The honesty of Met chief Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe called into question

jeanmonroe wrote:Can BHH and SY/Met afford to have, possibly, ANOTHER 'scandalous' "cover-up" exposed to public scrutiny?

(38 full time officers, not available to investigate other serious crimes in London, and expenditure of £7.5 MILLION, and rising, of taxpayers money, and as yet, after 2 years and 9 months of full time 'investigation' not a scintilla of evidence, not a shred of evidence, that an 'abduction' SY/Met were TOLD about by ONLY the parents of the 'missing' child, ever occured)

After 'Sapphire' (rape unit) Mark Duggan (UN-ARMED shooting) and Plebgate (where officers LIED and BHH 'backed them' 100%) and SDS ('spying' on Lawrence family that BHH knew about) Met Police using 'dead' babies ID's (that BHH knew about) Hackgate (that has cost the Met 1 comissioner and assistant commissioner exposed by a serious newspaper, the Guardian)

And that's before BHH has to explain his 'i can't remember' role in the Hillsborough tradegy.

Can the Met really afford for another possible 'cover-up' to be all over the front pages of the 'serious' papers?

What do you think yourself, Jeanmonroe? And Petermac?

In my country just one of them would finish off the hapless functionary responsible

What do you think yourself, Jeanmonroe? And Petermac?

In my country just one of them would finish off the hapless functionary responsible
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think, myself, the Madeleine 'review/investigation' should have been given to his HONOURABLE Policeman.

Sadly, now 'retired'

http://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/Police-chief-congratulated-medal-honour-Queen/story-16433066-detail/story.html

ONE of Derbyshire police's most senior policemen has been congratulated following the news he is to receive a prestigious award.
Members of Derbyshire Police Authority heaped praise upon Assistant Chief Constable Steve Cotterill after it was announced that he was to be awarded the Queen's Police Medal.
Mr Cotterill is currently leading the investigation into the deaths of six children in a house fire in Allenton.

"This is a rarely-bestowed honour that is given to a select few and this is a credit to the hard work that he has put in over 29 YEARS OF POLICING.
"Steve is currently leading the investigation into the deaths of six siblings at a house fire in Derby and I believe DURING ALL THAT TIME HE HAS ACTED IN A THROUGHLY PROFESSIONAL MANNER.
"On behalf of the police authority, I offer him our congratulations."

THE VERY SAME Assistant Chief Constable Steve Cotterill, of Derbyshire police WHO SUCCESSFULLY WENT ON TO NAIL THE CHILD KILLING PHILPOTTS.

Stating outside Court that:

.......his officers soon realised after the fire that things "weren't adding up"

And

'JUSTICE HAS BEEN ACHIEVED FOR THE PHILPOTT CHILDREN'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9967330/Derbyshire-police-justice-has-been-achieved-for-Philpott-children.html

That's what i think.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 7 2008 Mrs Justice Hogg gave judgement in the Family Division of the High Court regarding the attempt by Kate & Gerry McCann to gain access to all the Leicester Police documents regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
The judgement was by agreement between the parties and was made in open court.
M/S Kate McCann in her book Madeleine has now provided an excerpt from the official submission of Leicester Police to the court regarding the matter and outlining the reasons why they could not agree to provide the documents. Signed by the assistant chief constable of Leicestershire it runs:

“While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”

Signed by the assistant chief constable of Leicestershire it runs:

“While one or both of them (the McCanns) may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you think about that, DCI Redwood?

And would you care to pass a comment on that, on the record, 'statement'?

A one word 'reply will do.

You can select one from the following, if you like.

LUDICROUS
HURTFUL
RIDICULOUS
UNHELPFUL
DISGUSTING
DISPICABLE
BALONY
BULLS*IT
PATHETIC
DEVASTATING (perhaps not)

jeanmonroe wrote:Can BHH and SY/Met afford to have, possibly, ANOTHER 'scandalous' "cover-up" exposed to public scrutiny?

(38 full time officers, not available to investigate other serious crimes in London, and expenditure of £7.5 MILLION, and rising, of taxpayers money, and as yet, after 2 years and 9 months of full time 'investigation' not a scintilla of evidence, not a shred of evidence, that an 'abduction' SY/Met were TOLD about by ONLY the parents of the 'missing' child, ever occured)

After 'Sapphire' (rape unit) Mark Duggan (UN-ARMED shooting) and Plebgate (where officers LIED and BHH 'backed them' 100%) and SDS ('spying' on Lawrence family that BHH knew about) Met Police using 'dead' babies ID's (that BHH knew about) Hackgate (that has cost the Met 1 comissioner and assistant commissioner exposed by a serious newspaper, the Guardian)

And that's before BHH has to explain his 'i can't remember' role in the Hillsborough tradegy.

Can the Met really afford for another possible 'cover-up' to be all over the front pages of the 'serious' papers?

I honestly don't think they give a stuff Jean, about how they are seen. I don't have HH down as a team player concerned about SY's image after his unprofessional pronouncements on the BBC. Or his refusal to resign after blind support of a police officer over a minister of the crown before an investigation into the incident had even begun. The list you made should have galvanised any Home Secretary into advising him on his position. But no, a deafening silence in that quarter, as usual.

What we really have to get our heads round is that the ruling elite have no ability to feel shame. They are intent on survival. There are examples of this all the time. The few that are advised to step down until things quieten down usually manage to re-invent themselves and make a comeback like Mandelson. The Profumo example is lost on these people. Even as the Immigration Minister was stepping down, a mate was opining "he'll be back soon". Does Blair feel shame? Does he hell. What was that I heard this week about a Hutton style enquiry? Says it all. Ways and means for yanking people out of difficult holes.

And is shame from the trio who enabled paedophilia on a reported "industrial scale" forthcoming this week? Where are they? Writing a mea culpa to the public? Or looking at their future options for re-inventing themselves?

Does Maria Miller feel shame over her reported £90k claims on a house her parents were said to be living in? Does that DJ, Moyle - paid an eye-watering salary of £700k pa by the BBC on our behalf - feel shame about not stumping up his due tax? Does Margaret Hodge feel shame about writing to a programme maker with smears about Demitiou Panton's mental health, an Islington Children's Home Victim abused on her watch?

Having heard HH live on air I am now convinced beyond a scintilla of doubt that it would require a simultaneous Damascene Conversion on the part of probably hundreds who are caught up in various webs of deceit around this case. They all have some dirt to dish on the person next to them. That is what oils their particular wheels - not shame.

The detectives working on the case is something I wonder about for sure. I cannot answer for them at all. They don't speak to us on a personal level so I cannot guess what their attitude is to the official silence on the dogs' evidence for instance. Or the inconsistent statements and blatant lies. That is for them to decide.

What I do know is that it has taken nigh on forty years for the truth about PIE and its supporters to filter out. Just think how many people through a whole range of services and committees must have known what was going on in those children's homes and they never spoke up for all those children.

So do I think a little local difficulty like shame is going to deter the juggernaut? Frankly, no.  And in due course the presses will be set up ready for some bad news burial.  



I

.

Mirage

THAT IS A WELL PROPER  .

SUMS UP THE 'SHAMELESS' ADMIRABLY

Gree 100% with everything you wrote Mirage.

They don't give a stuff, they hold the masses in utter contempt, they are sociopaths whose life work is about power and self promotion.

V

jeanmonroe wrote:Signed by the assistant chief constable of Leicestershire it runs:

“While one or both of them (the McCanns) may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you think about that, DCI Redwood?

And would you care to pass a comment on that, on the record, 'statement'?

A one word 'reply will do.

You can select one from the following, if you like.

LUDICROUS
HURTFUL
RIDICULOUS
UNHELPFUL
DISGUSTING
DISPICABLE
BALONY
BULLS*IT
PATHETIC
DEVASTATING (perhaps not)

You forgot one. -  TRUTHFUL. 

Understandably, most of us avoid the graphic details of what we think may have happened to the missing child, Its too real, it takes us into areas we want to avoid, so we focus on the crimes that have been committed since 3rd May.

However, the reality is, at the heart of this, lies a heinous crime and the body of a child has been disposed of.  It chills me to the bone to imagine the mentality behind those who are willing to cover it up.  

Last night I watched a documentary about Marc Dutroux, a serial killer and child molester who murdered 6 young girls in Belgium.  As horrific as Dutroux's crimes were, it was more horrific to discover the authorities actively assisted in covering up what he was doing.  A senior official even went so far as to deny hearing the voices of two little girls imprisoned in the basement of Dutroux's house when it was searched - the little girls were later found dead.  The people of Belgium took to the streets in protest and their entire judicial system was overhauled, but it will never be forgotten that the crimes that were uncovered went right to the heart of the Belgian government.  

As the case of Missing Madeleine stands, a little girl is missing, and the most likely explanation is that she died as a result of an accident while her parents were at dinner.  The actions of the McCanns that night, were unbelievably stupid, leaving 3 toddlers alone in an unfamiliar apartment was an accident waiting to happen.  

If the British Government are prepared to spend £7m+ and counting, to clear the names of this unsavoury pair, then the questions we ask must become much, much, bigger.

Cristobell wrote:
Last night I watched a documentary about Marc Dutroux, a serial killer and child molester who murdered 6 young girls in Belgium.  As horrific as Dutroux's crimes were, it was more horrific to discover the authorities actively assisted in covering up what he was doin

I'm unfamiliar with the case and didn't see the documentary - what was the authorities motivation for the cover up?

Cristobell wrote:

If the British Government are prepared to spend £7m+ and counting, to clear the names of this unsavoury pair, then the questions we ask must become much, much, bigger.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Well i'll kick off with this question.

WHY did Theresa May 'appoint' BHH to be Met Comissioner, after Stephenson 'resigned' and with the 'review' and her 'money no object' already set up?

She had many 'options' for the post of Met Comissioner.

Did she 'appoint' a symphathetic 'supporter' of the McCanns, re his Liverpool tenure, having firmly nailed her colours to the mast to achieve a satisfactory 'review/investigation' outcome for the McCanns?

DCI Redwood ultimately 'reports' to her 'appointee' BHH.

Who has spoken, publicly, on the 'torment' of 'the poor McCanns'

I fully expect another 'revelation' tomorrow(23rd) or Monday (24th) from the Met, or even BHH himself,  before the libel court case sits in session again on Tuesday 25th February 2014.

Team McCann? BHH certainly seems to be a player on that 'team'!

As Cameron was on Team Nigella, even though there was a 'live' court case in progress.

ETA: On the BIG QUESTIONS 'show (BBC 1, 10:00am) tomorrow hosted by Nicky Campbell they are asking about 'hate crime'

A pound to a penny, he manages to get the McCanns 'mentioned' as 'victims' of 'hate crime'

And skips over their total neglect and their, and their's ONLY, consciously, creating the opportunity that enabled their daughter's 'disappearance'

AndyB wrote:

Cristobell wrote:
Last night I watched a documentary about Marc Dutroux, a serial killer and child molester who murdered 6 young girls in Belgium.  As horrific as Dutroux's crimes were, it was more horrific to discover the authorities actively assisted in covering up what he was doin

I'm unfamiliar with the case and didn't see the documentary - what was the authorities motivation for the cover up?

It was an old docmentary that I watched on Youtube Andy, and there is a mile of information about him on the internet. He was part of an evil paedophile ring that went right to the heart of the Belgian government.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/1455998/I-was-a-small-cog-in-a-sex-slave-ring-but-I-am-no-murderer-claims-Dutroux.html

Mirage - sadly I have to agree with your post - having come to the same conclusion, as I suspect you have, quite some time ago. 

I really don't see how this case will come to an acceptable resolution any day soon. Those who feel that stuff is happening behind the scenes,  I applaud your optimism, but mine, I'm afraid, left me along time ago on this case. All the hope I have is in Snr Amaral. Who is one of those very rare people not to cave in to outside pressure. He wasn't and still isn't prepared to tow the line. This man is so brave and I truly believe that if it wasn't for him that this case may have been, imo, whitewashed in the public eye. But as it is....He's still holding on in there, this small man - who is not swayed by politicians/Popes/Millionaire Business Men and Celebrities. Let's hope he stays well and strong.

Cristobell wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Cristobell wrote:
Last night I watched a documentary about Marc Dutroux, a serial killer and child molester who murdered 6 young girls in Belgium.  As horrific as Dutroux's crimes were, it was more horrific to discover the authorities actively assisted in covering up what he was doin

I'm unfamiliar with the case and didn't see the documentary - what was the authorities motivation for the cover up?

It was an old docmentary that I watched on Youtube Andy, and there is a mile of information about him on the internet. He was part of an evil paedophile ring that went right to the heart of the Belgian government.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/1455998/I-was-a-small-cog-in-a-sex-slave-ring-but-I-am-no-murderer-claims-Dutroux.html

So the cover up wasn't to protect Dutroux, it was to protect the rich and powerful paedophiles at the heart of the Belgian government. Given the recent articles about various senior Labour politicians, and the older articles about the imminent arrest of a former Conservative minister for paedophilia, I can't help but wonder if we aren't seeing a similar scandal to that of the Dutroux cover up being played out today for very similar reasons: That there is a paedophilia element to the MM case and our authorities are very concerned that skeletons may start coming out of the cupboard if its investigated properly

What a thought-provoking post, Cristobell.
Like you, there are 'places I don't want to go'. Who amongst us was not shocked by 'p.129'?

I think it would be true to say that despite the fact that the inconsistencies and discrepancies in the accounts presented of what happened on 3rd May 2007 are what keep us searching for the Truth, what motivates forum members is the fact that a defenceless three year old has disappeared.    Bernard Hogan -Howe may well feel compelled to refer to the torment  of the parents. I am saddened that he did not refer to the suffering of 'that little girl' Madeleine.

Actually, there could be some truth in BHH's use of the word torment.  I think if they were  involved, then they will be tormented by their memories, Kate in particular.  Suffering or pain would have been a better word to use, as would be used to describe any grieving parent who has lost a child. 

Pain and suffering following the loss of a loved one but Torment conjures up more a feeling of guilt to me, although I don't think Howe used it with that in mind.

Cristobell wrote:

As the case of Missing Madeleine stands, a little girl is missing, and the most likely explanation is that she died as a result of an accident while her parents were at dinner.  The actions of the McCanns that night, were unbelievably stupid, leaving 3 toddlers alone in an unfamiliar apartment was an accident waiting to happen.  

If the British Government are prepared to spend £7m+ and counting, to clear the names of this unsavoury pair, then the questions we ask must become much, much, bigger.

Cristobell, if the McCanns tell us they were stupid for leaving 3 toddlers alone in an apartment, then I have become convinced that there was no stupidity, no 3 toddlers alone. The McCanns trade being 'guilty of neglect' for 'the possibility of an abductor'. They tell us from the start that their abductor(s) are paedophiles in case Madeleine's body is ever found with signs of abuse. They tell us the twins were drugged by an abductor to account for the twin's behaviour as observed by the PJ. Everything we are told we are only told because it plays some part in keeping them above justice, I am now certain of that.

My wife keeps saying how she is struck by the fact that the McCanns never showed any guilt, regret or shame for leaving the children alone so that Madeleine could come to harm. I keep thinking how, on the few occasions they have ever spoken about their 'regret' about leaving the children unattended they look and sound like they're lying. They don't show guilt for leaving the children alone because....they didn't leave them alone in an unlocked apartment. Occam's razor yet again.

For some reason Amaral and Pat Brown both take a kind of 'middle ground' by putting forward the view that Madeleine died by tragic accident as the result of neglect by the parents. That leaves us all wracking our brains trying to work out what strange set of circumstance could drive a group of people to collude together to simulate abduction. It's hard because the only thing we can think of is child sexual abuse; that alone seems to justify the lengths they've gone to.

But if there's no neglect, then there's also no tragic accident. But there is simulation of an abduction and concealment of a child's body - the dogs tell us that.

Occam's razor tells me death, not accidental and - because they tell us so early on - involving child sexual abuse and drugging.

ProfessorPPlum wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

As the case of Missing Madeleine stands, a little girl is missing, and the most likely explanation is that she died as a result of an accident while her parents were at dinner.  The actions of the McCanns that night, were unbelievably stupid, leaving 3 toddlers alone in an unfamiliar apartment was an accident waiting to happen.  

If the British Government are prepared to spend £7m+ and counting, to clear the names of this unsavoury pair, then the questions we ask must become much, much, bigger.

Cristobell, if the McCanns tell us they were stupid for leaving 3 toddlers alone in an apartment, then I have become convinced that there was no stupidity, no 3 toddlers alone. The McCanns trade being 'guilty of neglect' for 'the possibility of an abductor'. They tell us from the start that their abductor(s) are paedophiles in case Madeleine's body is ever found with signs of abuse. They tell us the twins were drugged by an abductor to account for the twin's behaviour as observed by the PJ. Everything we are told we are only told because it plays some part in keeping them above justice, I am now certain of that.

My wife keeps saying how she is struck by the fact that the McCanns never showed any guilt, regret or shame for leaving the children alone so that Madeleine could come to harm. I keep thinking how, on the few occasions they have ever spoken about their 'regret' about leaving the children unattended they look and sound like they're lying. They don't show guilt for leaving the children alone because....they didn't leave them alone in an unlocked apartment. Occam's razor yet again.

For some reason Amaral and Pat Brown both take a kind of 'middle ground' by putting forward the view that Madeleine died by tragic accident as the result of neglect by the parents. That leaves us all wracking our brains trying to work out what strange set of circumstance could drive a group of people to collude together to simulate abduction. It's hard because the only thing we can think of is child sexual abuse; that alone seems to justify the lengths they've gone to.

But if there's no neglect, then there's also no tragic accident. But there is simulation of an abduction and concealment of a child's body - the dogs tell us that.

Occam's razor tells me death, not accidental and - because they tell us so early on - involving child sexual abuse and drugging.

Good post PP, pretty much what I've thought since the beginning once the story telling began. In my opinion it is one of only a very few possible reasons for the Tapas silence/behaviors and also the support from on high where as has been demonstrated many times, paedophilia is rife. I do think however that it could have been accidental but there was an obvious need to get rid of the body.

ProfessorPPlum wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

As the case of Missing Madeleine stands, a little girl is missing, and the most likely explanation is that she died as a result of an accident while her parents were at dinner.  The actions of the McCanns that night, were unbelievably stupid, leaving 3 toddlers alone in an unfamiliar apartment was an accident waiting to happen.  

If the British Government are prepared to spend £7m+ and counting, to clear the names of this unsavoury pair, then the questions we ask must become much, much, bigger.

Cristobell, if the McCanns tell us they were stupid for leaving 3 toddlers alone in an apartment, then I have become convinced that there was no stupidity, no 3 toddlers alone. The McCanns trade being 'guilty of neglect' for 'the possibility of an abductor'. They tell us from the start that their abductor(s) are paedophiles in case Madeleine's body is ever found with signs of abuse. They tell us the twins were drugged by an abductor to account for the twin's behaviour as observed by the PJ. Everything we are told we are only told because it plays some part in keeping them above justice, I am now certain of that.

My wife keeps saying how she is struck by the fact that the McCanns never showed any guilt, regret or shame for leaving the children alone so that Madeleine could come to harm. I keep thinking how, on the few occasions they have ever spoken about their 'regret' about leaving the children unattended they look and sound like they're lying. They don't show guilt for leaving the children alone because....they didn't leave them alone in an unlocked apartment. Occam's razor yet again.

For some reason Amaral and Pat Brown both take a kind of 'middle ground' by putting forward the view that Madeleine died by tragic accident as the result of neglect by the parents. That leaves us all wracking our brains trying to work out what strange set of circumstance could drive a group of people to collude together to simulate abduction. It's hard because the only thing we can think of is child sexual abuse; that alone seems to justify the lengths they've gone to.

But if there's no neglect, then there's also no tragic accident. But there is simulation of an abduction and concealment of a child's body - the dogs tell us that.

Occam's razor tells me death, not accidental and - because they tell us so early on - involving child sexual abuse and drugging.

ppp i think you,ve nailed it. it would also explain the behavior of rm.rushing to pdl.acting as patsy and possible provider of storage space for a body!

btw  as  for time of death i,ll go for  late tuesday 1st may when mrs fern heard the crying and early wednesday 2nd may when km was calling her friend,at the crack of dawn.imo

The MET is an organization that is rife with politics and corruption, always has been and always will be. So rife in fact that in the past 'whistleblowers' have had to leave the country for fear of repercussions. 

As previously mentioned HOWE is a political appointment and as such answers to MAY.

REDWOOD answers to HOWE and make no mistake he has been told what the outcome of the 'investigation' is.

ProfessorPPlum and i also agree with your addition Hong Kong Phooey ; -)

I only stumbled on this forum 6 months ago. I have been on here everyday since.
Finally joined today : -) so 1st post.

Would like to a say a big THANK YOU to all of you for sharing  your fascinating insight and research which i have become totally addicted to.

 

ProfessorPPlum wrote:My wife keeps saying how she is struck by the fact that the McCanns never showed any guilt, regret or shame for leaving the children alone so that Madeleine could come to harm. I keep thinking how, on the few occasions they have ever spoken about their 'regret' about leaving the children unattended they look and sound like they're lying. They don't show guilt for leaving the children alone because....they didn't leave them alone in an unlocked apartment. Occam's razor yet again.

Exactly spot on.  They refuse to say sorry for something they did not do.  They have absolutely refused to take any responsibility for those actions, as we know it was the abductors fault.

[quote="Stay Free"

I only stumbled on this forum 6 months ago. I have been on here everyday since.
Finally joined today : -) so 1st post.

Would like to a say a big THANK YOU to all of you for sharing  your fascinating insight and research which i have become totally addicted to.

 [/quote]

You're not 'our Kate' from Rothley, are you?

Because her 'tag' would surely be STAY FREE!

JOKING!     

  Stay Free

jeanmonroe wrote:[quote="Stay Free"

I only stumbled on this forum 6 months ago. I have been on here everyday since.
Finally joined today : -) so 1st post.

Would like to a say a big THANK YOU to all of you for sharing  your fascinating insight and research which i have become totally addicted to.

 

You're not 'our Kate' from Rothley, are you?

Because her 'tag' would surely be STAY FREE!

JOKING!     [/quote]
Hahaha. Great minds think alike and you beat me to it, Jean. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.