The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

On 8 May 2007, the PJ filed a report, saying they were barking up the wrong tree....400 WEEKS LATER, is DCI Nicola Wall of Operation Grange STILL barking up the wrong tree?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

On 8 May 2007, the PJ filed a report, saying they were barking up the wrong tree....400 WEEKS LATER, is DCI Nicola Wall of Operation Grange STILL barking up the wrong tree?

Post by Tony Bennett on 12.01.15 19:59

One of the most remarkable documents in the entire, voluminous PJ files, is a PJ report dated Tuesday 8th May, compiled by a PJ team.

The frustrated PJ team had followed up countless leads, but nothing made sense. 'We should be looking somewhere else', they realised. And they said so in this report, reproduced below.

Since then, exactly 400 complete weeks, or very nearly 8 years, have elapsed.

Yet Operation Grange appears to be looking in the very same places that were ruled 'dead ends' back on 8 May 2007, just 5 days after Madeleine had been reported missing by Drs Gerald and Kate McCann.

And with an official remit handed down from on high, confining the Scotland Yard investigation to 'investigating the abduction', is Detective Chief Inspector Wall going to spend the next 400 weeks also looking in the wrong place?

Here is the full astonishing report:

( Credits: 'pamalam' for hosting this report and so much other invaluable information on her site for over 6 years, and AnnaEsse for the translation, which I have amended very slightly in one or two places for readability)


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Madeleine's disappearance, May 8th 2007 - the PJ have doubts.
Several days of interviews.

It is May 8th 2007, being the fifth day after Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

At this stage, the PJ have taken statements from dozens of people.

Hundreds of pages in the reports.

Everybody has been interviewed:

* Employees of the Ocean Club,
* nannies,
* or child-care workers from the Kids Club,
* cooks
* and assistant cooks at the "Tapas" and the "Millenium",
* cleaners,
* gardeners,
* maintenance workers,
* managers for the club's various services,
* directors and managers of the complex,
* tourists,
* owners of apartments,
* neighbours,
* people who were at the "Tapas" on May 3rd 2007,
* tennis coaches...
...in short, no one was left out.

Everybody was interviewed.

We are sparing you all these interviews, which for the most part bring nothing to the investigation or at least no new leads.

They are mainly interviews which, in general, bring out the following common points.

1) No one noticed anything unusual about Madeleine.
2) No one noticed any strange individual at the complex.
3) No one noticed anything suspicious which could be linked to Madeleine's disappearance.
4) No one noticed any suspicious vehicles or any suspicious unidentified people.

It is to be noted that even the GRN police officers, first on the spot, were interviewed by their PJ colleagues, even though written reports of their operation had already been sent.

With regards to the PJ's interviews over the past few days, a change is noted in how the case is being perceived.


Thus the questions which the PJ are now putting to various witnesses are implying that the PJ have doubts about the statements from the parents or friends in the group.

We note, however, that the slightest info, concerning the slightest suspicion, was professionally checked, immediately.

Numerous pages of the case file attest to this.

Up to now, May 8th 2007, every lead, or hint of a lead, has been checked and it was, each time, a false lead.

Like, for example, a suspicious car noticed near the Ocean Club reception by various witnesses. In the end, it was the service vehicle of a Club employee who had come to make an urgent repair to a door lock.

Why do the PJ have these doubts?


On reading various witness statements, given the number of leads checked, it seems difficult for someone to have been able to :

* get into the complex,

* gain access to the McCanns' apartment,

* take Madeleine,

*get out of the apartment,

* leave the Ocean Club,

* take flight via whatever means of transport

* and that no- one, absolutely no-one, saw anything.


No strangers,
no suspicious or unusual vehicles,
not even a shadow of a person carrying a child at the times and places where there were other people.

From the police point of view, if these witness statements do not totally exclude the possibility of an abduction, they make the theory less credible.

As a result, the answer must lie elsewhere. Notably with the group of friends (parents included).

The only person to have seen a suspect with a child is Jane Tanner, a member of the group of friends.

Interview of an employee from the swimming pool bar:

In her interview, this employee states that access is restricted to clients and that this is controlled via the client's card at the entrance. She adds that she has not come across any unauthorised person on the site. She explains that on the day of Madeleine's disappearance, at around 8.30pm, her friend was called following a problem with a lock in an apartment situated close to the 'Millennium' restaurant.


She went there with her friend. At around 9pm, they went back towards the Club's reception.

They passed near the 'Tapas' and by the McCann family's apartment.

They state that they saw nothing suspicious.

They saw no one and no vehicles.

Her friend left the premises at around 9.10pm with his service vehicle and she left at 9.15pm in her own car.

ENDS


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P-J-HAVE-DOUBTS.htm

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: On 8 May 2007, the PJ filed a report, saying they were barking up the wrong tree....400 WEEKS LATER, is DCI Nicola Wall of Operation Grange STILL barking up the wrong tree?

Post by Sourdough on 14.01.15 12:48

@Tony Bennett wrote:One of the most remarkable documents in the entire, voluminous PJ files, is a PJ report dated Tuesday 8th May, compiled by a PJ team.

The frustrated PJ team had followed up countless leads, but nothing made sense. 'We should be looking somewhere else', they realised. And they said so in this report, reproduced below.

Since then, exactly 400 complete weeks, or very nearly 8 years, have elapsed.

Yet Operation Grange appears to be looking in the very same places that were ruled 'dead ends' back on 8 May 2007, just 5 days after Madeleine had been reported missing by Drs Gerald and Kate McCann.

And with an official remit handed down from on high, confining the Scotland Yard investigation to 'investigating the abduction', is Detective Chief Inspector Wall going to spend the next 400 weeks also looking in the wrong place?

Here is the full astonishing report:

( Credits: 'pamalam' for hosting this report and so much other invaluable information on her site for over 6 years, and AnnaEsse for the translation, which I have amended very slightly in one or two places for readability)


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

SNIPPED


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P-J-HAVE-DOUBTS.htm

Surely that is not a translation of a PJ report?
There is no page number or a link to a jpg file and I can't find it in the index.


Sourdough

Posts : 5
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2015-01-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: On 8 May 2007, the PJ filed a report, saying they were barking up the wrong tree....400 WEEKS LATER, is DCI Nicola Wall of Operation Grange STILL barking up the wrong tree?

Post by Tony Bennett on 14.01.15 19:46

@Sourdough wrote:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P-J-HAVE-DOUBTS.htm

Surely that is not a translation of a PJ report?

There is no page number or a link to a jpg file and I can't find it in the index.
I must admit I was in some doubt when I posted this item as to whether it was an official document in the case.

I thought it was, because it carries the title on it (at the top, left):

 
   1-Processo 1a

(click on the above link)

Does anyone else know for sure?

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum