"Digging" with a helicopter (continued from 'digging at resort')

SixMillionQuid wrote:

russiandoll wrote:ok sixmillion.......but what is so enormous that it needs millions spending on it to ensure that it is concealed?

Tax payers money for the Review / Investigation - no questions asked. Money donated from the public and rich friends - no questions answered.

What's being concealed is the circumstances leading up to Madeleine's disappearance - I'm certain if the trail was followed further it would lead to other people senior positions in the UK being exposed. One or more members of the T9 has questionable behaviour I think Gonçalo Amaral was heading in the right direction with that!! I'm sure some journalists knew from the start what really happened but have been told to keep quiet or else.

My opinion of about the SY Review / Investigation has always been that it's a PR exercise, at tax payers expense, to re-write history and to substitute the original PJ investigation. So each time a reference is made to the original PJ investigation, the pros and UK media will refer to the findings of Operation Grange.

Clocker wrote:@Hicks: there is this here, not sure if anybody ever gave any official statements about it though. 

Edited to add that on reading more of the link, I think this info comes from Mccanns investigators, hmmm.
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4965-why-would-destroy-a-million-pound-luxury-villa

The search told me the villa was empty and told me how they had got inside some weeks after Maddie disappeared, the dog handler said the villa had a room with a kind of amateur studio with video equiptment and cameras with childrens toys and pictures on the wall, he felt it was something to do with peadophiles. He told the police and they seemed to know something about it, but did not take the matter any further.

Sunday Express took him to the villa and he confirmed that it fits the description and location of the one he had told me about, they cannot name the villa for legal reasons and they have been unable to contact the owner.

The British dog walker woman resident said , I know the owner was contacted after they raised concerns with the police.The person was very angry because she said she did'nt know the people who rented it and was annoyed about being contacted by detectives.

DCF: You spoke to a man who later showed you a garage where there was a bed.

SC: Yes, well what happened was that, Gerry's apartment was here because it was not a flat area, it was more or less like this and that is why the opposite apartments were higher.

DCF: Correct.

SC: That is why it could obviously be seen, these apartments could be looked over from above and all the lower parts and where we, hummm.. this is where the grey haired man was.

DCF: Right.

SC: Who had supposedly acquired a property, and that is why I strongly suggested that we should open the maximum possible number of doors,...I can't remember the name of the man who I also met by chance and who was doing some translating, what was his name again, who helped open the doors.


DCF: Was it John HILL'

SC: No, John Hill was a Mark Warner employee, I can't remember his name, but he...humm also knew the local estate agent and different people who helped to get the keys of the properties from the letters, some of whom were on holiday.

DCF: Yes.

SC: And once the garage door was opened, it was not just a garage for a car, it was a type of "capsule" of about six by nine metres in size which became longer where there was a bed in the corner, and it was when we were searching this, the English man with grey hair whose identity I did not know, but who had explained this to me.


DCF: Yes.

SC: Humm... this garage belonged to a Portuguese man, the man from the laundry.

DCF: Yes.

SC: And when we entered the garage I asked who lived there, he replied that his son lived there and then there were distractions and because I was concentrated on the fifty year old English man, this man is Portuguese, it was only afterwards when I thought later about what we were searching for, it didn't occur to me and I think it is because of this that i mentioned it in my statement two weeks later, because I remember that there had been some distortions.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Of course with Murat there is Murat and the Russian individual, you know....I thought that we might well be looking for the totally wrong person and the fact that a bed existed in the garage and some children's toys.

DCF: Yes.

SC: I thought, ohhh...its worth mentioning this and that's the reason I mentioned it in my statement.

Hicks wrote:Clay, I am a bit confused, is the poster of the link saying that the villa( the one that had the studio and children' toys) is no longer there on Google Earth even thought it is still standing?

PDL is beginning to sound like a very dodgy place.

aiyoyo wrote:Would the British Government fund the MET fishing expedition if there's no purpose ?
Ermmm....personally I DON'T think so !

Haven't quite worked out what Op Grange hope to find from the chopper's aerial viewing, but if that helps narrow down the excavation, there's a damn good chance the prosecution of the couple will happen.

I can't see the British authorities funding MET to the extent of expensive helicopter-joy-ride unless there's good reason and purpose behind it; and it makes no sense to waste money just for white wash.

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

sofieellis wrote:
I was about to post that I remember Vilamura being mentioned in Brian's first dream post - I'm quite embarrassed that I remember that!

It really would put the tin lid on this case if a psychic had it solved right from the off.

plebgate wrote:I wasn't mocking you Kevmac and sorry if it came over that way, but there are pointers that there may well be connections between certain people and an open mind should be kept imo.

Cristobell wrote:

I have no doubt the PJ are discarding requests in their hundreds, its my belief those requests come from the McCanns and their lawyers and that SY don't care a jot about them being dismissed - I am sure they don't really want to spend the next 10 years interviewing everyone who ever worked at Warners or holidayed on the Algarve at the behest of the parents.

Cristobell wrote:In answer to an earlier question - I'm sorry I can't find it, that the PJ are not assisting the investigation - I simply had to respond as it sounds so much like a McCann planter!  We don't really know whether the PJ are assisting the police or not, anything that comes from the McCanns is questionable in view of their track record, and its highly unlikely that the police are keeping us (and Team McCann directly or indirectly) up to date with what they are doing. This case is surrounded in deceit, it is based on deceit, 

We have been told 'officially' there is to be a dig.  We have seen DCI Redwood and his team arrive in PDL and return to the UK, and we have seen a military helicopter flying over the area taking photographs.  None of this can be hidden or done behind closed doors.  If we take a few steps back and look at the bigger picture, we see the PJ and SY working together.  Lets take the scene of the crime to quiet Norfolk resort, and imagine the Portuguese Police being given permission by the CPS to go in with heavy digging machinery on their own whilst SY and the local police, stood by and sulked?  

I have no doubt the PJ are discarding requests in their hundreds, its my belief those requests come from the McCanns and their lawyers and that SY don't care a jot about them being dismissed - I am sure they don't really want to spend the next 10 years interviewing everyone who ever worked at Warners or holidayed on the Algarve at the behest of the parents.

Châtelaine wrote:I am absolutely convinced, that if ever there would be a similar case here in my little sleeping village in the deep French countryside and many people would be interviewed or interrogated, there would be lots of unexpected yet non-related "dirt" surfacing. Old peasants watching porn, former friends finding a board to blacken each other, attention-seekers making up stories, you name it. Which wouldn't mean, that any of them would be related to the case ...

plebgate wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I am absolutely convinced, that if ever there would be a similar case here in my little sleeping village in the deep French countryside and many people would be interviewed or interrogated, there would be lots of unexpected yet non-related "dirt" surfacing. Old peasants watching porn, former friends finding a board to blacken each other, attention-seekers making up stories, you name it. Which wouldn't mean, that any of them would be related to the case ...

Yes it's like that in the Midsomer Murder Mysteries on tv, but if Det. Barnaby received a reply of no comment about whether the parent of a missing child knew one of the other arguidos before the child went missing,  Barnaby would most probably make a note of it and keep an open mind until (to quote Cocker Spaniel) "a result was known".

It has been asked many times before, why say no comment when a yes or no would do???????

plebgate wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I am absolutely convinced, that if ever there would be a similar case here in my little sleeping village in the deep French countryside and many people would be interviewed or interrogated, there would be lots of unexpected yet non-related "dirt" surfacing. Old peasants watching porn, former friends finding a board to blacken each other, attention-seekers making up stories, you name it. Which wouldn't mean, that any of them would be related to the case ...

Yes it's like that in the Midsomer Murder Mysteries on tv, but if Det. Barnaby received a reply of no comment about whether the parent of a missing child knew one of the other arguidos before the child went missing,  Barnaby would most probably make a note of it and keep an open mind until (to quote Cocker Spaniel) "a result was known".

It has been asked many times before, why say no comment when a yes or no would do???????

sallypelt wrote:

Gerry McCann's exact words were "I am not going to answer that". I wonder why?

Châtelaine wrote:

plebgate wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I am absolutely convinced, that if ever there would be a similar case here in my little sleeping village in the deep French countryside and many people would be interviewed or interrogated, there would be lots of unexpected yet non-related "dirt" surfacing. Old peasants watching porn, former friends finding a board to blacken each other, attention-seekers making up stories, you name it. Which wouldn't mean, that any of them would be related to the case ...

Yes it's like that in the Midsomer Murder Mysteries on tv, but if Det. Barnaby received a reply of no comment about whether the parent of a missing child knew one of the other arguidos before the child went missing,  Barnaby would most probably make a note of it and keep an open mind until (to quote Cocker Spaniel) "a result was known".

It has been asked many times before, why say no comment when a yes or no would do???????

***
I think that if the answer would have been "No", that's what he would have said.
If the answer would have to have been "Yes", that would have provoked a lot of other questions.
And such a "Yes" might have been related to things not related to Madeleine's disappearance.
I tend to think, that GM knew RM, but more in the "recreative" sector, rather than in relation to Madeleine.
IMO, of course.

Gillyspot wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

I have no doubt the PJ are discarding requests in their hundreds, its my belief those requests come from the McCanns and their lawyers and that SY don't care a jot about them being dismissed - I am sure they don't really want to spend the next 10 years interviewing everyone who ever worked at Warners or holidayed on the Algarve at the behest of the parents.

When you think that during the original investigation the PJ were sent from pillar to post with spurious "sightings" it is no wonder that they are more selective this time when agreeing to requests IMO.