*NEW* - IS THERE A GOVERNMENT COVER-UP? And if so, why? - POLL ADDED (was: Why are they being protected?)

sandancer wrote:Sadly many are still unaware that the files are available online for everyone to read .

Many still continue to focus on the Neglect angle .

This CANNOT be allowed to go away !

For Madeleine's sake and for her brother and sister .

suzyjohnson wrote:

Verdi wrote:
A guide to British nationals abroad - issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

What kind of help we can provide

------------------------------------------
 
We cannot:

> 
> Ensure your safety and security in another country because this is the responsibility of the government and authorities of that country.

> Give you legal advice or translate formal documents because such support is best provided by independent professionals and we do not have the funding or the expertise to provide such specialist services.
 
> Carry out searches for missing people because doing so is the responsibility of the local authorities and to search effectively requires resources that only local authorities can provide.
 
> Investigate crimes, get you out of prison, prevent the local authorities from deporting you after your prison sentence, or interfere in criminal or civil court proceedings because we cannot interfere in another country’s processes and must respect their systems, just as we expect them to respect the UK’s laws and legal processes.
 
> Get you better treatment in prison than local prisoners (although we may raise concerns with local authorities if treatment falls below internationally recognised standards) or get you better treatment in hospital than the treatment that is given to local people because we cannot interfere in another country’s processes just as we would not accept such interference in the UK.
 
> 

No, initially they cannot help with the above. But in both the McCann case and the Needham case, police assistance and private detectives played a role later on, after the case was archived in the case of Portugal, and several years later in the case of Greece.

Verdi wrote:,

suzyjohnson wrote:Having reviewed the MM case, Scotland Yard, with all their experience, probably had a very good idea what the cost of an investigation was going to be.
 
The PJ files were already on the internet, Amaral's book was already published and there was already considerable interest in the case before Scotland Yard took any of this on. If they have been swayed at all in their objective by events, it won't have been any of the above.

That is not how Operation Grange proceeded.  The global cost to the UK public purse included the intital review by Operation Grange - Operation Grange did not make the decision to move on to an investigation, it was the governments decision.  Clearly they had no idea how much the review/investigation would cost.  They, Operation Grange, were granted a specific initial sum which has been supplemented by additional grants in subsequent years.  Dribs and drabs so to speak.  Had Operation Grange, or even the government, any inclination of estimated costs, they would have budgeted accordingly - not made a decision based on nothing from one year to the next.

It's impossible to anticipate the overall cost of a criminal investigation for the simple reason there is no way of knowing what resources will be required nor how long an investigation will take.  It is progressive - could be solved tomorrow or in ten years. 

Operation Grange is a facade, a pretence - time will tell.

sandancer wrote:Sadly many are still unaware that the files are available online for everyone to read .

Many still continue to focus on the Neglect angle .

This CANNOT be allowed to go away !

For Madeleine's sake and for her brother and sister .

Verdi wrote:


The British Ambassador to Portugal arrived at the crime scene within hours of Madeleine McCann's disappearance - this is not normal.  Ambassadors DO NOT get involved with such affairs, it just doesn't happen.  

suzyjohnson wrote:

Verdi wrote:
And you don't think the Met would have discussed the situation with the government before they began an investigation? Both sides must have had some idea of the cost before it started, how many police officers to commit for example.

suzyjohnson wrote:

Verdi wrote:


The British Ambassador to Portugal arrived at the crime scene within hours of Madeleine McCann's disappearance - this is not normal.  Ambassadors DO NOT get involved with such affairs, it just doesn't happen.  

I don't really know anything about this. However, the McCann's situation with a missing three year old child in Portugal was so unusual, that there isn't really another case to compare this response to.

The nearest would be Ben Needham's case, but that was in 1991, 16 years earlier, things change over time. Obviously there was no internet in 1991, news travels so much quicker these days. 

Can you think of any other more recent cases where a young child has gone missing in Europe or anywhere? I can't.

Carrry On Doctor wrote:Voted 4, but I differ from TextUSAs' accident/death on the 3rd theory. There would appear to be a far stronger argument that something happening to MBM much earlier in the holiday.

I don't believe that paedophiles would go en masse to a foreign holiday resort (with bookings, passports, and credit cards leaving a very clear trail) for the purpose of abusing children...

poppydog2 wrote:I just rejoined last week as my old email address is inactive and I couldn't get a password reminder. So I've gone from username poppydog to poppydog2.

I voted connections to high ranking pedophile ring. I do believe Madeleine is dead and that she died due to an accident after being given some sort of sedatives. However, the cover up is being supported, in my opinion, because the McCann's have connections to Gordon Brown, who I have heard some heinous things about over the years, from those who worked closely with him. I also heard that Gordon Brown's wife is a beard for him. Who knows? Either way, there is no precedent for the amount of high level support for a missing child's family, and certainly not a family who were so utterly and totally negligent. I awoke on my 40th Birthday ten years ago on May 4th to the news the wee girl was missing. My heart felt sympathies went out to the family for about three hours, until I heard those three children, all under four years of age, were left alone night after night. Immediately I knew this stank to high heaven. Nothing has changed.

Rob Royston wrote:If we believe that there was an ongoing conspiracy that week that was to have climaxed in a faked abduction, then a cloak of secrecy was already in place before the accident.

After the accident by following through with the abduction scene, albeit with many clangers, the accident was pulled under this secrecy cloak by those on the ground at PDL. If the UK government were involved in the conspiracy they were trapped.

When the UK heavy team arrived early the next morning they may still have been genuinely acting out the fake abduction follow-up with mass publicity.

The GNR and the PJ quickly realised that the abduction claims did not stack up, as did some of the UK police liason officers. Only after the dogs had done their work would most of the UK agencies start to realise that they had been duped by the perpetrators.

Verdi wrote:

Rob Royston wrote:If we believe that there was an ongoing conspiracy that week that was to have climaxed in a faked abduction, then a cloak of secrecy was already in place before the accident.

After the accident by following through with the abduction scene, albeit with many clangers, the accident was pulled under this secrecy cloak by those on the ground at PDL. If the UK government were involved in the conspiracy they were trapped.

When the UK heavy team arrived early the next morning they may still have been genuinely acting out the fake abduction follow-up with mass publicity.

The GNR and the PJ quickly realised that the abduction claims did not stack up, as did some of the UK police liason officers. Only after the dogs had done their work would most of the UK agencies start to realise that they had been duped by the perpetrators.

I'm struggling to understand your drift Rob Royston.  If I understand you correctly, why would there have been 'a cloak of secrecy in place before the accident' (assuming you're referring to Madeleine's fate)?

Who was the UK heavy team that arrived early the next morning?

Apart from that, as I understand it an initiative was launched in the UK within hours of Madeleine's reported disappearance, through the auspices of government officials, police and media representatives - this is just not normal.  Within hours/days officials were flying out to Portugal to aid a couple of insignificant middle englanders, who carelessly mislaid one of their children - a child that could have been found at any moment, indeed before the GNR/PJ even found their feet, so to speak.

For a British ambassador to be commissioned to personally attend to the alleged victims of such an occurence is frankly unheard of - it just doesn't happen.  Even the nearest Consul aren't required to drop everything and rush hot foot to assist a British citizen in circumstances such as this - it just doesn't happen.  They went far beyond the call of duty so you have to ask why.

There were no known extenuating circumstances to explain the onslaught of UK officialdom from Friday 4th May 2007.  I venture to suggest they weren't hoodwinked into believing the McCannn story - they were instrumental in it's creation !!!

Phoebe wrote:To me, everything that has occurred speaks of cover-up AFTER the McCanns, of their own initiative, cried "abduction".

Phoebe wrote:Again, why choose an abduction to cover up what happened? There are much easier, credible ways to have "disappeared" Madeleine without so much fuss and attention. J.M also points out on her blog that "It was Tony Blair and Gordon Brown who were behind the instructions given to U.K ambassador John Buck and to British consul Bill Henderson to make sure Gerry and Kate McCann were given all possible assistance". That makes sense to me. Both had very publicly hitched their wagons to the McCanns and both were too arrogant and politically paranoid about image to allow themselves to be proven poor judges of character and circumstance. It would also have been embarrassing to have several government employees in the health service shown up in the international media glare as liars. The diplomatic service alerted its early concerns re the veracity of the Tapas 9. That dispatch would never have happened if the dip. service had been primed in advance. In my opinion that is.