Madeleine McCann search to enter 'substantial phase' of activity

utahagen wrote:Missmar1 wrote: "How can a senior Met officer announce they will be updating the McCanns...this announcement alone implies to the public that SY have no qualms or suspicions about Madeleines parents' involvement..."

Why would the Met tip their hand at this stage of the game? Why would they want to alert the McCanns if they in fact do consider them suspects?

A few years ago, a muckety-muck real estate agent was murdered in NYC. The official timeline, which was disputed by no one, had the agent's personal assistant leaving her boss's apartment at, say, 4pm; at 8pm, someone else discovered the agent dead in her apartment. Well, early in the investigation, the NYP announced, "We have interviewed the personal assistant and she is not considered a suspect." Two weeks later...they arrested that personal assistant (who was eventually convicted of murder).

My point it is: why do some posters here take every statement by SY to be literally true or as lacking nuance? It's common for the next-of-kin of missing people to be given updates on police investigations. That doesn't mean the police tell the next-of-kin everything and it does not mean the police are not closely watching the same next-of-kin to whom they are giving updates.

nobodythereeither wrote:

missmar1 wrote:How can a senior met officer announce they will be updating the Mccanns as they have done throughout the activity ?  Imo, this announcement alone implies to the public that SY have no qualms or suspicions about Madeleines parents involvement whatsoever.

What are they supposed to say, that the McCanns are prime suspects? That will ensure they get a fair trial - not!

Of course they will update the McCanns. They are the parents of a missing child. What information they give them is another matter.

Andrew77R wrote:From the Press Gazzette.

Rowley's request that journalists should not publish information ahead of Operation Grange actions was described as a “big ask” by The Guardian’s crime editor, Sandra Laville.

Talking about the McCann case she told Rowley: “Looking at what was said in Leveson and what Leicestershire Police didn’t guide on re[garding] whether the family were suspects, a bit of guidance there would have saved the family an awful lot of stress actually.

nobodythereeither wrote:

noddy100 wrote:I still can't believe any credicle force would spend £££ and years chasing every impossible scenario with NO evidence for any of them and yet the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence they won't even look at it

You - and none of us - have absolutely no idea what SY have spent the past years looking at.

We have absolutely no idea what evidence they have found, if any,  for any particular scenario.

We have absolutely no idea what they have looked at regarding "the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence."

There are too many people jumping to all sorts of conclusions about exactly what SY have and have not done.

"They won't even look at it"? FFS! Of course they are looking at it! They aren't morons, not all 36 of them or however many there are!![

/quote]

So you're on the 'Not a Whitewash side then !
Trouble is, some of us have seen the other side of 'inquiries' and the bl**ding obvious about slippers turning out to be weapons of mass destruction where the chilcot inquiry equally looked at all the evidence did it.
Well, it might well have looked at it as it kicked it sharpish under the Afghan rug.
Got quite a few elephants on this forum and elephants are renowned for having a long memory.

nobodythereeither wrote:

noddy100 wrote:I still can't believe any credicle force would spend £££ and years chasing every impossible scenario with NO evidence for any of them and yet the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence they won't even look at it

You - and none of us - have absolutely no idea what SY have spent the past years looking at.

We have absolutely no idea what evidence they have found, if any,  for any particular scenario.

We have absolutely no idea what they have looked at regarding "the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence."

There are too many people jumping to all sorts of conclusions about exactly what SY have and have not done.

"They won't even look at it"? FFS! Of course they are looking at it! They aren't morons, not all 36 of them or however many there are!!

Châtelaine wrote:I wonder: have none of the whitewash-believers ever played poker ... ?

nglfi wrote:I just don't think it could be feasibly done with all the media attention this case has.

Rose Quartz wrote:Hello. Copied and pasted from the DM, article in full.

Police to step up search for Madeleine McCann with 'substantial activity' planned in Portugal over the next few weeks
Police have said that new work will begin soon in Praia de Luz, Portugal
Madeleine disappeared from the resort aged 3 on 3 May 2007
This month police were seen taking aerial photographs with a helicopter
They are also thought to have asked permission to question crucial witnesses
But Metropolitan Police said the investigation must be led by Portuguese
By KIERAN CORCORAN

PUBLISHED: 16:48, 22 May 2014 | UPDATED: 17:46, 22 May 2014

    0View 
comments
+7
Search: Detectives say they will be making 'substantial' efforts in their hunt to find missing Madeleine McCann over the coming weeks

Detectives looking for Madeleine McCann will begin 'substantial' work on their investigation in Portugal within weeks.

Officers from the Metropolitan Police are working with Portuguese police during a fresh phase of their hunt for the missing girl, who disappeared aged three on a family holiday in the resort of Praia da Luz.

Mark Rowley, the assistant commissioner of the force, said: 'In the forthcoming weeks we are going to be going to a substantial phase of operational activity on the ground in Portugal.

'A thorough serious crime investigation works systematically through all the credible possibilities, and often in an investigation you will have more than one credible possibility'.

However, he warned that they may not come up with answers quickly - or at all.

The announcement came weeks after detectives were spotted using a helicopter to take aerial photos in the holiday resort where Madeleine disappeared after being left in her room by parents Gerry and Kate McCann.

Police were then preparing to excavate three areas in the resort in the hope of turning up clues. Though they were not given permission to conduct the dig themselves, experts were on hand to oversee the work - including those trained to detect bodies.

British police officers have been negotiating with their Portuguese counterparts throughout the search.

It is thought they have requested permission to question eight crucial witnesses in their investigation. However other requests - including plans to raid homes of prime suspects - were refused.

+7
Aerial view: Specialist officers are expected to examine several sites in Praia da Luz after permission to dig was granted by Portuguese authorities, seven years after Maddie went missing from the area aged three

Mr Rowley said: 'I want to be able to go back to Kate and Gerry at some stage in the future and tell them we’ve got to the bottom of this, or second best is to go back to them and say we’ve turned over every stone and we can’t get to an answer sometimes'.

A number of officers from Scotland Yard are hoping to be involved in the latest phase of activity, though it is being led by the Portuguese.

Mr and Mrs McCann have been briefed on the activity, but will not travel to Portugal while the work is being carried out.

'The activity in Portugal is led by the Portuguese, that’s absolutely crystal clear in law,' Mr Rowley said.

'We have some officers who would like to be helping with that on the ground in Portugal, doing some of the work we anticipate. We are putting the finishing touches to the plans to the Portuguese in the coming weeks'.

He added: 'I anticipate a substantial phase of activity in forthcoming weeks including Portuguese and British officers but the detail of that is still being finalised with Portuguese colleagues and it will all be under Portuguese leadership.'

+7
Detectives are also said to be preparing to dig up a site on a beach near the Ocean Club apartments

+7
+7
Briefed: Gerry and Kate McCann, pictured at a prayer service earlier this month - have been told about the police plans, but will not visit the resort during the investigation

+7
Hunt: Portuguese police initially searched the resort, but the Met will look for anything they might have missed

+7
Map: British police are expected to excavate two sites near the Ocean Club and one near Praia Da Luz beach

One line of inquiry for Scotland Yard is a lone male paedophile who staged a series of sex attacks on young British girls while they were on holiday in the Algarve.

They are looking at nine sexual assaults and three 'near misses' on British girls aged six to 12 between 2004 and 2006, including one in 2005 on a 10-year-old girl in Praia da Luz, where Madeleine vanished two years later.

Hundreds of people have already made contact with police in response to appeals to try to find the attacker.

Mr Rowley warned that, after sifting through all the possible lines of inquiry, officers may draw a blank.

'There’s lots of potential lines of inquiry', he said. 'If we didn’t think there were any potentially fruitful lines of inquiry, we wouldn’t be where we are today; we would be saying there’s nowhere to go with this investigation.

'There are many potential fruitful lines of inquiry and the only way you get anywhere is to work through them all systematically.

'Within that may be the answer and the case may be potentially solvable. We may be able to work through potential lines of inquiry over a period of time with the Portuguese and all of them draw a blank, that can happen'.

(Where it says +7 is where photos were in the article, but they wouldn't copy. Using an iPad)

utahagen wrote:nglfi wrote: "Having read about the McCann response on their official facebook page, where they actually said that SY are investigating the 'football stadium sighting', I'm of the opinion that in no way are SY talking to the macs in the way they would like. I mean do they really expect us to believe SY would open a new file on a picture of a girl who is clearly too young, but it is also clearly not Madeleine."

You got it! Thanks for posting the info that the McCanns posted that on their website. That "sighting" was a joke, if not an actual sham (meaning contrived by some McCann supporter). The child resembled Madeleine as she looked when she disappeared only in that they both have blond hair, which is true of about 30% of three year olds of English/Celtic ancestry. More significantly, the child spotted at the soccer match looked as young or younger as Madeleine was seven years ago! The idea that SY spent even thirty seconds investigating this is preposterous, and the fact that the McCanns would post that on their website tells me they are very isoltaed these days because any sober intelligent person they consulted would have said, "Um, I wouldn't put that on the website..."

Of course, the main point of the spotting at the soccer match is that the idea that some agile, clever bogeyman stalked the McCanns in Portugal and bypassed their younger daughter to abscond through a window with 3/4 year old child with whom they disappeared without a trace to raise in England as their own child is absurd.

Just typing the above gave me hope that the truth will out. If SY ends up officially endorsing the idea that a stranger grabbed Madeleine and spirited her away, that will spur an enormous backlash. Maybe SY won't end up having the guts to directly implicate the McCanns, but I don't see how they can make a claim that it must have been a stranger who took her. I also think they would have to say something about the cadaver dogs, even if just to pooh-pooh them.

bobbin wrote:

nobodythereeither wrote:

noddy100 wrote:I still can't believe any credicle force would spend £££ and years chasing every impossible scenario with NO evidence for any of them and yet the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence they won't even look at it

You - and none of us - have absolutely no idea what SY have spent the past years looking at.

We have absolutely no idea what evidence they have found, if any,  for any particular scenario.

We have absolutely no idea what they have looked at regarding "the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence."

There are too many people jumping to all sorts of conclusions about exactly what SY have and have not done.

"They won't even look at it"? FFS! Of course they are looking at it! They aren't morons, not all 36 of them or however many there are!![

/quote]

So you're on the 'Not a Whitewash side then !  
Trouble is, some of us have seen the other side of 'inquiries' and the bl**ding obvious about slippers turning out to be weapons of mass destruction where the chilcot inquiry equally looked at all the evidence did it.
Well, it might well have looked at it as it kicked it sharpish under the Afghan rug.
Got quite a few elephants on this forum and elephants are renowned for having a long memory.

endgame wrote:

nobodythereeither wrote:

noddy100 wrote:I still can't believe any credicle force would spend £££ and years chasing every impossible scenario with NO evidence for any of them and yet the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence they won't even look at it

You - and none of us - have absolutely no idea what SY have spent the past years looking at.

We have absolutely no idea what evidence they have found, if any,  for any particular scenario.

We have absolutely no idea what they have looked at regarding "the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence."

There are too many people jumping to all sorts of conclusions about exactly what SY have and have not done.

"They won't even look at it"? FFS! Of course they are looking at it! They aren't morons, not all 36 of them or however many there are!!

Hate to be a pedant nobodythereeither but you can't both state that "we have absolutely no idea" and then go on to assert that "of course they are looking at it". If we have absolutely no idea then that's it. We have absolutely no idea. We can't not know and know at the same time.

AndyB wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I wonder: have none of the whitewash-believers ever played poker ... ?

I have, and do (and if this site will just stop updating for five minutes I'll be playing it again - I logged on to play poker not to post here   )

You bluff for a reason (usually because you're weak) and I can see nothing that bluffing achieves here that silence and a straight emotionless face would also achieve

Châtelaine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I wonder: have none of the whitewash-believers ever played poker ... ?

I have, and do (and if this site will just stop updating for five minutes I'll be playing it again - I logged on to play poker not to post here   )

You bluff for a reason (usually because you're weak) and I can see nothing that bluffing achieves here that silence and a straight emotionless face would also achieve

***
I'll be playing on-line soon too. My best moments are when everyone chickens, whilst I have nothing or when I keep modest and they call my bluff, raise  ... and lose   

Strategy.

nobodythereeither wrote:

noddy100 wrote:I still can't believe any credicle force would spend £££ and years chasing every impossible scenario with NO evidence for any of them and yet the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence they won't even look at it

You - and none of us - have absolutely no idea what SY have spent the past years looking at.

We have absolutely no idea what evidence they have found, if any,  for any particular scenario.

We have absolutely no idea what they have looked at regarding "the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence."

There are too many people jumping to all sorts of conclusions about exactly what SY have and have not done.

"They won't even look at it"? FFS! Of course they are looking at it! They aren't morons, not all 36 of them or however many there are!!

nobodythereeither wrote:

noddy100 wrote:I still can't believe any credicle force would spend £££ and years chasing every impossible scenario with NO evidence for any of them and yet the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence they won't even look at it

You - and none of us - have absolutely no idea what SY have spent the past years looking at.

We have absolutely no idea what evidence they have found, if any,  for any particular scenario.

We have absolutely no idea what they have looked at regarding "the one scenario where there is a fair bit of evidence."

There are too many people jumping to all sorts of conclusions about exactly what SY have and have not done.

"They won't even look at it"? FFS! Of course they are looking at it! They aren't morons, not all 36 of them or however many there are!!