CEOPS

"@Guest 999.

ARE OG/CEOP, iyv, 'investigating', 'THE abduction' (OG 'remit') of Madeleine McCann, or 'the murder' (deceased) NOT OG 'remit', of Madeleine McCann?

Operation Grange, an/THE 'abduction' of Madeleine investigation, OR, a/THE(?) 'murder', of Madeleine, investigation?"


................................................................................................................................................

I think a lot of over analysis has been done about the individual words written in the remit and many/any other published bit of info..."abduction"  "disappearance" etc etc and people run away with it.


Bottom line is this....no-one on here (including me) knows exactly what or who is being definitively investigated (although not the McCanns), as OG and other authorities do not publish everything they are doing.


Thinking logically though...


CEOP: Why would CEOP be involved just because a child has 'disappeared'(i use that word as no body so not officially dead, or no confession, so, the same)??? Obvious answer is...because they are aware of activity in the area, or known people operating in the area and thus can offer intelligence and assistance to the relevant police authorities running the case.


OG: Have no body, no suspect in custody and not enough evidence to categorically prove that she was murdered or by whom, therefore cannot publicly state that is is a murder investigation. Are they investigating this as a murder though? most likely yes, based on the intelligence/info they have received to date, the scene of the crime, the dogs, the limited forensics etc, hence why they were performing digs etc.


The parents however, need to keep up the pretense of an 'abduction' for as long as possible/forever, so it can be seem as an opportunistic snatching in a minute window of opportunity and not the reality which was that they neglected their children for hours upon end which led to unspeakable events taking place and ultimately led to their daughters demise. If a body is found or the murderer/abuser speaks out, too many questions will be asked/stories debunked (from the parents and tapas 7) and ultimately put them in the frame for some serious criminal charges.

I wonder what evidence there is that made OG/SY state the McCann's are not suspects in this crime, because i really can't think what evidence they could possibly have to make it so??

He saw how 'well' the bewk madeleine 'was' and he, JG, MB, and S&S 'thought' erm, 'maddie's still a 'winner'!

The S&S 'blockbuster' bewk was to be ALL their 'pension' pots! (with a % for unohoo)

Marty never got 'enuff' from the bewk 'sales' to even buy a new 'dirty' mac!

and that's AFTER the 'collective' (THEY) 'pushed/plugged' the bewk on Sky News a SECOND 'time', four or five months , later!

'disguised' as an 'update'

THAT went 'well' then!

As PM stated, WTF was Gamble and CEOP 'doing', getting 'involved' with a 'missing person' case, when THOUSANDS of girls were being EXPLOITED, ABUSED, RAPED, DRUGGED in Rotherham, Rochdale, Oxford, Derby etc., in 2007!

UNDER HIS 'WATCH', when Gamble was the CEO of CEOP.

E in CEOP stands for EXPLOITATION.

THOUSANDS of girls, in UK, being EXPLOITED in 2007.

What does Gamble 'do'?

Get to Portugal, as quick as he can, because the parents, and only the parents, the very last 'people' to have seen the child 'alive', of a 'missing' child, 'said' that 'she was abducted' (by paedo/s)



'

Verdi wrote:

tigger wrote:CEOP was a Ltd. Co. with government funding. I am not sure how this works, is it a convenient way for a government to withdraw support from such a body? i.e. if it is not set up by the government and it doesn't suit the government to keep it going they can just withdraw the funding.
I believe that is what happened as soon as Cameron came to power, Teresa May cancelled all links with CEOP.

Personally I do believe in planning but not in CEOP having the website ready on the 30th of April, it's not my area of expertise so I haven't read the arguments. I'd think that Mr. Gamble is rather too bright to do this. On reflection I also don't think the CAT files (there are in fact two according to LP: one for each of the parents iirc) are important although I used to think so. Both files may have been opened when the Leicester police got involved or may have something to do with the weird WoC issue.  I would like to know what the repercussions are for siblings  if parents voluntarity place one of their children under the guardianship of the court.
CEOP is quite interesting enough for me even without the 30th April website or the CAT files.  
I had a short conversation with Mr. G on twitter some months ago when he recommended reading Summer and Swan's book. I asked him why not the PJ files? He then blocked me after telling me he knew I'd just joined Twitter to annoy him, or words to that effect.
That was not the case. What I wanted to know is why an ex police officer would promote very much second-hand information where first-hand is so easily available.

So there you have it - totally unprofessional.  IMO in his position he shouldn't even be discussing the case on twitter or any other social media platform, let alone hitching himself to the McCann wagon.  Speaks volumes.

ITA, that it does speak volumes about his relationship to the McC's.

Guest999:

CEOP: Obvious answer is..."because they are aware of activity in the area, or known people operating in the area and thus can offer intelligence and assistance to the relevant police authorities running the case."
-----------------------------------------

You 'know' that CEOP NEVER 'passed' A SINGLE holiday 'photo', to the relevant police authority, Portuguese, from holidaymakers they 'asked' to send 'photo's' to at CEOP, don't you?

If that's 'helpful', i wouldn't like CEOP, when they are being, erm, 'unhelpful'!

You 'know' the UK HO and LP 'witheld' information from the PJ, don't you?

"Get to Portugal, as quick as he can, because the parents, and only the parents, the very last 'people' to have seen the child 'alive', of a 'missing' child, 'said' that 'she was abducted' (by paedo/s)"


You assume here that everybody loves the McCanns, believes everything that comes out of their mouths and that thy run the show. I predict it is quote the opposite and they both distrust and dislike them immensely for their action before, during and post holiday in Luz.


Have you considered that it might have been CEOP who told them about the paedo connection and not the other way round? IMO CEOP must have had intelligence about activity in the area to get involved, otherwise they simply wouldn't.


Also, again, until there is a body or a confession, then abduction could be one theory (though based on the evidence, disposal/removal of the corpse is more likely), regardless of whether the parents shout that/write about it.

Guest999

"You assume here that everybody loves the McCanns, believes everything that comes out of their mouths and that they run the show."
--------------------------------------------

I don't 'assume' anything, and you shouldn't either, because, 'that' could make an 'ass', out of, 'u' and 'me'!

So, 'abduction' or 'murder' investigation, by OG?

tigger wrote:CEOP was a Ltd. Co. with government funding. I am not sure how this works, is it a convenient way for a government to withdraw support from such a body? i.e. if it is not set up by the government and it doesn't suit the government to keep it going they can just withdraw the funding.
I believe that is what happened as soon as Cameron came to power, Teresa May cancelled all links with CEOP.

Are you sure CEOP was a Ltd. company? The website [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] always in the 'gov.uk' domain.

".gov.uk
This is for government bodies and is managed by the HM Government Cabinet office with applications approved by The Naming and Approvals Committee (NAC). Details on the application process can be found at Naming and registering government websites. "

CEOP still exists but has been moved to the police.uk domain ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

".police.uk
This is for the UK Police Force and applications are approved by the College of Policing."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Tigger wrote:Just throwing this in: Operation Ore was when? It was a US trawl of internet users and threw up hundreds of addresses in the UK.

Blair put a D-notice on it iirc. I understand Jim Gamble moved on from Operation Ore to having his own baby in the form of CEOP. Surely he'd have a fair bit of information available from Operation Ore?

I think you've hit the nail right on the head there.

Nereid wrote:Are you sure CEOP was a Ltd. company? The website was always in the 'gov.uk' domain.

It pays to remember that we are talking about a period in history when the lines between public and private enterprises had never been more blurred.

@Verdi--- "I can't be convinced that it was the result of some contrived destiny."

I can't speak for others but I am by no means arguing that the McC's went to Portugal with the intent of harming their daughter or allowing her to be harmed.

But harmed she was. The dogs said so.

There are a myriad of indicators that she was harmed prior to May 3.

You have to wonder why the Prime Minister was called that very night, the major media published reports practically before the police were called, and hundreds of media boots were on the ground before anyone could actually say for certain that the child hadn't wandered off. What was so special about these people that the world spotlight was focused on them immediately as 'the grieving parents'?


It's extraordinary when you think about it. With all those glaring lights on the McCann's you have to squint to look at what was left in the shadows. In my opinion they became human shields and there wasn't a bloody thing they could do about it.


It doesn't beggar my belief to entertain the possibility that certain orgs were employed to concoct a cover story. Some, or one, may have pulled the trigger too soon.

Entire care systems purporting to focus on the nurturing and protection of children were actually just hunting grounds for depraved lunatics.
Sometimes a thing is actually the monster it claims to fight.

As always, follow the money.

Rogue-a-Tory wrote:

Guest 999 wrote:I suspect that CEOP asking for photos was not to prove Madeleine's presence at certain times/dates (thats the job of the PJ/Met), but more to identify people in the background of those pictures to establish who they are, if they are known to them and how regularly they appear on the photos to map out their behaviors/movements.

This would fit in line with the thinking that there was a known paedo in the area at the time (already known to CEOP hence their involvement/input), watching the apartments and is the main focus of both the Grange Operation for the removal of Madeleine from the apartment (deceased) and CEOPs on-going investigations into paedo rings/activity.

There were people in PdL in May 2007 known to CEOP all right, doubt CEOP would need photos to identify these people.

!

@ Guess 999

"There are pedophiles operating in many places around the globe, including the UK and a lot of them are already known to the authorities. However, you can not expect the authorities to warn everyone of each peado wherever they are, it would be a monumental task! If the paedo is not actively committing a crime, then they are free to live their lives in among the general public, as are any convicted/known criminals."
~~~~~~

Indeed this is true -  but you would think that eight well educated professional adults would be sufficiently aware of such dangers to think twice about leaving their children unattended whilst they went off on the hit and miss, wouldn't you?  Two of which even claimed to have left their apartment unlocked with three very young children within !!! 

I think you can expect parents attend to the safety of their own children, would you agree?

I don't think CEOPS was looking for known or unknown paedo's  in those 1800 photographs they got on their special website.

Here is his blog:

Day 37 - 09/06/2007     Saturday

DATE GERRY USED Day 37 - 11/06/2007 Kate and I had a slightly busier day on the media front than expected. We did a short press interview for the Irish Sunday papers, mainly to thank the Irish for their fantastic level of support. We followed that with one for the British Sundays which is likely to be the last one we do for a while. We talked about our pain of not having having Madeleine for such a long time and for our need to grieve, which occurs mainly in private. We also talked about how after Morocco we will have to spend some time reflecting both emotionally, and also how best the campaign can be taken forward. What we want to ensure is that the campaign has a psoitive effect on finding Madeleine. After this we headed down to Sagres which is the very most southwestern tip of Portugal. There is a very nice beach and we had lunch with the family. After returning from the beach we did the Irish version of Crimewatch-‘Crimecall’. There are a lot of Irish tourists in and around Praia da Luz and although the awareness of Madeleine’s disappearance in Ireland is extremely high, we want to ensure that everyone is aware of the appeal and we want the Irish public to come forward with photographs of people who they do not know who were in and around Praia da Luz in the 2 weeks leading up to the 3rd May. The address to upload photographs is: to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] . We have also asked for people to contact their local police if they have seen a man matching the description of the suspect carrying a child seen around the time of Madeleine’s abduction. He is 30-40 years, 1.70-1.80m (5’7”-11”), caucasian and was wearing a dark jacket, beige or mustard coloured trousers with dark shoes. No major news on the investigation front- we still believe it is just a single phone call away.

This is full of interest:
Why does Gerry fudge the date? the Sagres visit was on the 9th.
On the 10th they flew to Morocco.
Why is he specifically asking Irish people to come forward?
Why does he mention 'their need to grieve' after Morocco ( this is clearly part of a plan, see below)?

This is repeated to the press when they return from Morocco. In view of the strange photographs which Miss Beetle posted of the two in Morocco, the call for photographs from holidaymakers and the time-frame of two weeks before the 3rd of May the whole thing smells of sea bass left out in the sun. Come to think of it , sea bass is on the menu in the following blog entry the 8th of June: . Sean, in particular has acquired a taste for sea-bass!

The special website can be found still : result from the Wayback machine

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Saved 41 times between mei 23, 2007 and april 1, 2009.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Car Hired 5 Weeks After Madeleine’s Disappearance

By admin, on December 10th, 2008

John McCann, the uncle of missing girl Madeleine speaks to the media in Glasgow after her mother Kate was made a formal suspect by police in Portugal.

When the DNA evidence was first brought to light, John McCann appeared on Sky Television in an interview.

Interestingly, and never challenged at the time, John went into elaborate detail about the car hired by brother Gerry and said;

“…but some of the, some of the stuff that’s being speculated on just isn’t plausible. Like information appearing about samples in a car which Gerry and Kate only got 5 weeks after Madeleine disappeared.  Are you trying to tell me that Madeleine was hidden for 5 weeks and then was suddenly reappeared in this hire car. It…does not make sense.”

Did John make an amazing Freudian Slip?

Why did John mention “5 weeks” when he was talking in September 2007 – months after Madeleine had disappeared?

The facts are that the car had been hired on May 27 – 24 days after Madeleine was reported missing. 24 days is a significantly shorter time than 5 weeks.

So, what could be significant about something happening 5 weeks after Madeleine’s demise?

5 weeks after Madeleine disappeared was the weekend commencing Friday June 8, 2007. When we look closely at that weekend, there are several interesting things to note:

The McCann family flew in to the Algarve or were already there for that weekend. Susan and Brian Healy – Kate’s parents – were there. Trish and Sandy Cameron – Gerry’s sister and his brother in-law were there. Philomena flew in to Lisbon and Kate’s long time friend Anne-Marie Wright and her husband Michael had flown in to Faro.

Michael told the police that he and his wife flew in with the specific job of looking after Sean and Amelie while Kate and Gerry went to Morocco on Sunday June 10. Given the large number of close family relatives in town, Michael’s statement to the police is flawed.

On Saturday June 9, 2007, the entire family is supposed to have spent a day at the southwestern tip of Portugal – a town called Sagres.

On the Sunday afternoon, Kate, Gerry and Clarence Mitchell all went up to Lisbon to catch a small private plane laid on especially for them to go to Casablanca in Morocco. Their ultimate destination was Rabat, where a press conference with Sky’s Martin Brunt was held.

North Africa in June is a very hot place to be. Why then was Martin Brunt wearing a white suit, children were wearing t-shirts, but they chose to wear the worst attire possible – black suits more befitting a funeral?

Was Madeleine disposed of during the weekend of June 8?

Did John McCann inadvertently let it slip that this was the weekend when Madeleine was finally laid to rest or disposed of?

Verdi wrote:Indeed this is true -  but you would think that eight well educated professional adults would be sufficiently aware of such dangers to think twice about leaving their children unattended whilst they went off on the hit and miss, wouldn't you?  Two of which even claimed to have left their apartment unlocked with three very young children within !!! 

It is worse even than you state.
There were NINE parents present, who left EIGHT children, all under the age of four, most under the age of three, some younger still . . .
alone in cold, unlit, and in one admitted case unlocked apartments, when some of them, again allegedly were suffering from acute medical conditions . . .
for FIVE nights in succession

Is this credible ?
Would a grandmother permit this ?

Hi Jeanmonroe,
Thank you for your most recent post.
If it is true and I Do not doubt the possibility of CM and a Private plane use,if my memory is right didn't Philip Green offer the McCann family a Lear jet, if your "Theory" is proven to be correct, this certainly means the S**t will hit the proverbial fan!?
Perhaps the pink one would care to undertake a Lie detector test of his involvement in Madeleine McCann disappearance?
From what I have read on the PJ files,Pat Brown, Didn't Gerry, Kate and family attend a christening in the UK in June 2007, where "Michael Wright" flew to Portugal to accompany Kate and children back to the UK for that event!
I think Gerry and Kate were made God parents to the family's children, was this event around the same time or am I mistaken?

willowthewisp wrote:Hi Jeanmonroe,
Thank you for your most recent post.
If it is true and I Do not doubt the possibility of CM and a Private plane use,if my memory is right didn't Philip Green offer the McCann family a Lear jet, if your "Theory" is proven to be correct, this certainly means the S**t will hit the proverbial fan!?
Perhaps the pink one would care to undertake a Lie detector test of his involvement in Madeleine McCann disappearance?

My 'theory'?

MY 'theory' is the same as the SIO of the PJ, GA.

Having said that, i 'do' also have a 'back up' theory.

A HUGE, HUGE, 'scam'!

Madeleine 'secreted away' in a luxury 'lair' in the UK, waiting for the big 'reveal'. (totally 'unharmed' and 'miraculously FOUND' YEARS 'later'. The McCann's constant 'mantra')

Which coincides, rather 'neatly', with the total LACK of ACTUAL 'searching', for Madeleine, by McCann/Healy family members, for a 'missing' family member, and their 'friends'.

And when EVERYONE (including CM) has finally made 'enough' money, from her 'disappearance'.

Her 'parents' are NOW millionaires. (not having 'a pot to pee in' BEFORE the 'disappearance' according to 'family')

Would they be millionaires, if Madeleine had NOT 'disappeared'?

WHY SY/MET are, imo, going along with, being totally 'mugged off' by a couple of 'chancers' is anybody's 'guess'.

Ah, i 'know'

Met commissioner, BHH! (McCann 'supporter' McCann 'fund' raiser)

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

DO these 'two' McCann 'family members' (GM's sister and brother) LOOK, to you, to be 'totally distressed, distraught, worried sick' about a 'missing' family 'member', THEIR 'darling, wee, niece', Madeleine?

P Mc 05/03/2007

J Mc 09/03/2007

2 and 6 DAYS, respectively, 'after' Madeleine's 'disappearance'

They BOTH 'know', imo, EXACTLY 'where' Madeleine 'is'!

Why were CEOP employees (Jo Sullivan and Graham Hill) invited out to PDL by the FCO almost immediately?

Why has Jim Gamble, foregone the professional detachment one would expect from a senior UK police officer to openly support the McCanns, the Summers & Swan book etc.

Why has Graham Hill taken to LipTV with support for the McCanns?

Why has Dr Sharon Leal supported the McCanns in a documentary?

Why has Missing People made Kate McCann their maidenhead/launcher of all things about missing children/people?

If paedophilia isn't at the heart of all of this then I don't know what is.

Just my opinion.

Thats why its time to stop worrying about stupid libel issues and all say exactly what you think is going on. Time to fight hard. Forums have been challenging the nonces in Parliament for years without any comeback. So why the worry about this case ?

Libel labelled bull wrote:Thats why its time to stop worrying about stupid libel issues and all say exactly what you think is going on. Time to fight hard. Forums have been challenging the nonces in Parliament for years without any comeback. So why the worry about this case ?

Tony Bennett said what he thought and was devastatingly threatened by a major libel law firm. He couldn't afford to do anything other than accept their terms. He went on to have his say and found himself before the court for contempt of court. He was also trapped by a journalist into sending a copy of his booklet. This journalist said in the court (I was there) 'I lied My Lord'. There was an audible gasp in the court.

Stupid libel issues? what are you talking about? Tony Bennett is paying £125 per month to a court for the next several years. Are you prepared to take your chances and do that? Are you prepared to say what you think and risk your livelihood? I hazard a guess you're not.

Tony is much maligned by many people. He had more courage than most and is paying the price. He's vilified by the likes of Hutton and Poulton.

I find freedom fighters annoying. Hutton is a freedom fighter without substance. Poulton is a freedom fighter who sits on Murdoch sofas. Both of these women speak of freedom of speech and yet neither of them actually step out of line.

Libel labelled bull wrote:Thats why its time to stop worrying about stupid libel issues and all say exactly what you think is going on. Time to fight hard. Forums have been challenging the nonces in Parliament for years without any comeback. So why the worry about this case ?

I, for one, am 'NOT WORRIED', in the least, about 'stupid LIBEL issues'!

I have ASKED the McCann's to SUE me!

I have asked SKY News and Brunt to 'interview/doorstep' me!

I WILL stand up in any 'court room', to explain, MY 'libellous/slanderous' explanation, on Madeleine's 'disappearance'

'Libel/Slander' or NOT!

I wrote to GB, in 2007, about this 'case' (all 'saved' e-mail to thirty 'disks'/ss/ 'everything'. He will NEVER be able to 'say' ......'nobody told me, i didn't know that, i didn't get an e-mail') I've GOT a right proper 'paper trail' and it goes, all the way, to 10, Downing Street!

Libel?,,,,, Schmibel!