Mark Harrison and the searches he recommended and took part in.

[ferryman]

In his report he said 'I recommend' He then named it “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” and submitted it to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.

In his final report named ''OP TASK Madeleine McCann'' dated 22nd August 2007, written on headed paper belonging to the NPIA he refers to his previous report by name. Then he writes down WHAT IT RECOMMENDED [it being his report, submitted on 23rd July];

It recommended considering re searching:
 
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

If he wasn't referring to his report, pray tell what you think he was referring to????????

He was accepting the fait-accompli of the additions (to his own recommendations) added (by someone else).

[John]

In this case we only have certain things, mostly written information. I think the correct way to proceed is to accept what is written rather than trying to 'read between the lines' in order to support your own viewpoint.

I don't disagree but we have to bear in mind that a lot went on which we will never hear about.

[Robittybob1]

In this case we only have certain things, mostly written information. I think the correct way to proceed is to accept what is written rather than trying to 'read between the lines' in order to support your own viewpoint.

I doubt if the PJ or Mark Harrison thought like that!  Everyone is telling the truth?  Hardly.

[G-Unit]

I don't disagree but we have to bear in mind that a lot went on which we will never hear about.

What point are you trying to make John? I'm sure an awful lot went on behind the scenes, but I can't imagine what it was and then present it as a fact in a debate. I understood the forum tried to debate using known facts.

All my points on this thread are supported by cites. I haven't suggested that 'someone' tinkered with Harrison's reports, nor have I tried to draw conclusions [to support my standpoint] from the way he writes his points.

[ferryman]

What point are you trying to make John? I'm sure an awful lot went on behind the scenes, but I can't imagine what it was and then present it as a fact in a debate. I understood the forum tried to debate using known facts.

All my points on this thread are supported by cites. I haven't suggested that 'someone' tinkered with Harrison's reports, nor have I tried to draw conclusions [to support my standpoint] from the way he writes his points.

Your cites directly contradict what (you suggest) is the case.

[G-Unit]

He was accepting the fait-accompli of the additions (to his own recommendations) added (by someone else).

So you believe, without any evidence to support it, that a National Search Adviser working for the National Police Improvement Agency would cover up the fact that some unknown person added searches to the itinerary which he had agreed with the PJ Algarve regional Director?

Would you care to explain why? Why keep it secret? All he had to say in his final report was that x searches were carried out in addition to those recommended and they were suggested and authorised by x.

[G-Unit]

Your cites directly contradict what (you suggest) is the case.

That depends on your understanding [not interpretation] of the cites. Your assertions are not supported by any cites.

[ferryman]

So you believe, without any evidence to support it, that a National Search Adviser working for the National Police Improvement Agency would cover up the fact that some unknown person added searches to the itinerary which he had agreed with the PJ Algarve regional Director?

Would you care to explain why? Why keep it secret? All he had to say in his final report was that x searches were carried out in addition to those recommended and they were suggested and authorised by x.

I have speculated as far as the (revealed) facts allow me to speculate.

[G-Unit]

I doubt if the PJ or Mark Harrison thought like that!  Everyone is telling the truth?  Hardly.

They could be lying through their teeth, but you can't accuse them of that without evidence. You have to find evidence which contradicts what they say.

[G-Unit]

What I'm doing is precisely that: accepting what's written.

Sorry, ferryman, that's precisely what you are not doing. Take the description of the searches; you are asserting that because of the way Harrison wrote them there's some hidden message there that only you understand. That's not accepting, that's assuming.

[ferryman]

Mark Harrison was employed to search for the scenario of Madeleine's deceased body being somewhere in PDL. Enter the  specialist dog team of Eddie and Keela to find evidence.

"These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

p.s. If blood were on the clothes Keela would have alerted.

And yet Eddie (apparently) needed two stabs to alert to the same clothing (he could find no hint of a scent on in the villa).

And we are still no nearer answering the question why clothes should have been inspected at all 3 months after the crime.

Or what it was (hoped!) would be achieved (we know nothing at least worthwhile) actually was achieved

[Robittybob1]

Well I was sure that I had proved the alert on Cuddlecat was untrue and that the PJ said there was an alert to Madeleine's clothing that actually belonged to Sean.  Yet both of those situations still can't be written down here as true, even though it is well documented that all police forces use ruses to try and elicit a confession.  So when I say the Police used Cuddlecat and the top as part of a ruse that is not libeling them but showing they were doing their job in their normal manner.
It is when Goncalo continues to use the results of the ruse as fact that makes me wonder if Goncalo was fully in control of the operation.
Can't they admit to using deception as part of their tactics, yet every other police force does (but maybe not openly admitting it either).  It is a tricky situation to be in, for if they were to admit to playing tricks on the suspects, all the dog alerts could be claimed by the defense to be tricks.

[G-Unit]

Well I was sure that I had proved the alert on Cuddlecat was untrue and that the PJ said there was an alert to Madeleine's clothing that actually belonged to Sean.  Yet both of those situations still can't be written down here as true, even though it is well documented that all police forces use ruses to try and elicit a confession.  So when I say the Police used Cuddlecat and the top as part of a ruse that is not libeling them but showing they were doing their job in their normal manner.
It is when Goncalo continues to use the results of the ruse as fact that makes me wonder if Goncalo was fully in control of the operation.

Police may be known to use ruses, but you have to show that they did it in this case. You can't accuse them without evidence. Most small children who disappear have been harmed by family or close friends, but you can't use those statistics to accuse anyone in this case. There are always exceptions.

[ferryman]

I have my thoughts which I will keep off (this discussion) but does anyone else have thoughts on why Harrison waited until after both inspections at Villa and Gym to issue PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct inspections in vehicles and buildings?

[sadie]

I have my thoughts which I will keep off (this discussion) but does anyone else have thoughts on why Harrison waited until after both inspections at Villa and Gym to issue PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct inspections in vehicles and buildings?

To me, it seems that he saw errors in the way the earlier inspections were made.

Seems after those errors, he decided to put instructions on how to conduct inspections in writing.