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

MF's evidence to the Scotland Yard Review Team

View previous topic View next topic Go down

MF's evidence to the Scotland Yard Review Team

Post by Tony Bennett on 24.08.11 12:14

ANNOUNCEMENT

Further to our preliminary exchange of correspondence with Scotland Yard Review Team about its terms of reference, remit etc., (Note 1 below) in which we were told verbally and in writing that the Review Team was starting with a blank sheet and would consider ANY evidence no matter where it led, we have today by Recorded Delivery letter sent a 32-page letter and a bundle of supporting evidence to the Review Team.

We do not propose to disclose its contents. The Review Team will no doubt assess it, and in any event publication of the letter would risk yet a further letter from Carter-Ruck.

I will just say a few things.

I have spoken to one of the team's Detective Inspectors. He has, in terms, told me the following:

* The exercise is primarily a kind of 'cold case review', looking at all the paper evidence

* He described the volume of paperwork involved in the whole exercise as 'massive' and it was made clear to me that it would take months more work to get on top of it all and make sense of it

* Following the announcement of the review, he said that the Review Team had received many more letters from 'all sorts of people' offering evidence and conatining suggestions which 'has added to our workload'

* It was unlikely that many people would be directly interviewed by the Review Team

* This remained a Portuguese Police investigation and was not in any shape or form a 're-investigation' exercise at this stage

* He has given me two contact telephone numbers for the Review Team which I won't disclose. Messages for the Review Team may be left by dialling 101 and asking to speak to a 'Member of the Madeleine McCann Review Team' at Belgravia Police Station'.

I have disclosed to the D.I. and in our letter to D.C.I. Andy Redwood that we have received written evidence of interest from an insider within one of the Madeleine McCann private investigation teams - and invited D.C.I. Redwood or one of his detectives to contact us if he wants to follow this up.

I will just disclose one paragraph from our letter to D.C.I. Redwood:

I know that we can expect the Metropolitan Police to approach the evidence in this case robustly, fearlessly and without favour, and no doubt if this is what happens, along with you and your team following recommended police policy guidelines and procedures, the eventual report will be career-enhancing for all those involved in this review. It only remains for us at this stage to wish you every possible success in uncovering just how Madeleine McCann disappeared and who was responsible.

It will not be a surprise to anyone that our letter and accompanying file of evidence to the Review Team deals contains in considerable detail an anlysis of various contradictions, changes of statements and 'backfitting' as between and amongst the McCanns and their 'Tapas 9' friends, which we say is relevant circumstantial evidence.

The latest letter from Carter-Ruck to us insists that there is 'no credible evidence' that the McCanns have lied, or that Madeleine died in their apartment, or that they have covered up anything. It is because of their insistence that there is no such credible evidence that I now face contempt of court proceedings.

It is however worth bringing to mind the report of Britain's top criminal profiler in the National Policing Improvement Agency, Lee Rainbow, who in July 2007 wrote the following:

“Madeleine's father was the last one to see her alive. The family is a lead that should be followed. Contradictions in Gerald McCann's statements might lead us to suspect a homicide”.

Lee Rainbow's report also features in our letter to D.C.I. Redwood.

I would once again urge anyone with relevant evidence to write to D.C.I. Redwood.


Note 1: The Madeleine Foundation is still of course awaiting official responses from the Metropolitan Police to our Freedom of Infprmation Act questions about the Scotland Yard Review Team and its precise remit

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13959
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MF's evidence to the Scotland Yard Review Team

Post by MOTBO on 24.08.11 13:49

@Tony Bennett wrote:ANNOUNCEMENT

Further to our preliminary exchange of correspondence with Scotland Yard Review Team about its terms of reference, remit etc., (Note 1 below) in which we were told verbally and in writing that the Review Team was starting with a blank sheet and would consider ANY evidence no matter where it led, we have today by Recorded Delivery letter sent a 32-page letter and a bundle of supporting evidence to the Review Team.

We do not propose to disclose its contents. The Review Team will no doubt assess it, and in any event publication of the letter would risk yet a further letter from Carter-Ruck.

I will just say a few things.

I have spoken to one of the team's Detective Inspectors. He has, in terms, told me the following:

* The exercise is primarily a kind of 'cold case review', looking at all the paper evidence

* He described the volume of paperwork involved in the whole exercise as 'massive' and it was made clear to me that it would take months more work to get on top of it all and make sense of it

* Following the announcement of the review, he said that the Review Team had received many more letters from 'all sorts of people' offering evidence and conatining suggestions which 'has added to our workload'

* It was unlikely that many people would be directly interviewed by the Review Team

* This remained a Portuguese Police investigation and was not in any shape or form a 're-investigation' exercise at this stage

* He has given me two contact telephone numbers for the Review Team which I won't disclose. Messages for the Review Team may be left by dialling 101 and asking to speak to a 'Member of the Madeleine McCann Review Team' at Belgravia Police Station'.

I have disclosed to the D.I. and in our letter to D.C.I. Andy Redwood that we have received written evidence of interest from an insider within one of the Madeleine McCann private investigation teams - and invited D.C.I. Redwood or one of his detectives to contact us if he wants to follow this up.

I will just disclose one paragraph from our letter to D.C.I. Redwood:

I know that we can expect the Metropolitan Police to approach the evidence in this case robustly, fearlessly and without favour, and no doubt if this is what happens, along with you and your team following recommended police policy guidelines and procedures, the eventual report will be career-enhancing for all those involved in this review. It only remains for us at this stage to wish you every possible success in uncovering just how Madeleine McCann disappeared and who was responsible.

It will not be a surprise to anyone that our letter and accompanying file of evidence to the Review Team deals contains in considerable detail an anlysis of various contradictions, changes of statements and 'backfitting' as between and amongst the McCanns and their 'Tapas 9' friends, which we say is relevant circumstantial evidence.

The latest letter from Carter-Ruck to us insists that there is 'no credible evidence' that the McCanns have lied, or that Madeleine died in their apartment, or that they have covered up anything. It is because of their insistence that there is no such credible evidence that I now face contempt of court proceedings.

It is however worth bringing to mind the report of Britain's top criminal profiler in the National Policing Improvement Agency, Lee Rainbow, who in July 2007 wrote the following:

“Madeleine's father was the last one to see her alive. The family is a lead that should be followed. Contradictions in Gerald McCann's statements might lead us to suspect a homicide”.

Lee Rainbow's report also features in our letter to D.C.I. Redwood.

I would once again urge anyone with relevant evidence to write to D.C.I. Redwood.


Note 1: The Madeleine Foundation is still of course awaiting official responses from the Metropolitan Police to our Freedom of Infprmation Act questions about the Scotland Yard Review Team and its precise remit

Tried that got no where, but now I have a name I will try again, it relates to that so called Madeleine boarding the plane to Portugal video, IMO nah its not the plane to Portugal, see my earlier post, need some more opinions.

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3383-the-last-video

MOTBO

Posts : 16
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-08-22
Location : Surrey

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Lookit here son, I say son, did ya see that hawk after those hens? He scared 'em!

Post by The Rooster on 24.08.11 14:07

"Or was it the other way round". Mr Bennett I applaud your attention to detail and your robust nature in the face of difficult times. Having read about the McCanns instructions to their legal agents and their hell-bent attitude to removing you from their horizon it seems they about to open Pandora's box. By all that's right I hope they do and what they see inside scares them beyond anything they have previously experienced. I am certain they or their sycophants will be reading posts on sites such as this with great trepidation.



Ah say boy those hens are mighty angry now... ah say angry!

____________________
F J Leghorn
"DOO-Dah! DOO-Dah-Day!"

The Rooster

Posts : 379
Reputation : 36
Join date : 2011-04-12
Age : 70
Location : Virginia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MF's evidence to the Scotland Yard Review Team

Post by Guest on 24.08.11 14:10

@The Rooster wrote:Ah say boy those hens are mighty angry now... ah say angry!

big grin

Good to see you back, you've been missed!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Ah say... I've been working down on the farm!

Post by The Rooster on 24.08.11 14:27

@Admin wrote:
@The Rooster wrote:Ah say boy those hens are mighty angry now... ah say angry!



Good to see you back, you've been missed!



Why thank you, most kind. I really get the feeling that there are going to be some developments before long. Good to be back, cheers.

____________________
F J Leghorn
"DOO-Dah! DOO-Dah-Day!"

The Rooster

Posts : 379
Reputation : 36
Join date : 2011-04-12
Age : 70
Location : Virginia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MF's evidence to the Scotland Yard Review Team

Post by aiyoyo on 24.08.11 16:04

Blimey......what's there to lose anyway since the mccanns are hell bent on taking TB to court for contempt regardless whether he accedes to their demand or not.

They are just hardcore gangsters with money who got crooks for lawyers happy to earn their blood money.

Might as well just help Review Team so that perpetrators against Maddie can be punished -- and we all know who her perpetrators are don't we?

Her parents are the last people who want justice for her or they would have answered Police questions without reservation.

They've placed themselves between a rock and a v hard place.
Go to court open a can of worms and obliged to answer questions on oath or fear a knock on their door which kate said she fears ....understandably - anyone would especially when the police come armed with handcuff at the ready.

Oh I forgot, they are famous (not), so maybe the latest trend of arresting celebrities ie "arrested by appointment" will apply to them. They better pray they are not called up for interview either by Police or Judge.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MF's evidence to the Scotland Yard Review Team

Post by Guest on 05.09.11 16:44

Posted on twitter by Spudgun.......

Spudgun (@spudgun01)
Posted Monday 5th September 2011 from Twitlonger

#McCanns MET "review". What I REALLY want the Met’s finest to do is ask Kate McCann exactly WHAT it was that was shown to Kate at her interview. As the final report clearly states:

“Kate Healy was not immediately made an arguida, but merely interviewed voluntarily as a witness. Only after her interview was she made an arguida, that is, after she was confronted with concrete facts that might lead to her incrimination”

“...concrete facts that might lead to her incrimination” ???

Concrete FACTS, Kate? Gerry? Mr. Mitchell? It can’t be brushed off as “scurrilous, unhelpful speculation” by those bungling Porto Plod. It’s right there. In black and white. In the report.

The report that Team McCann so vehemently wave in the faces of anyone who dares to doubt their version of events.

http://spudgunsspoutings.blogspot.com/2011/05/happy-birthday-madeleine-mccann.html#comments


http://www.twitlonger.com/show/ctb6n0

Guest
Guest


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