UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: John on July 16, 2017, 12:29:39 PM
-
Should Scotland Yard be compelled to make public the result of Operation Grange?
Ten years on and over £11 million of public money spent on Operation Grange and still nothing of consequence has been announced. Is it time that Scotland Yard was compelled to divulge what exactly they have learned about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and put the speculation to bed for ever?
Your views please.
48
-
I don't think we should expect to learn specific details - that's not the British way (secrecy wherever possible), but certainly an overview of how they came to whatever conclusions they finally come up with would seem in order.
-
Normally I would say that the police should be allowed to continue their inquiries without being asked to justify their actions, but this isn't a normal case.
I think the Metropolitan Police could clarify aspects of this case without damaging whatever they are investigating. If they have convincing evidence which excludes the parents and their friends it's cruel to allow the speculation about their involvement to continue.
-
Normally I would say that the police should be allowed to continue their inquiries without being asked to justify their actions, but this isn't a normal case.
I think the Metropolitan Police could clarify aspects of this case without damaging whatever they are investigating. If they have convincing evidence which excludes the parents and their friends it's cruel to allow the speculation about their involvement to continue.
That is the way I see it. The investigation has stalled and that in itself is allowing speculation to grow. Normally a police investigation should be conducted in an atmosphere of utmost secrecy but this is no normal case. The Met have spent an inordinate sum of money on a single missing child yet have failed to produce anything of significance despite doing so. They are about to mothball their investigation despite claiming breakthroughs which ultimately became nothing more than damp squids. I personally think they should reveal what if anything they have learned and let the British public decide what should happen next.
-
Normally I would say that the police should be allowed to continue their inquiries without being asked to justify their actions, but this isn't a normal case.
I think the Metropolitan Police could clarify aspects of this case without damaging whatever they are investigating. If they have convincing evidence which excludes the parents and their friends it's cruel to allow the speculation about their involvement to continue.
COMM believe there is a massive conspiracy to protect the McCann's by the govt
As does Stephen
Any explanation would therefore be seen as part of that conspiracy
Best not to feed the conspiracy theorists
-
COMM believe there is a massive conspiracy to protect the McCann's by the govt
As does Stephen
Any explanation would therefore be seen as part of that conspiracy
Best not to feed the conspiracy theorists
I believe if SY came clean and revealed everything they have learned about Madeleine's disappearance that it could take the pressure off her parents, always assuming of course that they are as innocent of involvement in her disappearance to the extent that they have always claimed.
Ultimately there are only two scenarios. If she is dead it is unlikely she will ever be found in such a region where the landscape is pockmarked by fissures and underground drains. The chances of her being alive after ten years of constant publicity around the world must in reality be very small. Anyone who suggests otherwise is merely kidding themselves.
-
COMM believe there is a massive conspiracy to protect the McCann's by the govt
As does Stephen
Any explanation would therefore be seen as part of that conspiracy
Best not to feed the conspiracy theorists
Try not to speak for me.
That is goading
-
Try not to speak for me.
That is goading
you have stated clearly that you suspect there is a government cover up to protect the mccanns ...im merely repeating what you have already stated...perhaps you could clear up the confusion...do you think the mccanns are being protected.
-
you have stated clearly that you suspect there is a government cover up to protect the mccanns ...im merely repeating what you have already stated...perhaps you could clear up the confusion...do you think the mccanns are being protected.
There is no confusion at all.
I said that the McCann's had contact with Prime Ministers and other government ministers, courtesy of their contacts.
That is an indisputable FACT.
Mind you, it hasn't helped them, has it
-
I said that the mccanns had conbtact with Prime M
We all know they had contact
-
COMM believe there is a massive conspiracy to protect the McCann's by the govt
As does Stephen
Any explanation would therefore be seen as part of that conspiracy
Best not to feed the conspiracy theorists
Either OG have evidence ruling out parental/friend involvement or they haven't. If they have it they can silence
all the critics. Refusing to do so means the McCanns and their friends are being left to suffer. How harsh!
-
Either OG have evidence ruling out parental/friend involvement or they haven't. If they have it they can silence
all the critics. Refusing to do so means the McCanns and their friends are being left to suffer. How harsh!
The McCann's are not suspects and are not suffering on that score
-
Were we playing by British rules I doubt very much if as much time would have been allowed to pass without the police saying something publicly.
We are playing to the Portuguese rule book. Anyone remember Judicial Secrecy Laws? Anyone recall the song and dance there was back in 2013 when the status of the newly opened investigation was put at risk and the McCanns issued a desperate plea to the media for restraint?
Even the unprecedented? statements from the Portuguese and British chiefs marking Madeleine's decade missing appeared to me to have been jointly discussed and agreed.
To all intents and purposes Scotland Yard are bit players here. It is a British child who is missing but her case is within Portuguese jurisdiction and they rightly dictate the terms.
-
Should Scotland Yard be compelled to make public the result of Operation Grange?
Ten years on and over £11 million of public money spent on Operation Grange and still nothing of consequence has been announced. Is it time that Scotland Yard was compelled to divulge what exactly they have learned about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and put the speculation to bed for ever?
Your views please.
Is it normal practice for the forces of law and order to publicise details of an active case no doubt alerting and benefiting the criminal/s?
I wouldn't have thought so whatever jurisdiction one is in.
-
Is it normal practice for the forces of law and order to publicise details of an active case no doubt alerting and benefiting the criminal/s?
I wouldn't have thought so whatever jurisdiction one is in.
I am sure that when it is shelved, a FOI request or two will be lodged.
After all, the tax payer is footing the bill.
-
Were we playing by British rules I doubt very much if as much time would have been allowed to pass without the police saying something publicly.
We are playing to the Portuguese rule book. Anyone remember Judicial Secrecy Laws? Anyone recall the song and dance there was back in 2013 when the status of the newly opened investigation was put at risk and the McCanns issued a desperate plea to the media for restraint?
Even the unprecedented? statements from the Portuguese and British chiefs marking Madeleine's decade missing appeared to me to have been jointly discussed and agreed.
To all intents and purposes Scotland Yard are bit players here. It is a British child who is missing but her case is within Portuguese jurisdiction and they rightly dictate the terms.
I'm sure the Portuguese would have no problem if OG decided to release the evidence ruling out the parents and their friends. According to Rowley that evidence can be found in the original investigation files which aren't subject to Judicial secrecy.
-
I'm sure the Portuguese would have no problem if OG decided to release the evidence ruling out the parents and their friends. According to Rowley that evidence can be found in the original investigation files which aren't subject to Judicial secrecy.
Madeleine McCann: Police confirm Portugal 'activity' BBC News
6 May 2014 Last updated at 20:02
No media updates
A letter was sent to media editors amid speculation about excavation work. Mr Rowley asked them to "think carefully" about information they published.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Mr Rowley said he had discussed the case with his opposite number in Portugal and highlighted the "high levels of interest" the activity would generate in the British media.
He said Portuguese police did not provide the media with updates on ongoing investigations.
Activity would cease if police in Britain gave out information or news reporters caused any disruption to their work in Portugal, he added.
>>>>>>>>>>>
Analysis
Richard Bilton
BBC News
Mr Rowley urged the media to avoid speculation; to think of the impact it might have on the investigation.
That is because the Portuguese police and not the British will carry out any work in Praia da Luz. British officers will simply be observers. Without the co-operation of the Portuguese Policia Judiciaria, the British efforts will not get far.
The relationship between the forces has been difficult at times. Officers in both countries have told me of their frustrations. Both have active and separate investigations. Leaks and speculation could fatally undermine their co-operation.
It seems an upsurge in police activity is about to start. If it is to be successful, this sometimes uneasy relationship will need to survive.
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id485.htm
-
There may be those who would reject OG's evidence, but there are others who would evaluate it and, if it stood up under scrutiny, accept it. If OG are confident that they have enough they have nothing to lose by presenting it for scrutiny. They would perhaps gain by strengthening their public support and that of the McCanns. It's a no-brainer really - if, of course, they have the evidence needed.
-
There may be those who would reject OG's evidence, but there are others who would evaluate it and, if it stood up under scrutiny, accept it. If OG are confident that they have enough they have nothing to lose by presenting it for scrutiny. They would perhaps gain by strengthening their public support and that of the McCanns. It's a no-brainer really - if, of course, they have the evidence needed.
As you and others haven't understood the evidence that has already been released..imo
What's the use in giving you any more
Redwood said they believed Maddie was abducted by a stranger ...this has been confirmed recently but you wouldn't accept it
Harrison said no inferences can be drawn from the dog alerts
Posters won't accept that
SY have stayed clearly the McCann's are not suspects
You and others have tried every way you can to discredit that statement
-
Why should this request only apply to the McCann's case
Could we see all the evidence that has justified the persecution of Julian Asssange
Has Been Needham's kin all been ruled out
Could we see the evidence
There are many morei
-
How very strange that not one McCann supporter so far is in favour of Operation Grange sharing the evidence which led them to rule the McCanns and their friends out of their investigation.
It seems they prefer to let the McCanns remain under suspicion ad infinitum.
-
How very strange that not one McCann supporter so far is in favour of Operation Grange sharing the evidence which led them to rule the McCanns and their friends out of their investigation.
It seems they prefer to let the McCanns remain under suspicion ad infinitum.
No it doesn't seem. We simply have more sense than to expect it.
-
How very strange that not one McCann supporter so far is in favour of Operation Grange sharing the evidence which led them to rule the McCanns and their friends out of their investigation.
It seems they prefer to let the McCanns remain under suspicion ad infinitum.
the mccanns are not under suspicion...they are not suspects
-
the mccanns are not under suspicion...they are not suspects
Operation Grange said that did they? So did the PJ but it wasn't true, was it?
If Operation Grange have the evidence to support that statement they should release it because the McCann's prophecy back in 2007 has been fulfilled;
The parents of Madeleine McCann fear they'll never be cleared over the disappearance of their daughter and will always be tainted by a 'cloud of suspicion'.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/madeleine-kate-and-gerry-fear-cloud-of-suspicion-will-never-leave-them-6661142.html
-
Should Scotland Yard be compelled to make public the result of Operation Grange?
Ten years on and over £11 million of public money spent on Operation Grange and still nothing of consequence has been announced. Is it time that Scotland Yard was compelled to divulge what exactly they have learned about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and put the speculation to bed for ever?
Your views please.
What is to be gained by The Met. making a public announcement?
As far as I can see The Met. are held harmless. IIRC the involvement of The Met was opposed by it's then commissioner and the then incumbent Home Secretary, only to be overruled by the Prime Minister's Office with the promise that the first tranche of funding would come from The PM's Office. If anyone should make an announcement or call time it's the PM's Office, after all it started the hare running for what appeared at the time to be spurious reasons and clearly remains content for resources to be expended on the case. Were I The Met. I would be chuffed to little meatballs that I was able to keep a few bodies employed on someone elses budget.
Maybe access to the files should be denied for 20 years after closure?
-
What is to be gained by The Met. making a public announcement?
As far as I can see The Met. are held harmless. IIRC the involvement of The Met was opposed by it's then commissioner and the then incumbent Home Secretary, only to be overruled by the Prime Minister's Office with the promise that the first tranche of funding would come from The PM's Office. If anyone should make an announcement or call time it's the PM's Office, after all it started the hare running for what appeared at the time to be spurious reasons and clearly remains content for resources to be expended on the case. Were I The Met. I would be chuffed to little meatballs that I was able to keep a few bodies employed on someone elses budget.
Maybe access to the files should be denied for 20 years after closure?
I expect the Met were happy to take the money but it may rebound on them. If they accepted a politically imposed remit they are culpable. The whole thing stinks in my opinion and should be subjected to thorough scrutiny.
-
I expect the Met were happy to take the money but it may rebound on them. If they accepted a politically imposed remit they are culpable. The whole thing stinks in my opinion and should be subjected to thorough scrutiny.
I think you are totally misguided
I think the investigation was carried out with the best intentions
To find out what happened to Maddie
-
I think you are totally misguided
I think the investigation was carried out with the best intentions
To find out what happened to Maddie
I think the same about you! 8((()*/
The road to h*ll is paved with good intentions.
OG should release their evidence ruling out the McCanns and their friends. That would help the McCanns, help OG by showing that their investigation is viable and restore both their reputations.
-
I think the same about you! 8((()*/
The road to h*ll is paved with good intentions.
OG should release their evidence ruling out the McCanns and their friends. That would help the McCanns, help OG by showing that their investigation is viable and restore both their reputations.
Perhaps SY considered the following to be some of the 'evidence' that enabled them to rule out the McCanns and their friends as suspects or even persons of interest.
-
I expect the Met were happy to take the money but it may rebound on them. If they accepted a politically imposed remit they are culpable. The whole thing stinks in my opinion and should be subjected to thorough scrutiny.
Culpable of what?
-
I can see no reason why people should have to guess. If OG released their evidence they could end such speculation and we could all move on.
Just for accuracy, I don't recall the McCanns urging anyone to re-investigate a heinous crime? They called for a review of the first investigation.
-
I can see no reason why people should have to guess. If OG released their evidence they could end such speculation and we could all move on.
Just for accuracy, I don't recall the McCanns urging anyone to re-investigate a heinous crime? They called for a review of the first investigation.
I doubt if the 'speculation' (which exists for a myriad of different reasons) from folk mainly on the internet who spend their time villifying the McCanns is of any concern at all to SY. The idea that they should answer to them is preposterous IMO.
Unless you think the McCanns did not believe a heinous crime had been committed - then your comments are nitpicking IMO.
-
I doubt if the 'speculation' (which exists for a myriad of different reasons) from folk mainly on the internet who spend their time villifying the McCanns is of any concern at all to SY. The idea that they should answer to them is preposterous IMO.
Unless you think the McCanns did not believe a heinous crime had been committed - then your comments are nitpicking IMO.
I was referring to the speculation by your good self as to what OG might be thinking. Eventually those involved in this case may find they have to answer to the public, whether you like it or not.
If OG have the means to help the McCanns clear their names but choose not to that's not very nice, is it? They don't like being criticised themselves, allegedly;
Whatever we do, and we are doing our very best, someone always wants to criticise the actions of the police regarding Madeleine McCann.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4029785/maddie-mccann-cops-insist-search-hasnt-ground-to-a-halt-but-admit-they-only-have-11-weeks-left-to-find-her-before-their-money-runs-out/
-
I was referring to the speculation by your good self as to what OG might be thinking. Eventually those involved in this case may find they have to answer to the public, whether you like it or not.
If OG have the means to help the McCanns clear their names but choose not to that's not very nice, is it? They don't like being criticised themselves, allegedly;
Whatever we do, and we are doing our very best, someone always wants to criticise the actions of the police regarding Madeleine McCann.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4029785/maddie-mccann-cops-insist-search-hasnt-ground-to-a-halt-but-admit-they-only-have-11-weeks-left-to-find-her-before-their-money-runs-out/
I have no qualms at all about the contents of any report which may be made public at some future time by SY regarding this case.
If you have - then that's not my problem.
-
If OG can supply evidence which eliminates the McCanns and their friends of involvement in Madeleine's disappearance they should do so and dispel the cloud of suspicion hanging over them.
-
I was referring to the speculation by your good self as to what OG might be thinking. Eventually those involved in this case may find they have to answer to the public, whether you like it or not.
If OG have the means to help the McCanns clear their names but choose not to that's not very nice, is it? They don't like being criticised themselves, allegedly;
Whatever we do, and we are doing our very best, someone always wants to criticise the actions of the police regarding Madeleine McCann.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4029785/maddie-mccann-cops-insist-search-hasnt-ground-to-a-halt-but-admit-they-only-have-11-weeks-left-to-find-her-before-their-money-runs-out/
Your premise is seriously flawed. Neither Kate nor Gerry McCann require Operation Grange to "clear their names".
Their names are already entirely clear.
Any suggestion to the contrary is defamatory.
-
Your premise is seriously flawed. Neither Kate nor Gerry McCann require Operation Grange to "clear their names".
Their names are already entirely clear.
Any suggestion to the contrary is defamatory.
It isn't defamatory to say that some people suspect them because it's true. Operation Grange could dispel those suspicions by releasing the evidence which rules out the McCanns and their friends from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.
-
It isn't defamatory to say that some people suspect them because it's true. Operation Grange could dispel those suspicions by releasing the evidence which rules out the McCanns and their friends from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.
Why is this so important to you?
-
It isn't defamatory to say that some people suspect them because it's true. Operation Grange could dispel those suspicions by releasing the evidence which rules out the McCanns and their friends from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.
And would it be accepted? Of course not. Not a chance. Any more than those who demand a lie detector test would accept it if the McCanns passed.
Why anyone thinks SY would have the slightest interest in pandering to sceptics and/ or malicious trolls on the internet as if they are important is a total mystery to me. IMO as far as SY is concerned they are all just members of the public voicing an opinion - and nothing more. Only they think they are important and should be given special treatment.
AIMHO
-
Why is this so important to you?
Why is it so unimportant to those who have been insisting on the parent's innocence for years? Why are they reluctant to be proved right? Why are they not interested in proving those who have doubted the McCanns wrong? That's a much more interesting question imo.
-
And would it be accepted? Of course not. Not a chance. Any more than those who demand a lie detector test would accept it if the McCanns passed.
Why anyone thinks SY would have the slightest interest in pandering to sceptics and/ or malicious trolls on the internet as if they are important is a total mystery to me. IMO as far as SY is concerned they are all just members of the public voicing an opinion - and nothing more. Only they think they are important and should be given special treatment.
AIMHO
The question includes the word 'compelled'. I think OG should be compelled to release the evidence they relied on to rule out the McCanns and their friends from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. It doesn't matter whether people accept it or not, nor does it matter what OG think of the British public whom they serve and who pays their wages.
.
-
The question includes the word 'compelled'. I think OG should be compelled to release the evidence they relied on to rule out the McCanns and their friends from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. It doesn't matter whether people accept it or not, nor does it matter what OG think of the British public whom they serve and who pays their wages.
.
Can anyone compel them?
-
The question includes the word 'compelled'. I think OG should be compelled to release the evidence they relied on to rule out the McCanns and their friends from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. It doesn't matter whether people accept it or not, nor does it matter what OG think of the British public whom they serve and who pays their wages.
.
It's not just the evidence though, it's the thought processes that have led them to this conclusion.
Was this a decision made by a single person - the SIO - or a joint decision come to by the team of 30 experienced officers ?
-
The question includes the word 'compelled'. I think OG should be compelled to release the evidence they relied on to rule out the McCanns and their friends from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. It doesn't matter whether people accept it or not, nor does it matter what OG think of the British public whom they serve and who pays their wages.
.
Police cannot be compelled to publicise evidence just because a bunch of bloggers want them to
-
Indeed, Britain would need to be a much more open democracy to allow that to happen.
-
Indeed, Britain would need to be a much more open democracy to allow that to happen.
You are living in a dream world
What about the evidence that clears cliff Richard
George Bush Tony Blair ...the bloke next door...and a million others
Why won't the police release it...any ideas
-
You are living in a dream world
What about the evidence that clears cliff Richard
George Bush Tony Blair ...the bloke next door...and a million others
Why won't the police release it...any ideas
What leads you to think I expect anything like this to happen ?
-
Can anyone compel them?
Don't know, it's not my thread.
-
In the light of the decision to award Operation Grange further substantial funds to investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, I feel that this thread has taken on a whole new significance. The original question bering, "should Scotland Yard be compelled to make public the result of Operation Grange?"
Someone made a good point earlier in the thread to the effect that it should be the PM's office which makes a statement on the case as it is they who are keeping it going. Any thoughts?
-
In the light of the decision to award Operation Grange further substantial funds to investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, I feel that this thread has taken on a whole new significance. The original question bering, "should Scotland Yard be compelled to make public the result of Operation Grange?"
Someone made a good point earlier in the thread to the effect that it should be the PM's office which makes a statement on the case as it is they who are keeping it going. Any thoughts?
Agreed, it would be good to get a government statement on the rationale behind the continued funding.
-
It has been said that this case was a matter of national interest. I'd be interested in an explanation for that.
-
It has been said that this case was a matter of national interest. I'd be interested in an explanation for that.
It goes without saying that this case was and is one of national interest. The fact that some of us are even still discussing the minutiae of the tennis timeline 11 years later bears witness to that.
-
It has been said that this case was a matter of national interest. I'd be interested in an explanation for that.
I thought that at one point it was said to involve matters of national security, not just national interest.
-
How does one define "national interest"?
Ensuring or restoring diplomatic relations could be deemed to be in the national interest.
Footballer kiss-and-tell rumours could also be of interest to tabloid consumers throughout the nation.
Not quite of the same nature, IMO.
-
In the light of the decision to award Operation Grange further substantial funds to investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, I feel that this thread has taken on a whole new significance. The original question bering, "should Scotland Yard be compelled to make public the result of Operation Grange?"
Someone made a good point earlier in the thread to the effect that it should be the PM's office which makes a statement on the case as it is they who are keeping it going. Any thoughts?
I think it is ridiculous to publish details of any active, ongoing criminal investigation. Talk about a charter for criminals complete with not 'a get out of jail free card' but a 'never arrested to be put into jail at all' card.
Courtesy of the investigation keeping those fully informed who should be investigated but never will be under such a system.
-
I think it is ridiculous to publish details of any active, ongoing criminal investigation. Talk about a charter for criminals complete with not 'a get out of jail free card' but a 'never arrested to be put into jail at all' card.
Courtesy of the investigation keeping those fully informed who should be investigated but never will be under such a system.
And that is why we do not know who is being investigated.
-
And that is why we do not know who is being investigated.
And why should we?
-
And why should we?
We shouldn’t.
-
We shouldn’t.
Are we in agreement?
-
Are we in agreement?
It would seem we are.
-
And that is why we do not know who is being investigated.
In the fullness of time we might learn who has been exonerated.
-
In the fullness of time we might learn who has been exonerated.
Indeed jassi.
-
In the fullness of time we might learn who has been exonerated.
What about suspected?
-
What about suspected?
Unless charged we are unlikely to know
-
Unless charged we are unlikely to know
Apart from the "Mr and Mrs Made Up Persons" so beloved of the tabloids and their feeders.
-
Apart from the "Mr and Mrs Made Up Persons" so beloved of the tabloids and their feeders.
Don't forget the dearly departed suspects... communicate with a corpse.co.uk
OG could hold a physic night with Derik acora or whatever...
Quote from: G-Unit on May 27, 2018, 10:55:08 AM
It has been said that this case was a matter of national interest. I'd be interested in an explanation for that.
Yeah me too!
-
Don't forget the dearly departed suspects... communicate with a corpse.co.uk
OG could hold a physic night with Derik acora or whatever...
Quote from: G-Unit on May 27, 2018, 10:55:08 AM
It has been said that this case was a matter of national interest. I'd be interested in an explanation for that.
Yeah me too!
I know the answer
-
I know the answer
Yeah
mmmmmMkay
-
Yeah
mmmmmMkay
its very simple and very boring