Re: Theresa May asks permission for Met to start Madeleine McCann inquiry in Portugal

by lj 05.08.13 17:03

tigger wrote:@marconi

I don 't think lj was apologising.

Lj pointed out that she has the right to her opinion and requested that you stop making it personal.

Your answer implies that lj was in the wrong and you are graciously waiving her need to apologise.
This is clearly not the case.

This is a forum for discussion with many well informed members who are keeping a grave miscarriage of justice in the public domain.

Thanks Tigger, I have to find the ignore button. Never needed it, but this nonsense ruins many good threads.

by Guest 06.08.13 10:01

I've not read this before from the PJ files, too long to copy but for anyone who hasn't seen it before it's well worth reading through.

Maybe it has relevence to what is happening now?

Letter from Lawyers Morais Leitao, Galvao Teles, Soares da Silva

Addressed to: Criminal Instruction Court of Portimao
Portimao Public Services Ministry

Ref: 201/07.0 GALGS

To the Criminal Instruction Judge and the Public Prosecutor

The Association of Chief Police Officers, The Chief Constable of Leicestershire, The Serious Organised Crime Agency, police and legal authorities in the United Kingdom and Crimestoppers, all already identified in the files, are here represented by Lawyers Rui Patricio and Tiago Felix da Costa, from the company Morais Leitao, Galvao Teles, Soares da Silva and Associates and submit the following explanation and request:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LAWYERS_UK_POLICE.htm

by russiandoll 08.08.13 19:44

from " The People" newspaper, 8 August 2013 :

As Scotland Yard investigators prepare to head to Portugal to take the next step in their investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance, her father says he is grateful for the work they've already done.

"We have been incredibly fortunate in the last two years to have the Metropolitan Police reviewing the case and now actively investigating," McCann told PEOPLE July 28, shortly after finishing the Virgin Active London Triathlon to raise money for the charity Missing People.

"It is very unlikely that someone is just going to walk up and say, 'Here she is,' " he says. "So you have got to chase it."

"That has been important," he says, "and it is important that we are still looking and that there is now an active investigation, which is great."

On July 4, Scotland Yard detectives announced they believe Madeleine, who was three years old when she vanished from a Portuguese resort in May 2007, could still be alive. They said they have 38 possible suspects in five different countries.

In May 2011, after years of pressure from the McCanns, Prime Minister David Cameron ordered London's Metropolitan Police to review the case, which had been closed by Portuguese police in July 2008.

"I think the information that came in early on is probably the most important," says Gerry. "You never know where it will lead."

"All we know is that at the very least they are eliminating things," he says, "and there are some very good lines of inquiry. So you have got to explore them."

by **PeterMac** 08.08.13 20:14

russiandoll wrote:from " The People" newspaper, 8 August 2013 :
"I think the information that came in early on is probably the most important," says Gerry. "You never know where it will lead." Like the statements about the shutter, windows, curtains and window of opportunity, for example ?
"All we know is that at the very least they are eliminating things," he says, Eliminating 38 lines of enquiry, as being of no further interest ? "and there are some very good lines of inquiry. So you have got to explore them."[/b] There are indeed. VERY good lines of enquiry. And let us all hope they are fully explored, as they have not been thus far.

by marconi 09.08.13 13:24

call on youtube "volunteers needed for video mining" 3 weeks after the disappearance, where Gerry says that the media interest was taking much and much longer than they had expected.
only 3 weeks after and they regreted it already. They made their own trap.
We are six years later now and it became a real mess to the McCanns.

by aiyoyo 09.08.13 23:44

PeterMac wrote:
russiandoll wrote:from " The People" newspaper, 8 August 2013 :
"I think the information that came in early on is probably the most important," says Gerry. "You never know where it will lead." Like the statements about the shutter, windows, curtains and window of opportunity, for example ?
"All we know is that at the very least they are eliminating things," he says, Eliminating 38 lines of enquiry, as being of no further interest ? "and there are some very good lines of inquiry. So you have got to explore them."[/b] There are indeed. VERY good lines of enquiry. And let us all hope they are fully explored, as they have not been thus far.

The point is: how did he know they are good lines of inquiry? Would the Yard tell him that?
Even if Yard were updating them as we are led to believe, I doubt Police say much about a live investigation.

He would have to invent something to say isn't it when interviewed.
I bet he knows he'd uttered a whole load of garbage and isn't too chuffed they are on records now.

by marconi 10.08.13 2:35

I believe the breakthrough is about to happen and it will come from Algarve. From somebody who took part in the disappearance, helping hiding the body.Or at least knowing where the body is.
When it happens in Algarve, arrests will be made in the UK too.

And there is also the possiblity that new witnesses evidence is coming from Tapas 7, that prefers being witnesses than suspects.
They must be fed up of helping the McCanns.

by **PeterMac** 10.08.13 8:17

marconi wrote:I believe the breakthrough is about to happen and it will come from Algarve. From somebody who took part in the disappearance, helping hiding the body.Or at least knowing where the body is.
When it happens in Algarve, arrests will be made in the UK too.
And there is also the possiblity that new witnesses evidence is coming from Tapas 7, that prefers being witnesses than suspects.
They must be fed up of helping the McCanns.

I hope you are right, but do you have anything more than just a 'belief' to go on. Have you spotted other signs ?

by comperedna 10.08.13 16:29

You said it for me, Petermac.

by Who?What?Where? 11.08.13 1:22

comperedna5 wrote:Who?What?Where?... I do not believe Cameron has any reason to block a genuine solution to what happened to MBM. It is NOT in his interests to do so... in fact the very reverse. If the case is cleared up on his watch he will gain kudos from it. The more complicated this whole situation is made, the less likely the true solution will be arrived at. I may not agree at all with Cameron's politics: he is in fact our own constituency MP as well as PM, but as a person I have very good reason to know that he is not corrupt or despicable, and he would have to be so to deliberately falsify what happened if the truth can be discerned.

Comperedna5 …

There are some thing's that you hear or read during your life, that stick in the mind, subconsciously.

Without conscious effort.

One phrase that has stuck in my mind , is that the first casualty of war, is the Truth.

As far as I can see, politician's since thatcher's reign, have been waging war on the Truth. What is the real Truth about the sinking of The Belgrano, for example? Look at how Bob Geldof found thatcher out, over the butter mountain.

The tapas9 through their various "spokes person’s" and "source's close to them" have waged a similar war on the Truth, IMO.

The blair/brown government with all the spin doctoring , did exactly the same thing.

Mr Cameron may be your constituency MP , but that is meaningless in the overall scheme of thing's.. He has to do good for his constituent's, or he would be removed from office, via the electoral system. He would not even be an MP, let alone the prime minister, if he did not do that.

What he does, or does not do for you, as his constituent, is irrelevant, in relation to what he is doing for, or to, the country.

by marconi 11.08.13 1:47

PeterMac wrote:
marconi wrote:I believe the breakthrough is about to happen and it will come from Algarve. From somebody who took part in the disappearance, helping hiding the body.Or at least knowing where the body is.
When it happens in Algarve, arrests will be made in the UK too.
And there is also the possiblity that new witnesses evidence is coming from Tapas 7, that prefers being witnesses than suspects.
They must be fed up of helping the McCanns.
I hope you are right, but do you have anything more than just a 'belief' to go on. Have you spotted other signs ?

No, Petermac, unfortunately I didn't, but it is a question of reasoning.Portugal accepts again the Yard, this time an investigation, and I don't believe its detectives are going there only to waist their time. They know what they are doing, they are ready to promote some people from persons of interest to formal suspects and even to arrest them. I believe both police are ready for this step.

by **Hobs** 11.08.13 2:17

russiandoll wrote:from " The People" newspaper, 8 August 2013 :

As Scotland Yard investigators prepare to head to Portugal to take the next step in their investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance, her father says he is grateful for the work they've already done.

"We have been incredibly fortunate in the last two years to have the Metropolitan Police reviewing the case and now actively investigating," McCann told PEOPLE July 28, shortly after finishing the Virgin Active London Triathlon to raise money for the charity Missing People.

"It is very unlikely that someone is just going to walk up and say, 'Here she is,' " he says. "So you have got to chase it."

"That has been important," he says, "and it is important that we are still looking and that there is now an active investigation, which is great."

On July 4, Scotland Yard detectives announced they believe Madeleine, who was three years old when she vanished from a Portuguese resort in May 2007, could still be alive. They said they have 38 possible suspects in five different countries.

In May 2011, after years of pressure from the McCanns, Prime Minister David Cameron ordered London's Metropolitan Police to review the case, which had been closed by Portuguese police in July 2008.

"I think the information that came in early on is probably the most important," says Gerry. "You never know where it will lead."

"All we know is that at the very least they are eliminating things," he says, "and there are some very good lines of inquiry. So you have got to explore them."

It is interesting to note gerry's use of the second person pronoun YOU and not the expected i or we.

He tells us we (you) never know where it will lead, he doesn't tell us i or we never know where it will lead.

One has to ask why is he distancing himself from chasing information and knowing where the information will lead.

When someone uses phrases such as that's all i know, that's all i can say etc it is a way of them trying to end the discussion or topic. it indicates sensitivity.
In this case it relates to eliminating things.

Why does he say eliminating things and not eliminating people or tips or evidence?

Therer are some very good lines of inquiry, he tells us you (us) have got to explore tham and not i or we have got to explore them which is the expected.
Again why does he distance himself from these good lines of inquiry?
An innicent parent would be taking ownership, they would be badgering LE to do more, do it faster, they would be answering all questions and oing reconstruction, there would be no obstacles to their co-operation.
Instead, we saw refusal to answer all questions, refusal to do a reconstruction, hiring of lawyers and extradition lawyers, suing of anyone who dares to disagree with their version of events.

Having a child go missing is intensely personal yet we see the mccanns distancing themselves, we see subtle demaning of Maddie, we see refusal to search, to co-operate, to do anything useful in finding Maddie.
Everything they do is in response to comments and allegations involving their reputations rather than to further the search for their daughter.

They have to be prompted to make any plea to Maddie or anyone who has her.

Despite claiming she was abducted by a paedophile ( marginally more believable than a childless couple, despite the body fluids and reaction of cadaver dogs, they insist she has come to no serious harm, whilst at the same time comparing Maddie to cases of adolescents, teens and early 20's who have been found alive after months and years of captivity.
These children and young adults have been repeatedly raped and abused even to bearing their rapists children yet still they say no evidence of serious harm.
This begs the question, what is your definition of serious harm?

Kate has told us maddie is dead, one word she said in an interview told me she knew Maddie was dead, it was the word ALL.
She said it in relation to pressing a button and they would ALL be togeather. This is only logical if she knew Maddie was dead, the only way they would ALL be togeather otherwise she has just made Maddie an orphan.

It also reveals just how crackers kate is if she is telling the world she would be quite happy to press a button which would kill the twins, gerry and herself ( would it count as justifiable homicide is she killed gerry, that smirk of his makes me want to punch him)

What mother of sound mind would ever consider killing her children?

What mother of sound mind would ever consider killing her children when their sibling is missing?

Is this perhaps a confession of sorts dince being deceptive is stressful and the guilt would be eating away at her.

We know Maddie was a handful, statements from her family and herself tell us this.

Was Maddies death a result of loss of temper?
was it an accident caused by sedation?
Was it premeditated?
Was it a result of an emotional breakdown caused by stress?
A make or break vacation, a relationship fading fast, money worries, 3 demanding children all under 4, a husband who doesn't help, psychosis?

Was this trip the straw that broke the camel's back?

is there a risk of her pressing a button and they will all be togeather if LE haul her in for questioning or if she thinks they will press charges against her?
She has told us this is something she has seriously thought about.
She is giving us warning signs, we ignore them at her children's peril.

I think if someone is prepared to listen to her, to ask the right questions, to not interrupt, to be the shoulder to cry on, she will tell the truth.
She will say what really happened that week.

If she is offered protection from gerry, perhaps even a plea deal she will talk.
She is leaking marbles, the brain knows what it knows and wants to tell the truth, everytime she talks another marble falls out, just like a game of kerplunk.
The straws being questions,pull the right straw and all the marbles will fall and we will see the truth.

gerry meanwhile thinks he is smarter than the world, he smirks when asked about sightings and him searching, he has a permanent sneer on his face as he believes we are his inferiors, he is the classic bully, one who thinks with his fists ( kate had the bruises to show for it)

if they are separated and kate feels safe from him then she may well start talking.
their relationship is toxic, it was before Maddie went missing, it is even worse now.
The only thing keeping them togeather today is guilty knowledge.

by Angelique 11.08.13 2:39

Hobs

Good points and very informative. Thumbs Up smiley.

I agree that Kate was vulnerable and that she wanted whatever happened to either be exposed or that she didn't have to deal with it and that is why she said about the "pressing a button". But do you think she is still not coping well. Does there come a time when you can shut something like this off completely?

I know what you mean about Gerry and his smirk. I feel the same way.

by Who?What?Where? 11.08.13 3:29

Hobs,

Second person pronoun....?

Now, that takes me back.

Here is another lesson that i have learned in life.

Bull..it baffle's brains.

Second person pronoun? Give me strength. It is nowhere near that complicated.

I thought that you did make some very good point's away from that , though. Just see it, for what it really is.

Bullsh.t.

by **tigger** 11.08.13 6:35

Hobs wrote:

Was Maddies death a result of loss of temper?
was it an accident caused by sedation?
Was it premeditated?
Was it a result of an emotional breakdown caused by stress?
A make or break vacation, a relationship fading fast, money worries, 3 demanding children all under 4, a husband who doesn't help, psychosis?

Unquote

'Making it happen by accident' is also a possibility imo.

Putting someone in a position where that person is sure to react in a violent manner.

Whatever it was, Gerry didn't do it. He is smugness personified - like someone who got his classmate to steal the cookies for him.
Imo

The ever changing story about the publicity they did or did not want is interesting in itself. I also recall reading in McCann files that in the first weeks there was no great emphasis on her being alive. The no harm and certainty of her being alive came after lawyers and advisors were on the scene.
Must confess I can't find it at the moment - limited internet access.

by **PeterMac** 11.08.13 6:59

Hobs wrote:
Interesting Post. Some snipped bits
I think if someone is prepared to listen to her, to ask the right questions, to not interrupt, to be the shoulder to cry on, she will tell the truth.
She will say what really happened that week.
. . .
If she is offered protection from gerry, perhaps even a plea deal she will talk.
. . .
if they are separated and kate feels safe from him then she may well start talking.
their relationship is toxic, .

Did we see that then Gerry was back in England, and almost the first thing Kate did was phone Insp Paiva to pour her heart out about her dream.
(The one that Gerry and omniscient denied absolutely. Both dream and phone call IIRC)
He was their FLO, and was prepared to listen to her, and we nearly got the truth.
And we remember that right from the start her first statement was given with Gerry siting behind her giving her signals by squeezing her shoulder.

by Guest 11.08.13 9:14

You now have to subscribe to read the Sun..... There is an article today which I cannot read accept for 2 lines....

Snared...fiend ‘let off’ by Maddie row cops

A FUGITIVE Brit sex offender was allowed to remain free by Portuguese cops — in a row over the Madeleine McCann probe.
Pervert Nigel Burnell had been on the run for three years after being convicted of serious

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5065155/British-sex-offender-remained-free-after-Portugese-cops-refused-to-take-him-in.html

by Guest 11.08.13 9:27

Have no fear - Mark Williams-Thomas is on the case!!

http://www.itv.com/presscentre/ep1week33/run

by Guest 11.08.13 9:28

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Have no fear - Mark Williams-Thomas is on the case!!

http://www.itv.com/presscentre/ep1week33/run

Yes, just posted infor on Mark Williams-Thomas thread.

by Guest 11.08.13 10:16

candyfloss wrote:You now have to subscribe to read the Sun..... There is an article today which I cannot read accept for 2 lines....

Snared...fiend ‘let off’ by Maddie row cops

A FUGITIVE Brit sex offender was allowed to remain free by Portuguese cops — in a row over the Madeleine McCann probe.
Pervert Nigel Burnell had been on the run for three years after being convicted of serious

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5065155/British-sex-offender-remained-free-after-Portugese-cops-refused-to-take-him-in.html

The Sun isn't going to be much help to the Mccanns anymore. What's the point of publishing stories about paedophiles, hellish lairs and sightings if they're going to be hidden behind a paywall?

by Cristobell 11.08.13 10:36

Another great post Hobs :) On a subconscious level most of us are probably aware that these statements are ridiculous, and your highlighting of the obtuse use of language explains why. Thank you.

by jeanmonroe 11.08.13 12:35

Tigger wrote:

"Whatever it was, Gerry didn't do it. He is smugness personified - like someone who got his classmate to steal the cookies for him."
____________________________________________________________________
WHATEVER IT WAS IT IS CERTAIN GERRY DIDN'T DO 'IT'!

As he proudly says so himself:

“Yes, yes, I know,” Gerry says bitterly. “Kate killed her in a frenzy, Madeleine was sedated by us, she fell down the stairs—

Many a TRUE word spoken in jest!

Poor, poor Kate, imagine having to live with a husband that says THAT about her in PUBLIC!

ETA: WHY did he even mention 'sedation'? (by US). He didn't have to!

He COULD have just said: “Yes, yes, I know, Kate killed her in a frenzy, she fell down the stairs....."

BUT he didn't!

by marconi 11.08.13 15:01

It is very well possile that the Met police are investigating already in Portugal and they are keeping their mouth.
And persons of interest are forbidden to talk about it. One of them who is longing to be inquired is Murat himself who wants to get rid of any suspicion and he will.
There must be somebody in Algarve that is watching Madeleine's rest place. Imo the PJ know who this person is and even know where the place is.
The Pj is an excellent police, very competent and of course they continued their investigation after the files were shelved.
I remember a paper interview to Amaral, where the interviewer asked if the PJ knew more, after having shelved the case, and his answer was: "Much more!".
And I still believe that it was Kate who insisted on the review, not Gerry. Manipulated and motivated by the News of the World, she stepped on the Boat of Disaster and Tapas 9 is in serious trouble.
Since it became an investigation, she disappeared from the face of the Earth.
How could they ever expect that their insistence would turn into a revision, let alone into an investigation.
And Portugal thought that it was ok!
They have to fight against two competent police forces, what did they start?

by windchime 11.08.13 16:55

jeanmonroe wrote:Tigger wrote:

"Whatever it was, Gerry didn't do it. He is smugness personified - like someone who got his classmate to steal the cookies for him."
____________________________________________________________________
WHATEVER IT WAS IT IS CERTAIN GERRY DIDN'T DO 'IT'!

As he proudly says so himself:

“Yes, yes, I know,” Gerry says bitterly. “Kate killed her in a frenzy, Madeleine was sedated by us, she fell down the stairs—

Many a TRUE word spoken in jest!

Poor, poor Kate, imagine having to live with a husband that says THAT about her in PUBLIC!

ETA: WHY did he even mention 'sedation'? (by US). He didn't have to!

He COULD have just said: “Yes, yes, I know, Kate killed her in a frenzy, she fell down the stairs....."

BUT he didn't!

Is this true? Did Gerry really say this?

by **Hobs** 11.08.13 17:04

PeterMac wrote:
Hobs wrote:
Interesting Post. Some snipped bits
I think if someone is prepared to listen to her, to ask the right questions, to not interrupt, to be the shoulder to cry on, she will tell the truth.
She will say what really happened that week.
. . .
If she is offered protection from gerry, perhaps even a plea deal she will talk.
. . .
if they are separated and kate feels safe from him then she may well start talking.
their relationship is toxic, .
Did we see that then Gerry was back in England, and almost the first thing Kate did was phone Insp Paiva to pour her heart out about her dream.
(The one that Gerry and omniscient denied absolutely. Both dream and phone call IIRC)
He was their FLO, and was prepared to listen to her, and we nearly got the truth.
And we remember that right from the start her first statement was given with Gerry siting behind her giving her signals by squeezing her shoulder.

I agree Peter, She had to tell someone, anyone as the guilt was eating her up alive.
She probably wanted and still wants maddie home, She wants to be able to grieve openly, she wants to be able to visit her grave perhaps even to apologise what whatever happened.
She cannot bring Maddie back, all she has any chance of now is being able to sit by her grave and talk.

In cases where children go missing and we know they are dead even if no body is found, the parents don't care, all they want is the chance to give their loved one a decent dignified burial, somewhere they can visit to be close to them rather than left rotting on the wilds like so much garbage.

There is a case in America where baby Lisa Irwin went missing, allegdly abducted from her bedroom whilst debbie, her mom was allegedly sleeping a box of wine off.

We all knew she murdered Lisa, cadaver dogs reacted in the bedroom of the parents, jeremy the common law hubby ( debbi is still married to an airman, they had a son togeather, jeremy had a son with his ex wife and won custody, jeremy and debbie then had baby Lisa)

Police interviwed her and she admiited she expected to be arrested and charged ( neither parent will talk without the other), us analysts knew what happened and expected a quick arrest, then a hotshot NY lawyer joe tacopino (taco joe) bounced onto the scene and promptly shut her up.
To date no one has been charged and Lisa has still not been found ( when asked if she had searched debbie said she didn't look out back because of what she might find, cadaver dogs indicated there but nothing was found)

I strongly suspect that kate at least returns to Portugal to talk to Maddie, to salve her guilty conscience.

Whether she visits the dump site or the last place she saw maddie before she was whoosh clucked away, i do not know.

What i do know is criminals, especially murderers will often revisit the dump site to either gloat over their victim, to relive the crime ( often they have a trophy), to check if the body has been disturbed by wildlife or the elements, sometimes to move the remains if they know the area is going to be searched, or worse, to desecrate the remains.
it is also not unknown for a body to be moved to a site that has alwready been searched on the basis they won't search there again anytime soon.

thinking along these lines, the obvious places for the original storing of the body are either the church or somewhere along their jogging route where they could cast a quick eye over the site whilst not being obvious about it, or visiting strange places at unusual times. ( This is how Kiesha Abrahams body was recovered, her mom and step dad paid a visit to her dumpsire out in the wilds to wish her a happy birthday. IRRC the taxi driver thought their behavior was odd and contacted LE who promptly arrested them)

Personally i think should this come to court kate will plead diminished responsibilty, possibly also a victim of domestic abuse. This is pretty much her only chance of mitigation, she may even take the rap for gerry unless they are separated and it is made clear he cannot get to her.

Which will be stronger, her love for the twins or her fear of gerry, her reactions and responses will tell us.

In the meantime, she needs someone who won't judge her, someone who will listen to her and advise on her options.
They will need to be open and blunt as well as honest as to the consequences.
Kate will talk, she wants to talk, she leaks everytime she opens her mouth, if they want the truth they have to interview her away from gerry,
Listen to what she is saying, not what you think she is saying, let her talk, encourage her to be truthful.
Watch her body language.
All it will take is a nod or a sound of agreement to the right question and we have our answer as to what happened.
Once she realises we know the truth, that it is ok to admit what happened the floodgates will open.

When someone confesses it is as if a weight has lifted from their shoulders, there is a huge sense of relief, the worst bit is over.

It wouldn't surprise me if an anonymous tip came in giving LE a general area to search or a name.

Theresa May asks permission for Met to start Madeleine McCann inquiry in Portugal