Re: Met chief vows no let-up in search for Madeleine

by Okeydokey 16.08.14 2:43

It just makes me feel sad for those well meaning people who think the Met are undertaking a serious police investigation.

by The Rooster 16.08.14 10:34

The Express and Hogan Howe what an oxymoron. A noticeable absence. But what more could we really expect.

by Woofer 16.08.14 11:00

Dee Coy wrote:Not allowed to, imo, JfM. They have a remit and their job is to stick with it. Each officer will be given a small area to analyse. Each person will have just one piece of the jigsaw to determine it's shape and position in the puzzle. My guess is most pieces won't even belong to the puzzle with the picture we see. The people rattling the box with the 'abductor' on the front are the ones who shouldn't sleep at night.

Those sort of people sleep very soundly indeed, however. It's the nature of that particular beast.

All just in my opinion, as ever.

Not knowing anything about police investigations, I wonder if this is actually the case (my bold above).
Because that`s almost saying they`re not allowed to question, which surely is what detecting is all about.

by SixMillionQuid 16.08.14 12:07

Woofer wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Not allowed to, imo, JfM. They have a remit and their job is to stick with it. Each officer will be given a small area to analyse. Each person will have just one piece of the jigsaw to determine it's shape and position in the puzzle. My guess is most pieces won't even belong to the puzzle with the picture we see. The people rattling the box with the 'abductor' on the front are the ones who shouldn't sleep at night.

Those sort of people sleep very soundly indeed, however. It's the nature of that particular beast.

All just in my opinion, as ever.

Not knowing anything about police investigations, I wonder if this is actually the case (my bold above).
Because that`s almost saying they`re not allowed to question, which surely is what detecting is all about.

They can question but if they go their boss about their findings will the boss be sympathetic? They could get stabbed in the back. If they go to the press, they could get stabbed in the back. If they go on Twitter about their findings watch that Twitter account disappear faster than the speed of light, then stabbed in the back and sued for compensation. Not saying its impossible but there could be risk where you could end up like Snr Amaral.

by Brian Griffin 16.08.14 15:08

Quoted from above: "Not saying its impossible but there could be risk where you could end up like Snr Amaral."

My thoughts exactly. I'd say it is a very real risk, and certainly a deterrent for any cop considering going beyond his or her brief. Much better simply to do what you are told, look in only the direction you are told, collect your paycheque and stay safe, especially in this economy! And I don't blame anyone for doing so, given the situation. Allegedly. In my opinion. Etc.

by joyce1938 16.08.14 17:50

I believe there has to be evidence that is needed and not just ideas of what could have happened ,would not go to court without pretty good evidence ,might just be thrown out and where would that leave the case no case to answer /? that just might be the problem . joyce1938

by XTC 16.08.14 23:56

joyce1938 wrote:I believe there has to be evidence that is needed and not just ideas of what could have happened ,would not go to court without pretty good evidence ,might just be thrown out and where would that leave the case no case to answer /? that just might be the problem . joyce1938

joyce1938

I agree comletely.

I'm scratching my head as to why the latest PJ r's managed to reopen the investigation?

I suspect the re-opening as a political act rather than an emergence of " new crebible evidence "

Unofficially I read that the PJ think that this reason for the removal/ disappearance was the resuly of a one off act and that the person responsible has gone back to the UK.

Officially the PJ are said to be working with SY.

The latest reports suggest that the PJ and SY should join forces as it were to push the investigation further forward.

If I were the PJ I would not touch this with a bargepole.

My reasoning is very simple which is: If DI Redwood and the Yard have ruled out that the so called Tapas 9 are out of the frame then the
only reason why SY would be interested in what the PJ know is to find out what the PJ know.

Because SY have not abided by the Judicial Secrecy of the PJ then it will be a fruitless union.

SY will as usual run to the media with tales of derring do for the attention of the British Public and say this is how hard we are working and the PJ will have to keep schtumm.

It's a no win for the PJ I think.

Fair enough there are many who think that SY are eliminating suspects bit by bit and will eventually end up where Mr Amaral and his team ended up. It's a possibilty for me but no more than that.

The Smiths saw somebody carrying a child I think and one of them thinks it was GM. In all honesty I remain to be convinced that this man was GM. If the ' unofficial ' reports from within the PJ are true the PJ are more than hinting as to what they think.

Yet as you rightly say without new credible extra evidence the investigation is in stasis.

If ( contrary to some people's beliefs ) the McCanns take on the Murdoch Empire then the game won't necessarily be up but the British end of support may take an irreperable dent.

I think Textusa ( if you have read it?) has it the wrong way round.

You do not bite the hand that feeds you. Murdoch is smarting and probably smarting for a fight post Levenson.

Cameron and others are about to learn this I think before the next election.

Politic s is a dirty business. Ask the Portuguese.

Opinion all of it of course.

by nglfi 17.08.14 4:51

I'll admit I don't know anything about investigations of this scale, but I do know people in the police force and standard procedure in normal investigations is to have a briefing meeting each morning/start of shift, where progress in all aspects of the case is discussed. It's not up to each individual to decide who might be responsible for the crime, but since everyone is aware of what everyone else is doing, it soon becomes obvious where the evidence is taking the process. AFAIK people are free to express their opinion and there are no secrets, but people are given tasks and they have to report to everyone at each briefing what they are doing (albeit briefly). The person in charge is then responsible for collating the information and deciding who might be charged. If some completely random patsy gets charged who has nothing to do with it, any member of staff can complain to the IPCC or internally about it. Also, people are picked to be on these serious and high profile teams randomly, the procedure was changed recently, so it's not like AR could pick cronies. That said, as I said at the beginning I don't know if high profile cases work any differently, but this is standard procedure.

by nglfi 17.08.14 5:17

Also don't forget that people are working in the same office, working together every day and they are allowed to talk to each other. I'm sure they will build up a pretty clear picture of who may be responsible for the crime. If the procedure has been genuinely changed to randomly select people, and I mean to the point where selections can't be manipulated, then I don't really see how a whitewash is possible. It would take 37 randomly selected people to all want to do a whitewash. Either that or they are threatened with the official secrets act on the first day, which I'm not saying isn't possible. There may be higher forces at work here. All I know is the procedure has changed recently, in the past the lead investigator used to be able to select who they wanted. How much of a genuine change it is or whether these people are got at as soon as they enter the investigation, I don't know.

by canada12 17.08.14 6:37

Well, now that the precedent has been set, perhaps when the McCanns go to Portugal next month for the decision in their case against Dr Amaral, the BBC will have full coverage of Leicestershire Police and Scotland Yard's massive surprise swoop on Rothley Manor in a 5-hour hunt for evidence concerning Madeleine's disappearance.

by Guest 17.08.14 7:15

Dear canada12

I hate to curb your enthousiasm.

In the Lisbon damages case there is still
one session to go, closing arguments of
all parties.

Judgement is expected at an even later date.

Kindest regards
parapono

by canada12 17.08.14 7:22

parapono wrote:Dear canada12

I hate to curb your enthousiasm.

In the Lisbon damages case there is still
one session to go, closing arguments of
all parties.

Judgement is expected at an even later date.

Kindest regards
parapono

Thanks for that. I honestly thought there was going to be some sort of decision in early September. Apologies for not paying closer attention :-)

by Guest 17.08.14 7:43

Don't apologise please empathy

by Liz Eagles 17.08.14 11:52

SY's last trip to Portugal (just prior to the Damages Trial) was left on a cliffhanger with interest in a disused well.

If SY turn up with a fanfare in September (just prior to the final hearing of the Lisbon Trial) to explore this area of interest, any faint glimmer of hope I have that there will be justice for Madeleine will die.

It's only my opinion as usual.

by Guest 17.08.14 12:01

SY will be be back as you say in September, under the pretext that it is the end of the tourist season.

by missmar1 17.08.14 12:32

aquila wrote:SY's last trip to Portugal (just prior to the Damages Trial) was left on a cliffhanger with interest in a disused well.

If SY turn up with a fanfare in September (just prior to the final hearing of the Lisbon Trial) to explore this area of interest, any faint glimmer of hope I have that there will be justice for Madeleine will die.

It's only my opinion as usual.

I have to say I agree with you aqulla, imo, it would be too much of a coincidence for SY to arrive with all the fanfare just prior to the final hearing - I do believe the truth of what happened to the Mccann's little girl will come out one day but it may not be for many years.....

I just hope Mr Amaral wins this libel trial because at the very least, his victory will give him his life back and also stop the Mccann's in their tracks to get the million they wanted and carry on ruining the life of the very same man who, imo, tried to do his job which was to get to the truth of what happened to their daughter. All my opinion as usual.

by plebgate 17.08.14 12:52

aquila wrote:SY's last trip to Portugal (just prior to the Damages Trial) was left on a cliffhanger with interest in a disused well.

If SY turn up with a fanfare in September (just prior to the final hearing of the Lisbon Trial) to explore this area of interest, any faint glimmer of hope I have that there will be justice for Madeleine will die.

It's only my opinion as usual.

That is my own opinion too.

by missmar1 17.08.14 13:37

missmar1 wrote:
aquila wrote:SY's last trip to Portugal (just prior to the Damages Trial) was left on a cliffhanger with interest in a disused well.

If SY turn up with a fanfare in September (just prior to the final hearing of the Lisbon Trial) to explore this area of interest, any faint glimmer of hope I have that there will be justice for Madeleine will die.

It's only my opinion as usual.

I have to say I agree with you aquila, imo, it would be too much of a coincidence for SY to arrive with all the fanfare just prior to the final hearing - I do believe the truth of what happened to the Mccann's little girl will come out one day but it may not be for many years.....

I just hope Mr Amaral wins this libel trial because at the very least, his victory will give him his life back and also stop the Mccann's in their tracks to get the million they wanted and to stop them carry on ruining the life of the very same man who, imo, tried to do his job which was to get to the truth of what happened to their daughter. All my opinion as usual.
Eta correct typing error and add words

by End 17.08.14 14:35

Is it possible that there is a connection with this report and the breaking UK news the previous day .... given the connections with PDL?

by Guest 18.08.14 8:20

Doug D wrote:Out of interest, this 'statement' does not appear on the Met Police's Press Release site.

That is interesting Doug D, when I first read the story in the Daily Express I searched other online newspapers for the statement and found nothing, has far as I know no mention on Sky/bbc/itv news, if there had been I'm sure a member would have said.

Why would the statement only appear in the Express? Why I wonder wasn't it read out on any of the news channels or printed by other newspapers?

by Guest 18.08.14 9:33

Cherry Blossom wrote:
Doug D wrote:Out of interest, this 'statement' does not appear on the Met Police's Press Release site.

That is interesting Doug D, when I first read the story in the Daily Express I searched other online newspapers for the statement and found nothing, has far as I know no mention on Sky/bbc/itv news, if there had been I'm sure a member would have said.

Why would the statement only appear in the Express? Why I wonder wasn't it read out on any of the news channels or printed by other newspapers?

Perhaps the Express made up the article. It is August after all!

by Woofer 18.08.14 10:21

nglfi wrote:I'll admit I don't know anything about investigations of this scale, but I do know people in the police force and standard procedure in normal investigations is to have a briefing meeting each morning/start of shift, where progress in all aspects of the case is discussed. It's not up to each individual to decide who might be responsible for the crime, but since everyone is aware of what everyone else is doing, it soon becomes obvious where the evidence is taking the process. AFAIK people are free to express their opinion and there are no secrets, but people are given tasks and they have to report to everyone at each briefing what they are doing (albeit briefly). The person in charge is then responsible for collating the information and deciding who might be charged. If some completely random patsy gets charged who has nothing to do with it, any member of staff can complain to the IPCC or internally about it. Also, people are picked to be on these serious and high profile teams randomly, the procedure was changed recently, so it's not like AR could pick cronies. That said, as I said at the beginning I don't know if high profile cases work any differently, but this is standard procedure.

Thanks nglfi. If this is standard procedure, surely it can`t be a whitewash. But I keep remembering that GA thinks it`s a big show.

by Guest 18.08.14 10:25

Ladyinred wrote:
Cherry Blossom wrote:
Doug D wrote:Out of interest, this 'statement' does not appear on the Met Police's Press Release site.

That is interesting Doug D, when I first read the story in the Daily Express I searched other online newspapers for the statement and found nothing, has far as I know no mention on Sky/bbc/itv news, if there had been I'm sure a member would have said.

Why would the statement only appear in the Express? Why I wonder wasn't it read out on any of the news channels or printed by other newspapers?

Perhaps the Express made up the article. It is August after all!

He could have mentioned it over dinner, on Thursday, cut out the rest of the bumf, this is what he said.

BRITAIN’S top policeman vowed to keep going in the hunt to discover what happened to Madeleine McCann after Scotland Yard’s major operations this summer.

Yesterday, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe said: “The investigation is still ongoing and we will not be reducing the team.”

He praised Portuguese authorities for allowing Yard detectives to take part in the summer search.

“A reasonable amount of progress has been made,” he added.
However, no trace of Madeleine has been found and police have no idea what happened to her.

Sir Bernard believes the ideal way to tackle the case is with a joint squad of British and Portuguese police.

That would speed up many aspects of the inquiry, but authorities in Lisbon are against the move.

by espeland 18.08.14 11:51

I'm not surprised that the investigation is taking so long, but am not happy that there is still no idea what happened to Madeleine. I imagine if her body was found there would still be extreme doubt who was to blame, unless she was found on/near the route to Huelva or Fatima.

But what I don't think there's any doubt about is that the McCanns have commited fraud, with the T7 and others also involved. I remember Gordon Brown publicly told them in 2007 to keep quiet - which they've patently ignored and instead pursued a course which has kept them and the fund in the limelight.

I know I've said it before, but I believe a fraud enquiry should be established. I'm not involved with the Police or legal services, but I see no reason if they were prosecuted and found guilty of fraud, that they couldn't later be prosecuted for other crimes, at least in the UK. In other words, the establishment of a fraud enquiry wouldn't necessitate closing the current enquiry and should, I believe, produce a result far more quickly.

by Sam S 18.08.14 13:30

Anybody who expects justice in this case will be sorely disapointed. If they haven't nailed the real culprits 7 years after the event they never will. My opinion only.

Latest topics