Operation Grange methodology.

[Mr Gray]

Certainly nothing in the way of forensic evidence.

If they had evidence of abduction, the trail would have led somewhere.

What is obvious, is that nothing has changed since the original investigation.

Mind you, they have a plethora of rehashed files.

you have no idea if anythging has changed

[stephen25000]

you have no idea if anythging has changed

The case remains unsolved.

Even with Rowley, he stated 'multiple hypotheses'.

[G-Unit]

It is the SIO who makes the decisions in a major crime investigation, so in this case the man in charge was Hamish Campbell, despite newspaper headlines saying it was Andy Redwood. Campbell would have been responsible for the investigative strategy;

The purpose of an investigative strategy is to:

identify the most appropriate line(s) of enquiry to pursue
determine the objective of pursuing particular lines of enquiry
identify the investigative action(s) necessary to efficiently achieve the objectives, taking into account resources, priorities, necessity and proportionality
direct and conduct investigative actions to gather the maximum amount of material which may generate further lines of enquiry
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/managing-investigations/#investigative-strategies

[Mr Gray]

John...it's fair to say that both investigations have said the McCann are not suspects...that is surely a fact

[G-Unit]

John...it's fair to say that both investigations have said the McCann are not suspects...that is surely a fact

The Met said Barry George killed Jill Dando and Colin Stagg killed Rachael Nikkell. Then we have Broadwater Farm and Stephen Lawrence. Nobody's perfect. They may be right, but they may be wrong too.

[Mr Gray]

The Met said Barry George killed Jill Dando and Colin Stagg killed Rachael Nikkell. Then we have Broadwater Farm and Stephen Lawrence. Nobody's perfect. They may be right, but they may be wrong too.

They have an excellent record on murder and serious crime which would suggest they are right far more often than they are wrong.  Two police forces....no real evidence...that is pretty convincing...imo

[barrier]

They have an excellent record on murder and serious crime which would suggest they are right far more often than they are wrong.  Two police forces....no real evidence...that is pretty convincing...imo

The thread is about OG ,the MPS have no jurisdiction that is why its funded by the HO which in turn is why its being treated a if the abduction is treated as if it happened in the UK,that remit was drawn up before any officer was assigned.The most convincing thing there is no evidence against any one.imo
All this is found with in the remit linked to on page one.

[Benice]

A C Rowley doesn't refer to any information except that found in the PJ files, so you are merely speculating.

At the time the remit was written they were still entering the PJ information into HOLMES too. That information was dealt with first.

Q: Andy Redwood, the first senior investigating officer, said in one interview his policy was to go right
back to the beginning, accept nothing, but one thing you appear to have accepted is that this was an
abduction. It’s in your first remit statement, it refers to ‘the abduction’, which rather suggests right from
the start you had a closed mind to the possibility of parents’ involvement, an accident or Madeleine
simply walking out of the apartment.
MR: Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the
original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was
all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of
investigation.

As I said previously - unlike SY we simply don't have ''ALL the material'' to look at and therefore can have no idea what other information may exist within the more than 40,000 documents in their possession - i.e. info that we have never had access to but which could have affected their decisions. 

Neither do we have the multitude of options available to SY which they use to aid their investigations.   Just one 'for instance'  being their ability to speak to people directly  if necessary.   A major advantage that we don't have imo.

Armchair detectives who think their expertise is on a par with the experienced detectives of OG -  or who actually think they know more about this case than SY  - and that SY have 'got it all wrong'  are being totally unrealistic imo.

The idea that some huge conspiracy by people in 'high places' is afoot to 'protect the parents from justice' is even more unrealistic IMO.

If there was any 'secret' political reason for the parents to be protected - then common sense dictates there would have been no review in the first place and the whole thing would have been allowed to quietly slip into obscurity 10 years ago - with no further action forthcoming from the McCanns.

AIMHO

 

[stephen25000]

Yet davel, no one else has been found to be involved in Madeleine's disappearance, in over 10 years, and with truly unparalleled publicity, worldwide, for this case.

[G-Unit]

As I said previously - unlike SY we simply don't have ''ALL the material'' to look at and therefore can have no idea what other information may exist within the more than 40,000 documents in their possession - i.e. info that we have never had access to but which could have affected their decisions. 

Neither do we have the multitude of options available to SY which they use to aid their investigations.   Just one 'for instance'  being their ability to speak to people directly  if necessary.   A major advantage that we don't have imo.

Armchair detectives who think their expertise is on a par with the experienced detectives of OG -  or who actually think they know more about this case than SY  - and that SY have 'got it all wrong'  are being totally unrealistic imo.

The idea that some huge conspiracy by people in 'high places' is afoot to 'protect the parents from justice' is even more unrealistic IMO.

If there was any 'secret' political reason for the parents to be protected - then common sense dictates there would have been no review in the first place and the whole thing would have been allowed to quietly slip into obscurity 10 years ago - with no further action forthcoming from the McCanns.

AIMHO

There is evidence that OG went into this case with the intention of investigating an abduction. I don't understand why it's unrealistic to accept that The Met may have got it wrong. There's no evidence that they're infallible.

There's no need for conspiracies and cover-ups either. I've seen lots of people saying it's ludicrous to suggest that the parents could be involved. I've never seen one person give a coherent reason why they hold that view. It seems to rest purely on opinion.

Those opinions, however, have dominated how the parents have been perceived and have been repeated so often they're seen as accepted facts, just as the parents having been cleared became an accepted fact.

It seems perfectly possible to me that those making the decisions about Operation Grange truly believed that the parents weren't involved. Whether they were right or not remains to be seen; or not, as the case may be.

[Brietta]

How feasible is it to keep returning to work which has been carried out to carry it out all over again?

Kate and Gerry McCann had to keep agitating on Madeleine's behalf and eventually were successful in having a scoping exercise into her disappearance commissioned with CEOP investigating.

The purpose of the scoping exercise was to ascertain if there was sufficient justification to take Madeleine's case forward to a review of all the evidence.

There was.

In my opinion any suggestion that Operation Grange was created to perform in the one dimensional vacuum of "ABDUCTION" without prior scrutiny of evidence is in my opinion nothing short of risible.

In my opinion the criticism they have received and continue to receive in the course of their employment as professional investigators in the case of a missing child is nothing short of deplorable particularly as the genesis of Operation Grange lay in the ashes of previous failed and stalled investigations.

There is a dropping crime rate in the Algarve ... which may in no small measure be as a result of lessons learned from Madeleine McCann's case.

[barrier]

How feasible is it to keep returning to work which has been carried out to carry it out all over again?

Kate and Gerry McCann had to keep agitating on Madeleine's behalf and eventually were successful in having a scoping exercise into her disappearance commissioned with CEOP investigating.

The purpose of the scoping exercise was to ascertain if there was sufficient justification to take Madeleine's case forward to a review of all the evidence.

There was.

In my opinion any suggestion that Operation Grange was created to perform in the one dimensional vacuum of "ABDUCTION" without prior scrutiny of evidence is in my opinion nothing short of risible.

In my opinion the criticism they have received and continue to receive in the course of their employment as professional investigators in the case of a missing child is nothing short of deplorable particularly as the genesis of Operation Grange lay in the ashes of previous failed and stalled investigations.

There is a dropping crime rate in the Algarve ... which may in no small measure be as a result of lessons learned from Madeleine McCann's case.

The remit document clearly states "the investigative review is intended to collate,record and analyse what has gone on before" it further adds "it is to examine the case and seek to determine (as if the abduction took place in the uk)" ergo it was already determined before collating,recording and analysing the remit was set.
A link to the remit is on page 1 of this thread.

[Angelo222]

The Supreme Court is the highest judicial authority in Portugal and they aren't convinced so that is good enough for me.  As far as they are concerned the McCanns have not established their non culpability in matters arising from Maddie's disappearance.  Hopefully the PJ will get their act together and finish investigating everything that went on post disappearance, something that SY have been prevented from doing.

[Brietta]

The remit document clearly states "the investigative review is intended to collate,record and analyse what has gone on before" it further adds "it is to examine the case and seek to determine (as if the abduction took place in the uk)" ergo it was already determined before collating,recording and analysing the remit was set.
A link to the remit is on page 1 of this thread.

Thank you, I have read the 'remit' which in my opinion was as a result of the findings of the scoping exercise ... which determined whether or not a review was justified.
In my opinion part of the scoping exercise must have involved  looking at the theories and possibilities ... why ask or expect as I intimated in my previous post that each step of a recent investigation is repeated and repeated and repeated.

At some stage decisions have to be taken and directions taken from what has been learned from the previous step and built upon.  It is all a progression ... not a fly in aspic.

[Mr Gray]

The Supreme Court is the highest judicial authority in Portugal and they aren't convinced so that is good enough for me.  As far as they are concerned the McCanns have not established their non culpability in matters arising from Maddie's disappearance.  Hopefully the PJ will get their act together and finish investigating everything that went on post disappearance, something that SY have been prevented from doing.

Would you like to tell us exactly what the SC said......I dont remember them using the word convinced. As I understand they said the McCanns had not proved their innocence...well...they dont have to and its just about impossible to do so, something the ECHR may look at. Despite what you say ...the portuguese investigation dont seem to share the view of the SC.

Your claim that SY have been prevented from investigating the mccanns is opinion not fact and imo ...risible