recently.
Was this the same corruption that Jill Dando was investigating, before she died?
This is very unlikely however, to have any relevance to how the investigation into Maddie, was conducted more 10? years later.
Who can we trust if not our own police forces?
-
Very interesting thread about SY in the dando case. It does look a pretty unsafe conviction to start with, but it is difficult to tell how worthy the witness was who IIRC was looking out of the window when he heard a noise that sounded like an excited greeting, but couldn't see the victim.
I wonder how far away he was from the front door, if he couldn't hear a gunshot?
A gunpowder speck found in a pocket and a fibre, I believe was the total of evidence, for convicting him, except for his obsessions.
There was also talk of corruption in SY and higher at the time, that I have read about, very recently.
Was this the same corruption that Jill Dando was investigating, before she died?
This is very unlikely however, to have any relevance to how the investigation into Maddie, was conducted more 10? years later.
Who can we trust if not our own police forces?
Never trust 'the police' or the CPS Anna, they are as susceptible to human shortcomings and weaknesses as anyone else is.
-
Never trust 'the police' or the CPS Anna, they are as susceptible to human shortcomings and weaknesses as anyone else is.
We are all susceptible to human weaknesses, John.
We do need to trust some people, such as doctors, firemen, nurses, paramedics, solicitors, bankers etc. etc. We have no choice in the matter.
In fact anyone that we come in contact with can stab us in the back, but it would be very sad, if we had to distrust everyone………………And that seems to be the way things are going, unfortunately.
-
We are all susceptible to human weaknesses, John.
We do need to trust some people, such as doctors, firemen, nurses, paramedics, solicitors, bankers etc. etc. We have no choice in the matter.
In fact anyone that we come in contact with can stab us in the back, but it would be very sad, if we had to distrust everyone………………And that seems to be the way things are going, unfortunately.
Just keep a weather eye on everyone!
"Speak softly but carry a big stick" Theodore Roosevelt
"Trust in God BUT keep your powder dry" Oliver Cromwell allegedly
-
The post raises the question...should we have any confidence in the PJ given that they have featured so heavily on the amnesty site re torture...and their role in the proven torture of Cipriano
-
The post raises the question...should we have any confidence in the PJ given that they have featured so heavily on the amnesty site re torture...and their role in the proven torture of Cipriano
Same rules as I quoted. Keep a weather eye on everyone but do not assume it is all a gold mine or all a mine full of pyrites. The skill is knowing which is which and how much of which.
-
Same rules as I quoted. Keep a weather eye on everyone but do not assume it is all a gold mine or all a mine full of pyrites. The skill is knowing which is which and how much of which.
of course it is..and some of us are better than others at knowing which is which...IMO Maddie was abducted...the only other option is she left the apartment herself but from what I have read that seems highly unlikely.
-
Just keep a weather eye on everyone!
"Speak softly but carry a big stick" Theodore Roosevelt
"Trust in God BUT keep your powder dry" Oliver Cromwell allegedly
Thank you, Alice. for the advice on the untrustworthy sort, who appear to be everywhere.
However, I think, I will just keep my dog underfed
-
Never trust 'the police' or the CPS Anna, they are as susceptible to human shortcomings and weaknesses as anyone else is.
Sorry, John. In my last reply, I had forgotten how much cause you have to distrust the police and CPS.
We are apt to put people in little bundles, according to our experiences.
I feel the same way about doctors, but we shouldn't really tar them all with the same stick. It is very difficult not too, though.
-
of course it is..and some of us are better than others at knowing which is which...IMO Maddie was abducted...the only other option is she left the apartment herself but from what I have read that seems highly unlikely.
No, it is not the only other option.
Remember even Redwood admitted Madeleine could have died in the apartment.
-
Thank you, Alice. for the advice on the untrustworthy sort, who appear to be everywhere.
However, I think, I will just keep my dog underfed
I like it!
-
of course it is..and some of us are better than others at knowing which is which...IMO Maddie was abducted...the only other option is she left the apartment herself but from what I have read that seems highly unlikely.
You are leading with your chin there!
"Amaral is toast" or whatever it was you said to that effect?
That doesn't appear to have panned out quite how you told us it would.
Cue how I am foolish and have it wrong yet again 8(>((
-
Sorry, John. In my last reply, I had forgotten how much cause you have to distrust the police and CPS.
We are apt to put people in little bundles, according to our experiences.
I feel the same way about doctors, but we shouldn't really tar them all with the same stick. It is very difficult not too, though.
I have seen how they operate first hand and from both sides of the fence. Police officers can lie freely when it suits their own agenda and this has been shown publicly on many occasions. In my book, trust has to be earned, it doesn't come with the uniform.
-
I have seen how they operate first hand and from both sides of the fence. Police officers can lie freely when it suits their own agenda and this has been shown publicly on many occasions. In my book, trust has to be earned, it doesn't come with the uniform.
I agree that trust has to earned, but how does one earn that trust from someone, who has probably never met them and has already been let down on many occasion by someone in the same profession? This is where "The bad apple" comes in.
-
You are leading with your chin there!
"Amaral is toast" or whatever it was you said to that effect?
That doesn't appear to have panned out quite how you told us it would.
Cue how I am foolish and have it wrong yet again 8(>((
Amaral has admitted that the McCanns have proved some of their accusations...they will be paid damages.....you will see I am right shortly
-
Amaral has admitted that the McCanns have proved some of their accusations...they will be paid damages.....you will see I am right shortly
Even a cursory glance through your previous posts is testament to your current position being somewhat of a climb down from "Amaral is beaten, Amaral is Toast, Amaral knows he is beaten that is why he (?) is causing delays....... "
-
Even a cursory glance through your previous posts is testament to your current position being somewhat of a climb down from "Amaral is beaten, Amaral is Toast, Amaral knows he is beaten that is why he (?) is causing delays....... "
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* what's toast is a claim for 1.2 million euros %£&)**#
-
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* what's toast is a claim for 1.2 million euros %£&)**#
I wonder if the judge will use the Portuguese equivalent of words like boundless and exorbitant ?
-
I wonder if the judge will use the Portuguese equivalent of words like boundless and exorbitant ?
I would have thought reckless and neglectful better.
-
I wonder if the judge will use the Portuguese equivalent of words like boundless and exorbitant ?
What is the Portuguese equivalent of 'yer aving a laff ' ?
-
Even a cursory glance through your previous posts is testament to your current position being somewhat of a climb down from "Amaral is beaten, Amaral is Toast, Amaral knows he is beaten that is why he (?) is causing delays....... "
then I will repeat for you...amaral is beaten...amaral is toast....that's why he tried to delay the trial and continually sacked lawyers...
-
then I will repeat for you...amaral is beaten...amaral is toast....that's why he tried to delay the trial and continually sacked lawyers...
As they say.... in yer dreams. Is that why the McC's tried to settle out of court? @)(++(*
-
As they say.... in yer dreams. Is that why the McC's tried to settle out of court? @)(++(*
In every libel/damages trial their is an effort to settle out of court...the offer of a settlement will reflect well on the McCanns when costs are awarded...that's why they did it
-
In every libel/damages trial their is an effort to settle out of court...the offer of a settlement will reflect well on the McCanns when costs are awarded...that's why they did it
It is, you have to admit, very unusual for the litigant to attempt an out of court settlement.
I wonder how the claim that Amaral made over a million will go down in the light of what was proven.
-
It is, you have to admit, very unusual for the litigant to attempt an out of court settlement.
I wonder how the claim that Amaral made over a million will go down in the light of what was proven.
it is not unusual and I understand is normal practice....the mccanns sought an out of court settlement with Bennet
-
it is not unusual and I understand is normal practice....the mccanns sought an out of court settlement with Bennet
So what were all the posts on this forum a few months (?) ago about how Dr Amaral was wriggling trying to settle out of court and 'twas he not the McCanns who caused all the delays by trying to settle out of court?
If the McCanns were trying to settle out of court why the necessity to attempt deny it back then if it is indeed "normal practice" ?
-
it is not unusual and I understand is normal practice....the mccanns sought an out of court settlement with Bennet
For a defendant in this country but a plaintiff in Portugal....almost unheard of and will make absolutely no difference to the monies awarded, if in fact there are any.
-
For a defendant in this country but a plaintiff in Portugal....almost unheard of and will make absolutely no difference to the monies awarded, if in fact there are any.
As far as I know it has never been divulged who first instigated exploring whether or not an out of court settlement could be achieved.
IIRC Whichever side it was - only the Plaintiff can apply to the court for time to do this - the Defendant does not have that right and can only do it via the Plaintiff.
Therefore although it may have been the McCanns who originally made this suggestion - it could just as easily have been Amaral.
AFAIK - no-one knows.
(from memory)
-
So what were all the posts on this forum a few months (?) ago about how Dr Amaral was wriggling trying to settle out of court and 'twas he not the McCanns who caused all the delays by trying to settle out of court?
If the McCanns were trying to settle out of court why the necessity to attempt deny it back then if it is indeed "normal practice" ?
Who was denying it...
-
I have severe reservations about the ability of Scotland Yard to conduct a proper investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann given that several members of the team were involved in the wrongful conviction of Barry George who as a consequence of their actions served a term of some 8 years in prison.
It is bad enough that someone of sound mind should serve time in prison for a crime they did not commit but to implicate a guy with learning difficulties in what was most probably a professional assination is despicable in my book.
120
You appear to have allowed your bias to over ride logic and reason.
-
Anyone?
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/madeleine-mccann-netflix-documentary-true-crime-making-a-murderer-serial-a8824666.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3oYWefKk9Z_2cnxE0R1W9ZcVgBaKFid53pbn_k06tj7C3YXM1JcnK0w_w#Echobox=1552658189
-
In answer to the thread question probably not!
During the BBC docu DCI Hamish Campbell refers to his decision logs. He accounted for discrepancies among witnesses re the man seen leaving and various other sightings before and afterwards by suggesting it was the same person viewed differently by the various witnesses! Well maybe this is correct to a greater or lesser extent but another possibility is that the perp did not act alone. Maybe accomplices were walking up and down Gowan Ave so in the event of pedestrians happening on the murder as it took place, or shortly before or afterwards, accomplices were able to distract by stopping to ask for directions etc.
-
During the BBC docu DCI Hamish Campbell refers to his decision logs. He accounted for discrepancies among witnesses re the man seen leaving and various other sightings before and afterwards by suggesting it was the same person viewed differently by the various witnesses! Well maybe this is correct to a greater or lesser extent but another possibility is that the perp did not act alone. Maybe accomplices were walking up and down Gowan Ave so in the event of pedestrians happening on the murder as it took place, or shortly before or afterwards, accomplices were able to distract by stopping to ask for directions etc.
Why do you veer from the facts of these cases Holly and appear to attempt to re write history?
-
What first attracted me to this case is the conundrum about Jill being shot within 30 seconds of arriving at Gowan Ave when she no longer lived there visiting very infrequently on random days and at random times. How then did the perp know she would arrive when she did?
This suggest to me the perp(s) had Jill under surveillance probably by way of a GPS tracking device fitted covertly to her car. This would enable the perps to collect data on her movements over a period of time and plan a location for the murder and would account for the above.
Again Hamish Campbell pointed out the fact her visits to Gowan Ave were unknown but the idea she may have been under surveillance did not appear to register!?
-
Why do you veer from the facts of these cases Holly and appear to attempt to re write history?
What evidence exists showing the perp did not have accomplices to act as lookout?
-
In answer to the thread question probably not!
Why; do explain.
-
What first attracted me to this case is the conundrum about Jill being shot within 30 seconds of arriving at Gowan Ave when she no longer lived there visiting very infrequently on random days and at random times. How then did the perp know she would arrive when she did?
This suggest to me the perp(s) had Jill under surveillance probably by way of a GPS tracking device fitted covertly to her car. This would enable the perps to collect data on her movements over a period of time and plan a location for the murder and would account for the above.
Again Hamish Campbell pointed out the fact her visits to Gowan Ave were unknown but the idea she may have been under surveillance did not appear to register!?
I don’t believe you
-
What evidence exists showing the perp did not have accomplices to act as lookout?
Answer my question instead of being evasive
Stop question dodging
-
Hamish Campbell also makes what imo are incredibly stupid comments which frankly beggar belief. Eg the perp only had one cartridge on the basis it had been tampered with. How would this preclude the perp having a pocketful of tampered with cartridges on his/her person?
He also suggests the perp wasn't a professional on the basis the cartridge was tampered with. I disagree. Imo the cartridge was tailor made for the occasion. Propellant was removed to reduce the sound of gunshot. Maybe a silencer was difficult to come by but more likely a silencer fitted to a handgun would make it too long to fit inside a standard pocket. Attaching a silencer shortly before the shooting may well have been a problem.
-
Another officer on the case, Shaun Sawyer, comments about the shooting happening in broad daylight. No doubt the perp(s) took this into account and calculated on managing any risks. The fact remains the perp(s) remain undetected and clearly outwitted SY!
-
Your cherry picking of the evidence in these cases has been pointed out to you numerous times Holly.
-
The fact remains the perp(s) remain undetected and clearly outwitted SY!
Have already answered this on another thread.
Barry George was arrested, convicted, appealed and had his conviction quashed on a technicality.
Susan Meyer’s witness evidence, for example, stands to this day Holly! In 20 years Barry George hasn’t been able to discredit this.
-
.