Who benefits from the review?

Assuming that the review has one of two outcomes - a re-opening of the case or a whitewash, who benefits?


The McCanns


Re-opening: possibly not.


Whitewash: would it help them legally? From a pr aspect, at best, there is no change of image from the public point of view but it could also backfire and encourage more people to investigate the case for themselves.




Rebecca Brooks/News International


Re-opening: one of the biggest money-spinning stories in history gets a whole new lease of life.


Whitewash: no benefit.





Scotland Yard


Re-opening: will help to polish their tarnished reputation.


Whitewash: no benefit





David Cameron


This is where it gets complicated. David Cameron would not have ordered a review unless it was worth his while so:


Re-opening: improves diplomatic relations with Portugal


- improves relations with newspapers (including News International) by giving them a huge story,


- creates a massive hole to bury bad news in,


- improves relations with Scotland Yard by boosting their image,


- gives him power over the labour party who denied a child justice.


Whitewash: David Cameron could benefit from a whitewash if he is using the review to effectively blackmail powerful individuals or organisations who are somehow connected to Madeleine’s disappearance.




I think the McCanns have been manipulated into this situation because they are the only ones with nothing to gain from a review …unless I’ve missed
something.


So, have I missed anything?

ive said many times on other forums -- this review in my mind came about because the mcanns slated everyone with their week in the sun newspaper -- they also made a comment of dc son -- not good -- imo the review was set up to shut the mcanns up once and for all -- and the begging bowls too -- what happens from here im not sure -- why should portugal spend any more money on this -- it is good to know that sy and portugal are working together on this

It depends entirely on what grounds were laid down in however subtle a fashion to the senior investigating officer at the outset. Politicians have a way of indicating what they expect outcomes to be, what rewards can be expected if the desired result comes to fruition and vice versa. Three prime ministers have backed this pair and pulled a lot of strings into the bargain. I doubt any would come out smelling of roses if the McCanns were ultimately charged with offences in relation to their daughter’s disappearance. To a politician, today’s or yesterday’s, image and reputation are everything, and that unwisely assumes it is reputation alone being protected.

Let us assume for one moment the PJ, the men and women who investigate crime on a daily basis, the professionals with experience – let us for one minute assume they are correct in their early conclusions that M died in 5A and it was somehow covered up. I made an analogy using a chess game to this end the other day.

In those circumstances the McCanns would not be likely to benefit if the PJ reopened the investigation on their terms, one could invision a situation where the McCanns were possibly swiftly made arguidos again.
This could well be the reason why, according to people like Carlos Anjos they have not officially asked for the investigation to be reopened despite TM seemingly leading people to think otherwise.

However, should the investigation be reopened under an entirely new set of rules it could serve to benefit not just the McCanns but all the powerful people that have backed them over the years.

That would be to reopen the investigation on the basis that Maddie is still alive as TM are fervently touting at the moment and have been for some considerable time. Many people believe this is to ensure money continues to flow to the fund which it does but I would argue only as a by product of the long term view. In my opinion it would be foolish to disregard the fact that TM may have been working to this end for a considerable time and hence are many moves ahead in the game.

If the PJ were indeed correct in their original conclusions then the McCanns would benefit hugely from a reopening of the investigation on the basis she is still alive. The minute you open yourself to that possibility you effectively openly declare the McCanns innocence. You cannot hold the McCanns as suspects and the possibility that she is still alive in the same hand. It is a contradiction and cannot be done.

To reopen on this basis will effectively sweep all of the PJ’s pieces of evidence that point to the parents from the board and force them to continue the game searching for one imaginary piece whilst leaving the McCanns free to leave the table. If they were right in their original conclusions then it would be a game they could not win.

Once opened on that basis it would almost certainly close on that basis giving the McCanns lifelong vindication and freeing the many powerful people that have provided them assistance from the rather unpleasant hook they might otherwise find themselves upon should the PJ pursue their original findings to their ultimate and inevitable conclusion.

All just my opinion as to possibilities of course.