The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Tony was right was he not?

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Okeydokey on 08.06.14 23:35

@PeterMac wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:As we don't yet know what the final conclusions of Operation Grange will be, I think it is a bit premature to declare the investigation a whitewash!  Effectively it is stating that 37 homicide officers and all the support staff are covering up the death of a little girl. Thats a pretty serious allegation.  
We don't have a clue what OG are up to, we can only speculate.  We have however, seen OG kick out the foundations of the 'abduction' story by eliminating Tannerman, and they are clearly not singing from the same hymn sheet as the parents, as they are looking for a body while the parents are still flogging good quality wristbands and hoping for a happy outcome!

Indeed it is.
And it must go further than that and involve the entire Command Chain of the Met, and the PJ and the GNR
The prosecution authorities of the UK and of Portugal
And that is only the start.
The full list involves many hundreds of people, as an absolute minimum.

Like you, I can't make it fit.
I prefer incompetence, inefficiency, stupidity, amateurishness, and general blundering as a theory.
It is simpler and involves fewer people.

The PJ investigation is a separate matter.

The Met Police investigation, well that's the equivalent of being told to write the biography of Winston Churchill without mentioning Stalin, Roosevelt,  De Gaulle... or his mother for that matter.

The Met Police was clearly set up with a political purpose (which was why Theresa May fought it for some time), and was based on exclusion of the Tapas 9 as potential suspects. Whatever you think of the McCanns, that makes absolutely no sense in terms of police work, especially since we know how often such cases of claimed abduction end up being shown to have parental involvement or involvement of non-parents with access to the child.

Okeydokey

Posts : 919
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by tiny on 09.06.14 8:12

Its not over till the fat lady sings big grin I was once firmly on the whitewash side, but I really don't know which way this case is going to go now,but for once I hope
Tony is wrong pray2 and that justice for Madeleine will be achieved and not by a dead patsy .

tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Woofer on 09.06.14 9:02

@Woofer wrote:
@plebgate wrote:
@Latetothecase wrote:Well, princes is interesting, as Big Ears' son chose to marry the niece of a former Ibizan resident who had a front page NOTW expose boasting on tape he could get fresh young girls for them
would like to read that please LOTC, is there a link?

I think that refers to Gary Goldsmith, exposed by the MSM for supposedly being a coke user and provider of prostitutes for his guests plus his hedonistic lifestyle.  Can`t find the original NOTW article but this one was in the DM last year when he married a fraudster.

Forgot to post the link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2279497/Kate-Middleton-Gary-Goldsmith-uncle-Duchess-marries-fraudster.html

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Watching on 09.06.14 9:53

@tiny wrote:Its not over till the fat lady sings big grin I was once firmly on the whitewash side, but I really don't know which way this case is going to go now,but for once I hope
Tony is wrong pray2 and that justice for Madeleine will be achieved and not by a dead patsy .

I lean towards WW.  Hope that it isn't.  Hope too as you do that the perpetrators are held responsible, and not a dead patsy. Seems with every new piece of information, we are swayed one way then another.  Most of all I hope that Maddie's remains are found and she is properly and respectfully laid to rest, that justice for her is done.  I pray for the little twin children the suffering this must have brought them and for what they may have to next endure.

Watching

Posts : 289
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-02-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by HelenMeg on 09.06.14 10:01

@Watching wrote:
@tiny wrote:Its not over till the fat lady sings big grin I was once firmly on the whitewash side, but I really don't know which way this case is going to go now,but for once I hope
Tony is wrong pray2 and that justice for Madeleine will be achieved and not by a dead patsy .

I lean towards WW.  Hope that it isn't.  Hope too as you do that the perpetrators are held responsible, and not a dead patsy. Seems with every new piece of information, we are swayed one way then another.  Most of all I hope that Maddie's remains are found and she is properly and respectfully laid to rest, that justice for her is done.  I pray for the little twin children the suffering this must have brought them and for what they may have to next endure.
I hope for a swift conclusion and justice. If SY do 'whitewash' this then it wont be over. Someone somewhere will speak up. The forces will re-group.

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Guest on 09.06.14 10:30

@Woofer wrote:But Peter and Cristobell - surely it doesn`t have to involve the lower ranks - they just do as they`re told.

Say its just the higher ranks `in the know` - if you were a DCI and above and had been told that , say, the prime minister or the prime minister`s relation or anyone else in the cabinet or even a prince had to be protected at all costs, that cost never getting justice for a child, then I reckon they would have to oblige.  Justice for a child would be a no-brainer against protection for a prince (not saying it is a prince btw).

Sharonl made some good points but we don`t know for sure that the T7 haven`t been interviewed intensely.

The only thing that dissuades me from a cover-up is I`m sure it could have been done much sooner and with less fuss.

The McCanns continuing to campaign could be explained by them being involved and in the know, but not knowing who has her body.  That the McCanns and the Establishment have dirt on each other - hence `we keep the body just in case you blab`.

Just my thoughts not accusations.

At one stage, wasn't it hoped that Madeleine was being treated 'like a princess'.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Mirage on 09.06.14 10:47

The strongest indicators are for whitewash. I believe Dr Amaral is right about that. This is why SY had to give some ground and admit the possibility of MBM being dead in the apartment. This leads them into all the nonsense theories of course, because they are making it up as they go along and nothing can be made to hang together.


 
ETA I have moved the remainder of this post to the interview thread as more relevant there re GA.

____________________
Kate McCann: "It's too 'ot. Give 'im a minute."

Mirage

Posts : 1665
Reputation : 382
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by G1 on 09.06.14 11:51

I can't help being on the side of those who prefer to think, or hope, that OG isn't over and it can't be called a whitewash until it is. There are a roughly a couple of score of people who have received training, gained experience over years mostly, and are working at least 9 - 5, five days a week (or the equivalent), or more. Can that possibly be just a whitewash, conspiracy, cover up or ongoing cock-up? It's hard for me to think it could be any of those things.

However, then there are the levelling elements for me, things which make me think the investigation isn't likely to be going anywhere fast. The first is the apparent list of prospective new arguidos, as police wait to pounce for interviews / arrests. When I realise this is still concentrating on the local petty theft angle, the very least likely scenario to have brought about either a dead or kidnapped child, it's depressing. Without meaning to, did some local brigands pull off the perfect killing / kidnapping, but happened to leave the camera, the necklaces, whatever, and no forensics? Maybe an investigation has to rule out everything, but that it's stuck here isn't promising. Could there be many serious leads, then?

Then there is the history of the Met in another high profile case, involving A Redwood and some others on the OG team, the murder of Jill Dando. It seems that involved a miscarriage of justice, with the man with learning disabilities, Barry George, imprisoned but an appeal overturned the verdict. OK, police can get things wrong, and also they may leave things to the CPS to see if their case is appropriate or not. (And maybe this is partly why OG were very cautious re. the Tapas group and parents in the case of M. McCann.)

However, this article I'm linking to shows that, with the J Dando case, the police  determined one way to go (against Barry George), crucially ignoring some of the most important evidence available because it didn't fit with their plan. Once decided, it was stuck to, no matter what. That was not really a proper investigative operation, you can suppose, as much as a plan for a certain result. Thankfully, some expert spoke out that BG didn't have the mental capacity to carry out the perfect murder and cover it up, and a judge listened. Note, as well as what the article below shows, I'd read of another witness in the vicinity not being deemed important because he wouldn't agree with the Barry George proposition.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jill-dando-murder-witness-comes-2071046

So, it's not a good precedent. But again, I'm still unable to lash out against OG in the middle of things. Possibilities remain.

G1

Posts : 35
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Angelique on 09.06.14 11:52

@aquila wrote:I see nothing wrong in kicking against the pricks.

What's wrong with prodding at the historical corruption within the Met as Tony does and highlighting areas of discrepency he sees in the Madeleine investigation?

It's only justice for Madeleine that matters to Tony. It's not about being right or saying 'I told you'.

It's Tony's contribution. No-one needs to agree with it or disagree with it but it's full to the brim of interesting information. What is taken from that information is up to the individual but Scotland Yard need to know that people won't accept a whitewash if that is what they have in mind.

Just my opinion.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I believe Tony wants exactly what I want - Justice, Truth and Honour.

Without these we can trust no one.

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 35
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by sharonl on 09.06.14 13:36

And here is what Goncalo Amaral thinks of all this

News anchor - Gonçalo Amaral, the former coordinator of the Judiciary Police who once headed the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, lambasted the English police thesis and spoke of "farce and staged".

Gonçalo Amaral - There are English journalists who speak of a farce, of something that is being staged for the media, and perhaps there's nothing more than that. What is risky and very serious it's this attempt to produce a new thesis - the thesis that was divulged recently - of someone who commits a theft, gets scared by a 3-year-old child, murders the child for that reason and then whisks the body away, that to me sounds rather preposterous.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/06/goncalo-amaral-there-was-no-breaking-in.html 



That cliff area is an important zone, several people talked about it, there were many important events that took place there, events that people saw and suspected, in the golf course area, in the path to the geodesic mark, all in that area. Therefore, it is an area where it is worthwhile to make a search again. But to be searched in the scope of an investigation that is reopened.» - Gonçalo Amaral.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/06/quote-of-day.html

____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron

sharonl


Posts : 3566
Reputation : 419
Join date : 2009-12-29

View user profile http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Okeydokey on 11.06.14 1:48

@G1 wrote:I can't help being on the side of those who prefer to think, or hope, that OG isn't over and it can't be called a whitewash until it is. There are a roughly a couple of score of people who have received training, gained experience over years mostly, and are working at least 9 - 5, five days a week (or the equivalent), or more. Can that possibly be just a whitewash, conspiracy, cover up or ongoing cock-up? It's hard for me to think it could be any of those things.

However, then there are the levelling elements for me, things which make me think the investigation isn't likely to be going anywhere fast. The first is the apparent list of prospective new arguidos, as police wait to pounce for interviews / arrests. When I realise this is still concentrating on the local petty theft angle, the very least likely scenario to have brought about either a dead or kidnapped child, it's depressing. Without meaning to, did some local brigands pull off the perfect killing / kidnapping, but happened to leave the camera, the necklaces, whatever, and no forensics? Maybe an investigation has to rule out everything, but that it's stuck here isn't promising. Could there be many serious leads, then?

Then there is the history of the Met in another high profile case, involving A Redwood and some others on the OG team, the murder of Jill Dando. It seems that involved a miscarriage of justice, with the man with learning disabilities, Barry George, imprisoned but an appeal overturned the verdict. OK, police can get things wrong, and also they may leave things to the CPS to see if their case is appropriate or not. (And maybe this is partly why OG were very cautious re. the Tapas group and parents in the case of M. McCann.)

However, this article I'm linking to shows that, with the J Dando case, the police  determined one way to go (against Barry George), crucially ignoring some of the most important evidence available because it didn't fit with their plan. Once decided, it was stuck to, no matter what. That was not really a proper investigative operation, you can suppose, as much as a plan for a certain result. Thankfully, some expert spoke out that BG didn't have the mental capacity to carry out the perfect murder and cover it up, and a judge listened. Note, as well as what the article below shows, I'd read of another witness in the vicinity not being deemed important because he wouldn't agree with the Barry George proposition.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jill-dando-murder-witness-comes-2071046

So, it's not a good precedent. But again, I'm still unable to lash out against OG in the middle of things. Possibilities remain.


One thing you have to understand is that if a detachment of soldiers is ordered to take Hill 123 against impossible odds, that doesn't mean the soldiers are personally stupid or culpable.

You need to be unsentimental about this.

Forget about the hard work of the officers.

They have been given an impossible task: discover what happened to Madeleine McCann without ever re-interviewing the Tapas 9.

What Police Service anywhere in the world would begin without re-interviewing all those who were the witnesses to Madeleine's movements prior to her "disappearance"?

Okeydokey

Posts : 919
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by aiyoyo on 11.06.14 3:28

@Okeydokey wrote:

They have been given an impossible task: discover what happened to Madeleine McCann without ever re-interviewing the Tapas 9.

We can't assume that as a fact.
Do we know who they had or had not interviewed ?




aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by tigger on 11.06.14 6:11

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:

They have been given an impossible task: discover what happened to Madeleine McCann without ever re-interviewing the Tapas 9.

We can't assume that as a fact.
Do we know who they had or had not interviewed ?




Surely interviewing the T9 would be pointless as all of them would be in danger of giving false testimony (whatever the technical term is ) - it's abundantly clear they lied in their official statements - a practice they'd have to continue unless any would wish to turn Queens evidence.
Besides, their inability to remember 'facts' without a crib sheet would - if denied a copy of their previous statements during questioning - certainly lead to new inaccuracies.
That in turn would put them in an unpleasantl position in terms of appearing in court and eventual publicity.


Open to correction as legal matters are not my strong point.


____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by aiyoyo on 11.06.14 6:42

@tigger wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:

They have been given an impossible task: discover what happened to Madeleine McCann without ever re-interviewing the Tapas 9.

We can't assume that as a fact.
Do we know who they had or had not interviewed ?




Surely interviewing the T9 would be pointless as all of  them would be in danger of giving false testimony (whatever the technical term is )  - it's abundantly clear they lied in their official statements - a practice they'd have to continue unless any would wish to turn Queens evidence.  
Besides, their inability to remember 'facts' without a crib sheet would - if denied a copy of their previous statements during questioning  -  certainly lead to new  inaccuracies.
That in turn would put them in an unpleasantl position in terms of appearing in court and eventual publicity.


Open to correction as legal matters are not my strong point.


Let's assume OG had interviewed all the odd characters mentioned by the Press and arrived at no abduction.

Let's assume the re-interviewing of T7 was inevitable  (mom & dad had to be excluded till the last before charge as thumb of legal rule) and that they had been re-interviewed on the discrete.

Let's assume the gibberish nonsense given by them confirmed to OG they knew Maddie is dead but every single one is adamant to keep up their lies that no one broke ranks as they'd hoped.  They can't pressure this lot in a friendly (supposedly) chat, and these are intelligent people who probably consulted with lawyers before attending the interviews.  

Redwood team reading their inconsistent statements on papers is one thing, physically facing them and watching their every facial expression and body language first hand knowing that they lied through as many teeth right under your nose must be quite an experience, something that can't be ignored and something that gives OG more reason to go into overdrive to find the body.

Surely the Police are determined not to let them get away with their crimes.

Since Police don't talk about their operations we know nothing really what had or had not been done.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by aquila on 11.06.14 7:03

As someone who believes this is a whitewash and is hoping above all hope that it's not and open to anything that will convince me otherwise I can't help but take myself back to the rogatory interviews which at face value looked good.

The interviewing technique was good but didn't probe. This was Leicester Police (the police authority iirc chosen by the Mc's) conducting rogatory interviews at the request of the PJ. To my mind the minimum was done. Amazingly UK top knobs visited LP. Amazingly LP did not pass on the Gaspar statement immediately (and I'm inferring nothing by this). Amazingly iirc some of the T7 were transported to the police station by....the UK police. Amazingly Dianne Webster didn't take her mobile phone. Amazingly David Payne's 'this isn't the right forum' was just left hanging in the air. Amazingly one of the rogatory interviews suffered a technical hitch and the recording device wasn't working.

Yep, it's all amazing.

I'd love to think (wishful thinking whilst there's a small shred if optimism left in me) that the Met (the chosen Police authority) for the review and the 'investigation' will have selected NOT to interview any of T9 at this stage but to rule out everything else before they do.

aquila

Posts : 7953
Reputation : 1174
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by PeterMac on 11.06.14 7:24

Why would they start searching again today.
Why not just say "We checked out the information we had, and it proved to be useless. Sorry, but there is nothing more we can reasonably do."
And go home.

But they have started again, early this morning in another location.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Google.Gaspar.Statements on 11.06.14 7:27

So much  for all their high tech equipment and satellite images that took them to that area.

 lol4  lol4

Google.Gaspar.Statements

Posts : 345
Reputation : 205
Join date : 2013-05-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Doug D on 11.06.14 8:25

Difficult one that PeterMac.
 
Do we hang around in the sun for another week, pretending to do a bit or work, on an all-expenses jolly, or go back home, fight our way up to London every day & grind through more files like we’ve been doing for the last 3 years?

Doug D

Posts : 2146
Reputation : 635
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by HelenMeg on 11.06.14 9:48

To be in a position to secure a conviction is different from having a very good idea who
is responsible for what happened to M and the covering up of her death.

What exactly is the crime here?  It still has to be established.
Was it accidental death and cover up?
Was it manslaughter / murder and cover up?

Maybe OG is trying to gradually home in on things with the intention of  finally getting a TAPAS member to talk. It does seem to be a staged approach in that we have gone from abduction to death etc etc .
Maybe, without one of the notorious TAPAS gang talking, it will be incredibly difficult.. so they are gradually applying more and more pressure. Thats what I would do, although there must be other techniques that police use..

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Okeydokey on 12.06.14 0:46

@aquila wrote:As someone who believes this is a whitewash and is hoping above all hope that it's not and open to anything that will convince me otherwise I can't help but take myself back to the rogatory interviews which at face value looked good.

The interviewing technique was good but didn't probe. This was Leicester Police (the police authority iirc chosen by the Mc's) conducting rogatory interviews at the request of the PJ. To my mind the minimum was done. Amazingly UK top knobs visited LP. Amazingly LP did not pass on the Gaspar statement immediately (and I'm inferring nothing by this). Amazingly iirc some of the T7 were transported to the police station by....the UK police. Amazingly Dianne Webster didn't take her mobile phone. Amazingly David Payne's 'this isn't the right forum' was just left hanging in the air. Amazingly one of the rogatory interviews suffered a technical hitch and the recording device wasn't working.

Yep, it's all amazing.

I'd love to think (wishful thinking whilst there's a small shred if optimism left in me) that the Met (the chosen Police authority) for the review and the 'investigation' will have selected NOT to interview any of T9 at this stage but to rule out everything else before they do.

I agree - it was the bare minimum in terms of interview technique.  So many incredibly interesting inconsistencies and hesitancies simply not followed up.  Often the officers appeared to help the interviewees with their explanation, paraphrasing their feelings when they became inarticulate. There was no challenging e.g. "Well how dark was the room - how would you describe it?"  "Why didn't you immediately organise a search in the direction suggested by Jane Tanner sighting of the person you all thought was the abductor?"

Okeydokey

Posts : 919
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by G1 on 12.06.14 7:06

@HelenMeg wrote:To be in a position to secure a conviction is different from having a very good idea who
is responsible for what happened to M and the covering up of her death.

What exactly is the crime here?  It still has to be established.
Was it accidental death and cover up?
Was it manslaughter / murder and cover up?

Maybe OG is trying to gradually home in on things with the intention of  finally getting a TAPAS member to talk. It does seem to be a staged approach in that we have gone from abduction to death etc etc .
Maybe, without one of the notorious TAPAS gang talking, it will be incredibly difficult.. so they are gradually applying more and more pressure. Thats what I would do, although there must be other techniques that police use..

---

To reply to this, I'd mention a few others saying here in the last few days that DCI Redwood may be holding out before taking a certain course they feel logical, exhausting pehaps necessary preliminary avenues.

Firstly, it seems to me Redwood is acting currently against his own best conclusions, best expressed in the much read quote that the disappearance has the hallmarks of a purposive, serious, planned abduction with surveillance.

I think this is what happened also, but it's difficult for me to see also that things are quite as simple as that.

So I wonder if Mr Redwood thinks there is a simple answer behind this theory, or if the befogged madness so many people experience from the facts of this case leads him to silently expect much more going on. With the innumerous counts [ *a kind of defining paradox for the frustrating, confoundingly built Soupy Mess of what surrounds the girl's dissapearance* ] of norm defiance in the narrower and wider pictures, is the policeman willing to leave all of that within the domain of supposed undisciplined websleuths or conspiracy theorists? (Considering if he has no hidden orders or unspoken special approach himself.)

Though, I think Madeleine McCann was abducted, I wonder if the group had relations or some form of contact with certain people and illegal goings on before the child's disappearance. And then I wonder if these people suggested as known before the girl went missing (perhaps Kate's and Jane T's "they") were also known in V.I.P. circles in the UK. Perhaps through Europe and wider. One can wonder if those strange, unknown, shadowy people keep "blackmail photos" of well known British officials. Thus, any previous connection and acts of the McCanns with law breaking people finds itself in the same dish as interests in protecting certain V.I.P.s, protected by highest ranking officials. Concerning what kind of information could there be these interests of protection? Perhaps from places / incidents including Elm Guest House Barnes, Angell Road Home Brixton, and so on and so on, going back to Kincora Home, Birr Castle etc.

HelenMeg, you say the OG chief may gradually home in on things, or be waiting for a member of the old McCann's holiday partners to change somehow. I think you may be correct. But also it may be, of course, that Mr Redwood is thrown in, thrown in to a deep end where few, if any, serious, honest officers or inquiring officials would be able to do anything but just keep afloat, if that.

So, not only may he be waiting for some change or opportunity within the original holiday group, but also from anywhere in the wider picture. Perhaps there's seriously little to be done but the ground work now, as developments may seem unlikely without blocks toppling or being lifted. Or at least some quiet defection from a few souls.

G1

Posts : 35
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by G1 on 14.06.14 7:52

... So there's a more optimistic guess to how Operation Grange may turn out. Not exactly optimistic in itself, it's stressing that where there are honest policemen, things are kept very murky for them and against them in political ways. And if anything at all of worth is to happen in the investigation, that is likely to be dependent on unusual change - new people coming forward with information out of the murk somehow, or known people changing or breaking their silences as to the full truth.

But the worst of this possible angle to OG would be that police may be partly or substantially being prevented from apprehending who they rightly should not only by the persons (and friends) who claim the crime against them, but by 'higher ups' in the authorities. Maybe persons with direct control. The working policemen, if they are honest, would be hemmed in a rut on either side blindly, their targets protected by their own threats and blackmail (or shared interest).

Perhaps this would be not quite as awful a reality as the alternative possibility of an intentional whitewash from within.

Then again, from the perspective of precedence and trying to make sense of the Jill Dando investigation, you have to wonder if the Met are really capable of true, mature, modern views in the face of complex issues. Or also if they would have the will to take things as seriously as needed, and aren't looking typically for basic expediency, not so concerned with getting things right or hurting people. (In that case the 'why' could be more to do with basic ineptitude than knowing corruption.)

---

Added: Regarding the Jill Dando case, here is an article, someone's theory, linked to in a short article written by David Icke on this:

http://google-law.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/jill-dando-murdered-by-state-to-keep.html

It looks just like the theory considered here about the Madeleine McCann case.

G1

Posts : 35
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by Snifferdog on 14.06.14 8:11

G1 said: Though, I think Madeleine McCann was abducted,

Hello G1. If you think Madeleine McCann was abducted, how would you explain the findings of the cadaver dogs, Eddie and Keela? - who alerted to blood and cadaver in apartment 5a, where the McCanns were staying when Madeleine disappeared - considering no one died in the apartment before the McCanns holidayed there.

____________________
“‘Conspiracy stuff’ is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.”
– Gore Vidal

Snifferdog

Posts : 1008
Reputation : 10
Join date : 2012-05-11
Location : here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by tungsten tel on 14.06.14 8:31

I really dont think S/Y can whitewash this until the outcome of the libel trial and the P/J investigation . If the book is on sale in the UK and serialised in the press its game over for the Mccanns and a whitewash . If the P/J  charge them its the same result . AR can do nothing to he knows the result either way .

tungsten tel

Posts : 71
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-02-27
Location : walsall

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tony was right was he not?

Post by G1 on 14.06.14 9:30

laughat 
@Snifferdog wrote:G1 said:  Though, I think Madeleine McCann was abducted,

Hello G1.  If you think Madeleine McCann was abducted, how would you explain the findings of the cadaver dogs, Eddie and Keela? - who alerted to blood and cadaver in apartment 5a, where the McCanns were staying when Madeleine disappeared - considering no one died in the apartment before the McCanns holidayed there.

Hello tungsten. In this theory, the dogs' alerts are explained, but I certainly don't think that the scent dogs are just something to be explained away in this fashion, conveniently covering this piece of evidence with any possibility.

Actually, there are two elements which I feel may be a central part of the theory in terms of real evidence available. The dog alerts is one of them.

The two elements:

1. The dog scents. A lot of the McCanns' on camera defences here really make a lot of sense. For example, how could they have hidden a little girl's body SO well that police and searches didn't find any trail, later to be simply picked up in their hire car? Also, I can't believe that, I just can't believe, that with all the McCanns' expensive legal advice, they would not have been told that cadaver and blood scent dogs could well be brought in. Simply, there is no way the McCanns wouldn't have expected this as at least rather likely.

If, theoretically, the McCanns knew there would be cadaver scent left in the flat, I feel there's just no way any half-rational person trying to cover up their blame in their daughter's death, would put her corpse in the back of a car hired weeks after the disappearance. They're doctors. They're very intelligent, it seems. They know intimately about cadaver scent. They are aware that scent dogs are very likely to be brought in if the child isn't located. They can't not be aware of this. They know the scent can't be extinguished probably for years, no matter what you do. This is something any professional medic such as the McCanns know.

My theory says that a very professional, organised, international group of child abductors and groomers for child prostitution and other illegal activities abducted Madeleine. It would have been easy for professional, experienced, trained criminals in the months before the dogs' scent tests to plant dead body scent in these places.

Also, the unlikelihood of the McCanns being associated with cadaver scent in the hire car, the likelihood that it was planted may be a reason itself why the McCanns were protected by British authorities. Because they know it was planted. Because they have a good idea who planted it, but are actually covering for them, due to blackmail threats and possibly that the illegal interests of the V.I.P.s are ongoing anyway.

With a child abducted, possibly with hundreds of thousands of pounds or a few million pounds at stake (more if this involves, for example an Arabian Shiek and / or Greek shipping magnate billionaire, or some Portuguese V.I.P. figure such as Barrolo etc. as clients), a "frame the parents" approach by an abduction team may be included in client deals as insurance.

If the child's abduction goes high profile, professional abductors earning millions from high paying clients will offer security measures. This can include the recipients of the child can be assured ease of saying that it was believed the girl who visits or lives in the palace / wherever could not be girl x because police had assured them girl x was killed by the parents.

The Portuguese police did exactly this, as reported by numerous people who contacted them with sightings of Madeleine. (Released in the 2010 bundle of files of sightings which no-one, including the parents had been told about before release.) To some the Portuguese police said, "You could not have seen Madeleine because she is known to be dead", to others, "That was not Madeleine McCann as she was killed in Portugal by her family or their friends."

This is very strange behaviour by the Portuguese Police when they will not bring a trial, and suggests other motives, other involvements. Just like some people in the British authorities.

2. The last photo (poolside). I find that this photo has clearly been adjusted, but it's so obvious to me that it's really unlikely to be by the McCanns. I'll link to an explanation of this when I find it. [For now, here's a link to a photo analysis of the adjustment of the photo - a missing arm to elbow shadow of GmC, his left, that can't happen naturally in a photograph:

http://i39.tinypic.com/x3v212.jpg ]

The photo has been clearly edited and altered in software. But this is obvious actually to an expert who sees the area which is a problem. It's so obvious that it seems to me the McCanns would never have submitted this photo knowingly adjusted like that because it would be pretty clearly incriminating. This was the photo, it seems, which may have been stolen, in digital storage from Gerry, with his wallet, and later posted back to him. It seems to me the photo has been altered by people trying to incriminate the McCanns, or at least build up security tactics against Madeleine the abductee being identified for who she is, if they be needed (to incriminate the McCanns at a later date if necessary.) One further security measure an abductor could set up is the McCanns complicity in what the abductors or clients would claim as a legal, or at least agreed, adoption process. Or, again, that the parents killed their child. The stolen and adjusted photo could be, at some time, stated as evidence that the McCanns were lying to the police, that they altered the photo themselves.

I think the cadaver scents are likely to come down to the same thing.

G1

Posts : 35
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum