Re: Sky News - 6 months to find Maddie

by **HiDeHo** 03.04.16 22:49

whodunit wrote:As far as I can tell, these are the facts as reported in the press:

SY is convinced the girl was abducted.

SY can find no evidence the girl was murdered.

As far as SY are concerned Kate and Gerry McCann and the 'Tapas 9' are not suspects.

~~

As far as I can tell, for people who have studied this case in depth for years on end---and I admit I am not one of those people---these facts, which so far have not been refuted by SY, run counter to the reality of the case. What is it called when an investigation runs counter to the reality of a case? Oh yeah, a whitewash.

There are several lines of Inquiry so are they just referring to them not being suspects during THAT line of Inquiry at the time?

Not a suspect. True on that day. What about a day in the future?

Remember the PJ told them they were not suspects.....a few days before they were declared Arguidos

Convinced she was abducted? Have you seen a quote saying that (I only believe quotes in context when it comes to news articles)

I took some 'facts' from SY investigation and put them together...

They have shown some very thought provoking POSITIVE suggestions... In my opinion lol

Sky News - 6 months to find Maddie - Page 4 Whitew11

Sky News - 6 months to find Maddie - Page 4 Whitew11

by Google.Gaspar.Statements 03.04.16 22:51

http://portugalresident.com/met-ready-to-throw-in-the-towel-as-maddie-inquiry-%E2%80%9Cappears-to-have-gone-stone-cold%E2%80%9D

by **Tony Bennett** 03.04.16 22:59

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:http://portugalresident.com/met-ready-to-throw-in-the-towel-as-maddie-inquiry-%E2%80%9Cappears-to-have-gone-stone-cold%E2%80%9D

Throw in the towel

Meaning

Give up, to avoid further punishment when facing certain defeat.

Origin

This little expression of course derives from boxing. When a boxer is suffering a beating and his corner want to stop the fight they literally throw in the towel to indicate their conceding of the fight. This earliest citation that I have found of this is in the American newspaper The F ort Wayne Journal-Gazette, January 1913:

Murphy went after him, landing right and left undefended face. The crowd importuned referee Griffin to stop the fight and a towel was thrown from Burns' corner as a token of defeat.

It was very soon after that that the phrase began to be used in a figurative sense, to indicate giving up in non-boxing contexts; for example, in the Australian author Clarence James Dennis's WWI patriotic novel, The Moods of Ginger Mick, 1916:

No matter wot 'e done. It's jist a thing
I knoo 'e'd do if once 'e got the show.
An' it would never please 'im fer to sling
Tall tork at 'im jist cos 'e acted so.
"Don't make a song uv it!" I 'ear 'im growl,
"I've done me limit, an' tossed in the tow'l."

Throwing in the towel was preceded by throwing in the sponge. Sponges were a common ringside accessory as early as the 18th century. Throwing in the sponge was then the preferred method of conceding defeat. This is recorded in the mid-19th century, in The Slang Dictionary, 1860:

'To throw up the sponge,' to submit, give over the struggle, - from the practice of throwing up the sponge used to cleanse the combatants' faces, at a prize-fight, as a signal that the 'mill' is concluded.

A 'token of defeat'?

Who has 'beaten them'?

by Rogue-a-Tory 03.04.16 23:12

whodunit wrote: these are the facts as reported in the press:

Now there lies the perfect oxymoron yes

by whodunit 03.04.16 23:26

Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
whodunit wrote: these are the facts as reported in the press:

Now there lies the perfect oxymoron

Well, I am with you on that yes

but I've not seen anything to refute these facts. Have we not had direct quotes from officials that the McC's and the tapas 9 are not suspects? Do we not have proof that they keep questioning suspects whom they believe had the motive, means, and opportunity to abduct Madeleine? Have we ever heard a Met official refer to the evidence that Maddie is dead? Did Crimewatch even mention the dogs evidence? These are some of the things lead me to believe the press reports are accurate insofar as how the Met is treating the investigation.

by Verdi 03.04.16 23:27

HiDeHo wrote:
Verdi wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:Do we know for a fact that Scotland Yard have dealt with none of the above?
Since five years has elapsed since the initiation of Operation Grange with no apparent progress to this day, I think we can safely conclude the answer to that question is YES!

They have kept 'under the radar' regarding the investigation and possibly required by PJ to not issue details and compromise their investigation.

We know nothing about the investigation so I fail to see how anyone can draw conclusions.

I do not believe for one second that the PJ and Operation Grange are working in tandem. That opinion is not based on idle gossip but the total lack of any progress leading to a prosecution in relation to Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

If a prosecution was on the horizon after five years diligence, they wouldn't still be talking of a six month extension.

by whodunit 03.04.16 23:31

"Eliminated Jane Tanner's abductor"

Yes, and replaced him with an absolutely unverifiable 'creche dad'.

If they claim MBM may never have left the apartment alive, it is only because they blame a laughable 'burglary gone bad', not the parents.

by **HiDeHo** 03.04.16 23:32

Verdi wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:
Verdi wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:Do we know for a fact that Scotland Yard have dealt with none of the above?
Since five years has elapsed since the initiation of Operation Grange with no apparent progress to this day, I think we can safely conclude the answer to that question is YES!

They have kept 'under the radar' regarding the investigation and possibly required by PJ to not issue details and compromise their investigation.

We know nothing about the investigation so I fail to see how anyone can draw conclusions.
I do not believe for one second that the PJ and Operation Grange are working in tandem. That opinion is not based on idle gossip but the total lack of any progress leading to a prosecution in relation to Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

If a prosecution was on the horizon after five years diligence, they wouldn't still be talking of a six month extension.

As I asked earlier. In a best case scenario what could SY prosecute the McCanns for?

Would they release anything before the PJ investigation is complete?

by Verdi 03.04.16 23:34

@HiDeHo wrote: BTW... I haven't yet seen any FACTS that Scotland Yard have not investigated any or all of the above list.

And I haven't seen any ~~evidence~~ FACTS that they HAVE investigated any or all of the above list!

In the words of Gerry McCann - 'how do you prove a negative'?

by whodunit 03.04.16 23:34

That is a good question. WHY are they investigating this crime when they can't actually arrest or prosecute any suspects, and at such great expense to the British public? SY actually have no business investigating this crime. It is not in their jurisdiction. The fact that they have taken it upon themselves while allowing the British press to rubbish the PJ's efforts speaks volumes in my opinion.

by **Tony Bennett** 03.04.16 23:46

HiDeHo wrote:

Hmmm, @ HideHo, I do have a good few comments on THAT graphic!

Viz:

1. Tanner's abductor NOT eliminated but cunningly replaced by Crecheman

2. Smithman sighting regarded as so credible that it is announced as the 'centre of our focus'

3. ONE of the Smithman efits bears a passing resemblance to Gerry McCann - but no more so than for hundreds of thousands of other European men

4. The OTHER efit looks nothing like Gerry McCann

5, Claiming that Madeleine 'may not have left the apartment alive' may simply be paving the way for Grange to declare that the abductor may have killed Madeleine in the apartment - thus hoping to 'explain away' Martin Grime's findings...

6. ...and conveniently, Redwood managed to extend the 'window' for the abduction from 5 to 50 minutes

7. Digging for a body with TV cameras blazing all round the waste ground and 'searching' with a top military Alouette Mark III helicopter may just have been pure 'threatre'

8. ST bringing in 'RELIABLE cadaver dogs'? @ HideHo?    Were Eddie & Keela not reliable?

9. A wholly inaccurate 'reconstruction' exercise on Crimewatch

10. A procession of highly unlikely abductors like tractor man, smelly bin man, OC staff with keys, 6 men in a white van etc. etc. - all nonsense for public consumption.

It looks like we are much further apart on Operation Grange than I thought eek

by Verdi 03.04.16 23:50

HiDeHo wrote:
Verdi wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:
Verdi wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:Do we know for a fact that Scotland Yard have dealt with none of the above?
Since five years has elapsed since the initiation of Operation Grange with no apparent progress to this day, I think we can safely conclude the answer to that question is YES!

They have kept 'under the radar' regarding the investigation and possibly required by PJ to not issue details and compromise their investigation.

We know nothing about the investigation so I fail to see how anyone can draw conclusions.
I do not believe for one second that the PJ and Operation Grange are working in tandem. That opinion is not based on idle gossip but the total lack of any progress leading to a prosecution in relation to Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

If a prosecution was on the horizon after five years diligence, they wouldn't still be talking of a six month extension.

As I asked earlier. In a best case scenario what could SY prosecute the McCanns for?

Would they release anything before the PJ investigation is complete?

The UK law enforcement agencies can't prosecute the McCanns or any other suspect in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann per se. What further proof is require that Operation Grange is a farce pure and simple.

Operation Grange was initially established to undertake a review of all the information collated by the Portuguese investigation - what unprecedented arrogance on behalf of the UK authorities !?! That review then morphed into a full blown re-investigation - what unprecedented arrogance on behalf of the UK authorities. Unless they know without doubt that the crime committed can lead to a prosecution on UK territory, then they have no jurisdiction to investigate the crime. IF that be the case, unless the crime being investigated is an element of a major nation/worldwide crime syndicate (possible but I doubt they would have established Operation Grange in the first place), then what further proof is required that Operation Grange is a joke.

by whodunit 03.04.16 23:53

@Tony Bennett--"
8. ST bringing in 'RELIABLE cadaver dogs'? @ HideHo? Were Eddie & Keela not reliable?"

I missed this bit. What were the findings of these 'RELIABLE' dogs--as opposed to the unreliable dogs?

by Verdi 03.04.16 23:57

HiDeHo wrote:
whodunit wrote:As far as I can tell, these are the facts as reported in the press:

SY is convinced the girl was abducted.

SY can find no evidence the girl was murdered.

As far as SY are concerned Kate and Gerry McCann and the 'Tapas 9' are not suspects.

~~

As far as I can tell, for people who have studied this case in depth for years on end---and I admit I am not one of those people---these facts, which so far have not been refuted by SY, run counter to the reality of the case. What is it called when an investigation runs counter to the reality of a case? Oh yeah, a whitewash.

There are several lines of Inquiry so are they just referring to them not being suspects during THAT line of Inquiry at the time?

Not a suspect. True on that day. What about a day in the future?

Remember the PJ told them they were not suspects.....a few days before they were declared Arguidos

Convinced she was abducted? Have you seen a quote saying that (I only believe quotes in context when it comes to news articles)

I took some 'facts' from SY investigation and put them together...

They have shown some very thought provoking POSITIVE suggestions... In my opinion lol

Sorry HiDeHo but what the flippin' heck has this got to do with public opinion? I haven't a clue how things go on in your neck of the woods but I can't say I've ever heard of the proceeds of a police criminal investigation being guided by public opinion.

by Verdi 04.04.16 0:12

The above post is supposed to relate to this..

Sky News - 6 months to find Maddie - Page 4 Whitew11

I've got this new laptop - we're not bonding. The damn thing is totally self controlled and ignores my instructions, I've never known the like. The cursor flits about nillywilly deleting here adding there, moving text around and it even finds stuff to add when I'm not looking - it's driving me bonkers.

You know what they say - a bad worker always blames the tools.

by Nina 04.04.16 0:17

Verdi wrote:The above post is supposed to relate to this..

I've got this new laptop - we're not bonding. The damn thing is totally self controlled and ignores my instructions, I've never known the like. The cursor flits about nillywilly deleting here adding there, moving text around and it even finds stuff to add when I'm not looking - it's driving me bonkers.

You know what they say - a bad worker always blames the tools.

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 0:20

Tony...

Is it troublesome that we have different views/perceptions?

We see things differently but both our opinions are valid.

I continue to say that you may be right and I am willing to admit if/when I'm wrong.

It's interesting to see your perception of the comments on the graphic and appreciate you taking your time to comment.

Until I get some official 'news' about what the investigation contains I will continue to believe/hope that my perception of what I see is valid and carry on working with the timelines and facts from the files as you suggested. :)

I value your opinion as I hope (and think) you do mine.

Your areas of expertise are way above anything I could even contemplate knowing, so hopefully we can bring our own opinions/beliefs and give an opportunity for others to express and believe theirs.

I appreciate being challenged and being made to second guess myself but also hope that opinions are respected, as I respect yours and others on here.

It's never been a matter of whos right and whos wrong...its about looking at the issues and being able to freely express one's opinions regardless of whether others agree.

As you know, after studying the timelines for more than 4 years prior to creating the videos, I have many thoughts that to date I have never shared and some that have taken years to be recognised. I offer my opinions and the reasons for them and allow everyone to view them in whichever way they feel is appropriate for them however, I dont know that I'm correct. I just provide the info for others to form their own opinions

I can't expect people without the knowledge of all the timelines to understand and believe the various individual discrepancies, and in the same way your wealth of knowledge is not in place for me when I give my opinions on your areas of expertise, but I am not afraid to give my opinion and not afraid to admit to being wrong if/when the time comes.

Thats what I love about discussions and why I respect those that don't make judgements.

Thanks Tony for all you have input into the case.. We don't have to agree to have respect smilie

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 0:23

whodunit wrote:@Tony Bennett--"
8. ST bringing in 'RELIABLE cadaver dogs'? @ HideHo? Were Eddie & Keela not reliable?"

I missed this bit. What were the findings of these 'RELIABLE' dogs--as opposed to the unreliable dogs?

I was pointing out they used cadaver dogs so how could it be declared that they were unreliable... (no distinction about Eddie and Keela) it was just to note that the dogs ARE reliable

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 0:39

Verdi wrote:
Sorry HiDeHo but what the flippin' heck has this got to do with public opinion? I haven't a clue how things go on in your neck of the woods but I can't say I've ever heard of the proceeds of a police criminal investigation being guided by public opinion.

Just my opinion that in this case Scotland Yard cannot suddenly report the McCanns are guilty and I am still waiting to hear what they CAN prosecute the McCanns for.

That is an honest question. I have never been clear on that and would really like to have the answer.

Public opinion once UK public have read the files, is what I believe the McCanns fear the most, hence the effort to do all they can to prevent the UK from learning they exist, never mind read and discuss them.

Thats what they pay huge amounts of money for... To stop the media reporting on the facts from the files.

That is why I started the FB group where we focus only/mainly on the files and facts from quotes/interviews etc.

One day, whether the McCanns are charged or not, I believe that the UK with hopefully find out the details from the files and public opinion will change... This time they wont be able to change public opinion by using Hanover to win an award for changing public opinion from hostility to sympathy as they did in 2007.

With the help of the facebook groups (CMOMM FB group included) with approximately 100,000 members combined we are attempting to make that change as well as on this forum.

The UK needs to know the truth

We are all doing our best to make that happen.

Again, I would love to know what everyone considers to be the best they could hope for from Scotland Yard. An honest question.

by Mariita 04.04.16 1:22

I don't believe this has anything to do with how many or how few have read the files. So SY will finally, after 'enough' public awareness, change direction and turn their eyes on the parents plus friends? No, don't think that will happen....ever

by Guest 04.04.16 7:28

Mariita wrote:I don't believe this has anything to do with how many or how few have read the files. So SY will finally, after 'enough' public awareness, change direction and turn their eyes on the parents plus friends? No, don't think that will happen....ever

There has never been anything stopping them turning their attention to parents and friends.

It would be bog standard policing.

Something we have yet to see from the UK police.

by **Jill Havern** 04.04.16 8:15

HiDeHo wrote:With the help of the facebook groups (CMOMM FB group included) with approximately 100,000 members combined we are attempting to make that change as well as on this forum.

100,000 members?

You would think that 10,000 signatures for the Petition would be do-able as the link is shared constantly around the groups, yet only 2,387 have signed.

Order the Home Office to publish a report on the Madeleine McCann inquiry

Enquiries by British (and Portuguese) police forces have cost around £15 million in 8 years. The public is now entitled to a full report on how that has been spent. The report should cover the role of the government, the security services & UK police forces.

Madeleine was reported missing over 8 years ago. The Portuguese, Leicestershire, the Met & other police forces have spent huge amounts of time & money on the case, but there seems no prospect of further progress. Given the huge interest in the case, the public needs the fullest possible explanations and answers.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/108562

by **Tony Bennett** 04.04.16 8:26

HiDeHo wrote:Tony...

We see things differently but both our opinions are valid. Until I get some official 'news' about what the investigation contains I will continue to believe/hope that my perception of what I see is valid and carry on working with the timelines and facts from the files as you suggested

It's interesting to see your perception of the comments on the graphic and appreciate you taking your time to comment. I appreciate being challenged and being made to second guess myself but also hope that opinions are respected, as I respect yours and others on here. It's never been a matter of who's right and who's wrong...its about looking at the issues and being able to freely express one's opinions regardless of whether others agree. That's what I love about discussions and why I respect those that don't make judgments.

I value your opinion as I hope (and think) you do mine.

Is it troublesome that we have different views/perceptions?

Good morning Lizzie,

No it's not troublesome grouphug

I agree with all you say above. Despite the claims of certain others, robust debate and conflicting opinions have always been welcomed by Jill and her Moderators on CMOMM - but on the other hand, the forum also exists (as you say) for people to challenge the opinions of others if there is a basis for challenging them.

You wrote: "It's never been a matter of who's right and who's wrong..." Yes, but it absolutely matters what is right and what is wrong.

Either Madeleine was abducted, or she wasn't.

Either the dogs sniffed the past presence of a corpse - or they didn't.

Either David Payne and Kate McCann met at Apartment G5A at 6.30pm on 3 May - or they didn't.

And so on.

On the subject of Operation Grange, I think there are only two possible views:

A. It has always been a genuine search for the truth and OG has been bluffing the McCanns for 5 years by pretending to rule them out and pretending to look for an abductor

OR

B. It was, from the very beginning, an expensive charade designed to continue to influence public perception that this was an abduction - when it wasn't.

I take your point that we don't finally know.

But my reading of the runes differs from yours.

I remain in 'Camp B' as I did back on 11 May 2011.

That was 1,789 days ago yes

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 12:13

Lol Tony :)

Yes, you are right about whos right or wrong... I was thinking in relation to right now though... and who's right or wrong regarding how we all get along... (or something like that) laughat

At least I didn't spell it 'whose' winkwink

Regarding my stance on OG, as someone pointed out to me, they don't share my optimism but they share my standpoint as we don't know what has been happening in the investigation, who has been questioned, what has been asked etc

I will need to hear (in a direct quote from SY) what has been accomplished/not accomplished in the investigation before I make any assumptions. I'm not good at guessing.

by Mariita 04.04.16 12:40

HiDeHo wrote:Lol Tony :)

Yes, you are right about whos right or wrong... I was thinking in relation to right now though... and who's right or wrong regarding how we all get along... (or something like that) At least I didn't spell it 'whose'

Regarding my stance on OG, as someone pointed out to me, they don't share my optimism but they share my standpoint as we don't know what has been happening in the investigation, who has been questioned, what has been asked etc

I will need to hear (in a direct quote from SY) what has been accomplished/not accomplished in the investigation before I make any assumptions. I'm not good at guessing.

The parents and their holiday friends are no suspects - isn't that a direct quote from SY?