Re: New DCI

by comperedna 11.02.15 17:07

woodforthetrees - Do you now believe that all the lying and false information from the T9 plus the main protagonists was purely to avoid the charge of neglect with its two years or more prison penalty?

by j.rob 11.02.15 17:12

I'm fairly sure also, that the McCann team would like us all to forget the PJ conclusions and will lose no opportunity to try to do so. I think they would more likely want to prove them wrong and humiliate them, not make them forget what they've said That is what they are paid to do. There is no proof of this

-------

Kate in her book writes about how, after being made arguidos, their 'fightback' begun. And how they worked 16 hour days They had Michael Caplan, Angus McBride and Justine working for them.

"It was decided that Justine and Angus would visit the editors of the main tabloid newspapers and Angus would explain to them that there was absolutely no evidence to support our involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

When this didn't work after a second go, they went into even more of a battle to clear their names. Hiring a private investigation company, Metodo 3 and getting Carter Ruck on board.

by Dr What 11.02.15 17:27

I do not believe for one moment that it is just 'Amaral's theory'.I seem to remember that the PJ conclusions in the final report were released after Amaral left the Police.

The McCann team have fought tooth and nail to have these conclusions suppressed totally.They have failed of course.Despite all the money that they have thrown at it, these conclusions from the investigation remain....until the PJ produce another report that contradicts them.

by j.rob 11.02.15 17:41

A more plausible one is that they have evidence (DNA) and intelligence, but cannot locate the person or have enough evidence for a clear conviction. More importantly, they will be focusing on trying to locate the body, as that will hold vital clues.
-----

This is deliberate misinformation, imo. Look there rather than here.

What happened to Madeleine is not the work of a lone person. Let alone a lone intruder. It has all the hallmarks of an insider job. And a complex one at that.

I doubt the body can be found, hence Gerry's taunt: "Find the body and prove we killed her."

by sammi1967 11.02.15 20:00

A quick question? How long after DC agreed and announced a review publicly due to RB's request was the remit produced ? And how soon after that was it decided or more to the point ...publicly stated that the M's weren't suspects? I've followed this case on and off for years and admittedly it's all totally intriguing.

by mad world 11.02.15 22:57

maybe i am stupid but i thought that the police worked on the theory in a disappearence the last person to see the missing person is their first suspect. As they was no evidence of abduction,and gm and ro'b said they didn't go into the kids room..what evidence did kate,as last person to see madeleine,produce to clear her name? I haven't seen it!

by **Tony Bennett** 11.02.15 23:06

mad world wrote:maybe i am stupid but i thought that the police worked on the theory in a disappearence the last person to see the missing person is their first suspect. As they was no evidence of abduction,and gm and ro'b said they didn't go into the kids room..what evidence did kate,as last person to see madeleine,produce to clear her name? I haven't seen it!

Well, she produced what she said was the last 'independent' person to see Madeleine alive and well.

David Payne.

She said he visited her and saw Madeleine alive and well at about 6.30pm on 3 May 2007, the day she was reported missing.

Problem with that one was that Kate McCann's version of that visit had 20 significant contradictions with David Payne's version.

Which made it very possible to doubt whether any such visit ever took place...

by mad world 11.02.15 23:22

It does seem like honour among thieves..everyone trying not to bethe last one to see her. But given that g and k when leaving for their meal were,given their own account,the last people to see her where is the evidence to have cleared them? Sorry tony i'm a new poster and as their is no abduction even all these years later they can be the only suspects? I just can't get my head round that..

by XTC 11.02.15 23:31

woodforthetrees wrote:
Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Rogue-a-Tory wrote:To repeat once more, there is a only 1 in 25 chance that the disappearance DIDN'T involve the parents or friends - that's before examining the SOC evidence of - no break in, no break out or no forensic evidence of any person other than the McCs or friends being in 5A.
To repeat once more.... SY are following their review and evidence findings and are not building a case against the McCanns or the tapas group, but on an unidentified intruder.
Which is why they can't close their enquiry. Their theory doesn't square the circle with the facts. Going to an OG team briefing must be a kin to attending a monthly meeting of the Flat Earth Society
This is a very vague assumption based on your thinking that the released PII files are the entire files and also 'fact' and not just Amarals theory.

A more plausible one is that they have evidence (DNA) and intelligence, but cannot locate the person or have enough evidence for a clear conviction. More importantly, they will be focusing on trying to locate the body, as that will hold vital clues.

Regardless of whether the parents are guilty or not (only Amarals investigation thinks they are and after recent conversations i have had, i now do not believe they disposed of her), SY do not think they are guilty and are not investigating the parents or tapas.

Amaral didn't have a theory he had an investigation. He was the PJ lead investigator.

The fact that he put his theory as the lead investigator in book form doesn't detract from what course he and the first lot of investigators
were taking.

This wasn't his own theory based on prejudice this was assisted by the first lot of British police advisors.

The dogs brought in by the British ( not the PJ - they were reluctant at first ) indicated to the presence of a dead body.

From these indications the PJ led by Amaral formulated a possible indication of their own - namely that the parents and possibly some of the Tapas 9 were involved in " occultation " - in English the possible removal of a dead body from 5a to somewhere unknown.

The ' somewhere ' is unknown and in my humble opinion the who ( or whom) removed it to where will inevitably lead to where the body was removed to.

That's OG's job to seek the presence of Madeleine. OG do not say whether they are looking for a live or dead body officially but ( we are in the arena once again of indications ) the wasteland search by SY was for one of two reasons:

They were looking for forensic evidence of the removers and/or the removed.

The bad news ( and it isonly opinion of course ) is that SY could find a body and still not know who the remover(s) were. Unless you could find some items or forensic clues which shouldn't be on the body or near where it is hidden. For that to be useful you need to know the forensic details of all your suspects - including the Tapas 9.

The thing is, is that OG have given themselves no room for manouvre because they have publicly stated that the so called T9 are not suspects in any way shape or form. The theories that there is some kind of pincer movement going on between OG and the current PJ is not
plausible to me I'm afraid.

There is evidence but not enough evidence to convict anyone and yet again after a great fanfare via the media the interviews of 11 susupects has once more come to nought.

In my opinion OG will get no nearer to the truth until the investigation becomes a complete investigation. It is half an investigation - if that.

Unofficially the PJ say that this crime was a " one off " and the perpetrator is a foreigner who is now back in their own country.

Officially it is an ' ongoing ' investigation.

I'm sorry but the ongoing investiagtion is ongoing nowhere . It appears to be a case of hwo to wrap it up.

That's what happens with remits. The remit dictates the parameters of an investigation.

It's self limiting.

All opinion tough.

by mad world 11.02.15 23:38

Quite agree xtc..the findings were not amarals but of his team and independent experts.
Utter whitewash in motion..all imo

by j.rob 12.02.15 0:04

mad world wrote:maybe i am stupid but i thought that the police worked on the theory in a disappearence the last person to see the missing person is their first suspect. As they was no evidence of abduction,and gm and ro'b said they didn't go into the kids room..what evidence did kate,as last person to see madeleine,produce to clear her name? I haven't seen it!

Quite so.

by jeanmonroe 12.02.15 1:22

@ mad world, j rob

GM was the LAST person to 'see' Madeleine, in her BED. (NOT KM or DP)

He never 'tires' of telling us, 'how beautiful she was' and 'how lucky he was', looking at her, asleep, 'in her bed', at 9:04/9:10/15 pm, 3rd May 2007. (with her 'blanky and cuddlecat')

And he didn't 'cover her' with bedclothes, because 'it was hot'

@TB

Well, she produced what she said was the last 'independent' person to see Madeleine alive and well.

David Payne.

She said he visited her and saw Madeleine alive and well at about 6.30pm on 3 May 2007, the day she was reported missing.
-------------------------------------------

Which, of course, totally CONTRADICTS, what DP TOLD Leicestershire Police Officer, DC 1756 Mike MARSHALL.

To: Ricard Paiva
From: DC 1756 Mike MARSHALL
Ref: David Payne
Date: October 24, 2007

Leicester Police Constabulary

"I read carefully the written document/questionnaire provided by David Payne."

"But was not able to extricate any other information besides what is already known. He declares that he saw Madeleine, for the last time, at 17H00 on 3/5/07 in the McCann apartment. Also present there were Kate and Gerry. He did not indicate the motive for being there or what he was doing. He also cannot indicate how long he stayed".

When asked with whom he was on the afternoon of May 3rd, he declares that this information was already offered to the police and cannot remember if anyone else was there.

He does not remember what he was wearing that afternoon.

He took part in the searches, having carried out most of them alone. He was at times accompanied by Matthew Oldfield.

NB. NO 'MENTION' of his 'search' with GM, at 4am, 4th May 2007.

He (DP) did 'NOT partake in the searches realized on the 4th of May', because, on this day, he spent to majority of time in the police headquarters.

NB. HE (DP) SAYS HE DID 'PARTAKE' in a 'search' WITH GM (only) at 4am on the 4th May 2007 So that's a blatant 'lie' he's told!

For many questions, he does not give a complete response, affirming simply that he has already given this information to the Portuguese police in his declarations.
----------------------------------------------------------

He declares that he saw Madeleine, for the last time, at 17H00 on 3/5/07 in the McCann apartment. Also present there were Kate and Gerry.

He, DP, declares that he saw Madeleine, for the last time, at 17H00 on 3/5/07 in the McCann apartment.

HE (DP) 'SAW' Madeleine, for THE 'LAST' TIME at 17h00s........5PM!

Which (AGAIN!) IS EXTREMELY 'ODD' because at 17h00 hrs, 5 (FIVE) pm on the 3rd May 2007, HE WAS AT THE 'BEACH'! (with 7 of the T9 and all their kids, almost half a mile, from McCann 'apartment'!)

My 'bold'

Istbc, as always.

by mad world 12.02.15 1:34

Sorry jean i thought kate left behind gerry..but as i said as the last to see her alive her parents must be the only suspects...there is no abduction evidence and no alibi for the mc canns i can see. I will stand corrected if wrong if this isn't police procedure.

by jeanmonroe 12.02.15 1:56

mad world wrote:Sorry jean i thought kate left behind gerry..but as i said as the last to see her alive her parents must be the only suspects...there is no abduction evidence and no alibi for the mc canns i can see. I will stand corrected if wrong if this isn't police procedure.

No probs!

Being able to 'remember' EVERYTHING is not a 'blessing' it's a bloody curse! winkwink

by woodforthetrees 12.02.15 9:12

Jamming wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:This is a very vague assumption based on your thinking that the released PII files are the entire files and also 'fact' and not just Amarals theory.

A more plausible one is that they have evidence (DNA) and intelligence, but cannot locate the person or have enough evidence for a clear conviction. More importantly, they will be focusing on trying to locate the body, as that will hold vital clues.

Regardless of whether the parents are guilty or not (only Amarals investigation thinks they are and after recent conversations i have had, i now do not believe they disposed of her), SY do not think they are guilty and are not investigating the parents or tapas.

These recent conversations that have changed your mind on things, mind telling us who they were with ?

Absolutely not. I would not jeopardize their 20+yr career, or put myself in that situation. Sorry.

All i will say is that they have first hand experience and access to information and are 100% credible. Quite possibly the most interesting person i have ever known and their career path through various agencies is fascinating, more so the differences between what the general public see/know and what is actually happening.

As such, my view on the parents guilt on the murder/disposal and the fact that SY are secretly putting a case together against them, have done a complete u-turn.

by woodforthetrees 12.02.15 9:14

Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Rogue-a-Tory wrote:To repeat once more, there is a only 1 in 25 chance that the disappearance DIDN'T involve the parents or friends - that's before examining the SOC evidence of - no break in, no break out or no forensic evidence of any person other than the McCs or friends being in 5A.
To repeat once more.... SY are following their review and evidence findings and are not building a case against the McCanns or the tapas group, but on an unidentified intruder.
Which is why they can't close their enquiry. Their theory doesn't square the circle with the facts. Going to an OG team briefing must be a kin to attending a monthly meeting of the Flat Earth Society
This is a very vague assumption based on your thinking that the released PII files are the entire files and also 'fact' and not just Amarals theory.

A more plausible one is that they have evidence (DNA) and intelligence, but cannot locate the person or have enough evidence for a clear conviction. More importantly, they will be focusing on trying to locate the body, as that will hold vital clues.

Regardless of whether the parents are guilty or not (only Amarals investigation thinks they are and after recent conversations i have had, i now do not believe they disposed of her), SY do not think they are guilty and are not investigating the parents or tapas.
Let's face it, the three point outcome of the Portuguese investigation was anything but vague - as you well know.

I was referring to the assumption being vague, not the case files. Apologies.

If it was so watertight and a slam dunk, this would have been tied up years ago and the McCanns incarcerated.

by woodforthetrees 12.02.15 9:15

comperedna wrote:woodforthetrees - Do you now believe that all the lying and false information from the T9 plus the main protagonists was purely to avoid the charge of neglect with its two years or more prison penalty?

Yes. and to help protect their friends, the McCanns

by woodforthetrees 12.02.15 9:16

Tony Bennett wrote:
mad world wrote:maybe i am stupid but i thought that the police worked on the theory in a disappearence the last person to see the missing person is their first suspect. As they was no evidence of abduction,and gm and ro'b said they didn't go into the kids room..what evidence did kate,as last person to see madeleine,produce to clear her name? I haven't seen it!
Well, she produced what she said was the last 'independent' person to see Madeleine alive and well.

David Payne.

She said he visited her and saw Madeleine alive and well at about 6.30pm on 3 May 2007, the day she was reported missing.

Problem with that one was that Kate McCann's version of that visit had 20 significant contradictions with David Payne's version.

Which made it very possible to doubt whether any such visit ever took place...

Exactly Tony. The subsequent scribbled down rota was then just that....scribbles. (IMO of course)

by woodforthetrees 12.02.15 9:36

XTC wrote:

Amaral didn't have a theory he had an investigation. He was the PJ lead investigator. Agreed, but based on his investigations, a theory was formulated and thus the story transpired

The fact that he put his theory as the lead investigator in book form doesn't detract from what course he and the first lot of investigators
were taking.

This wasn't his own theory based on prejudice this was assisted by the first lot of British police advisors. According to who? media? Amarals book? You and i do not know what the british law enforcement were thinking or advising as we weren't there.

The dogs brought in by the British ( not the PJ - they were reluctant at first ) indicated to the presence of a dead body. Agreed, which threw a spanner in the works as it takes time for cadaver scent to develop

From these indications the PJ led by Amaral formulated a possible indication of their own - namely that the parents and possibly some of the Tapas 9 were involved in " occultation " - in English the possible removal of a dead body from 5a to somewhere unknown. 'Possible indication', i.e theory

The ' somewhere ' is unknown and in my humble opinion the who ( or whom) removed it to where will inevitably lead to where the body was removed to.

That's OG's job to seek the presence of Madeleine. OG do not say whether they are looking for a live or dead body officially but ( we are in the arena once again of indications ) the wasteland search by SY was for one of two reasons: Yes, it does indicate they are looking for a body, hence not a live abduction... You abduct a live being, you remove evidence if not alive

They were looking for forensic evidence of the removers and/or the removed. I would say looking for a body or bag/sheet/clothing to corroborate evidence they have.

The bad news ( and it isonly opinion of course ) is that SY could find a body and still not know who the remover(s) were. Unless you could find some items or forensic clues which shouldn't be on the body or near where it is hidden. For that to be useful you need to know the forensic details of all your suspects - including the Tapas 9. T9 are not suspects, but their DNA will be on file for cross reference

The thing is, is that OG have given themselves no room for manouvre because they have publicly stated that the so called T9 are not suspects in any way shape or form. The theories that there is some kind of pincer movement going on between OG and the current PJ is not plausible to me I'm afraid. They would not publicly state that if they were not confident of it, especially as they shouldn't be saying anything directly tot he public

There is evidence but not enough evidence to convict anyone and yet again after a great fanfare via the media the interviews of 11 susupects has once more come to nought. Correct, or evidence but no perp found, or not enough witness evidence to put a strong MO to the perp being there at a specific time.

In my opinion OG will get no nearer to the truth until the investigation becomes a complete investigation. It is half an investigation - if that.

Unofficially the PJ say that this crime was a " one off " and the perpetrator is a foreigner who is now back in their own country. Exactly, so they too now believe the parents are not guilty of that part of the whole saga

Officially it is an ' ongoing ' investigation.

I'm sorry but the ongoing investiagtion is ongoing nowhere . I would be inclined to agree It appears to be a case of hwo to wrap it up.

That's what happens with remits. The remit dictates the parameters of an investigation. Unless findings change the direction of it

It's self limiting.

All opinion tough. Me too

by Jamming 12.02.15 14:52

woodforthetrees wrote:
Jamming wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:This is a very vague assumption based on your thinking that the released PII files are the entire files and also 'fact' and not just Amarals theory.

A more plausible one is that they have evidence (DNA) and intelligence, but cannot locate the person or have enough evidence for a clear conviction. More importantly, they will be focusing on trying to locate the body, as that will hold vital clues.

Regardless of whether the parents are guilty or not (only Amarals investigation thinks they are and after recent conversations i have had, i now do not believe they disposed of her), SY do not think they are guilty and are not investigating the parents or tapas.

These recent conversations that have changed your mind on things, mind telling us who they were with ?

Absolutely not. I would not jeopardize their 20+yr career, or put myself in that situation. Sorry.

All i will say is that they have first hand experience and access to information and are 100% credible. Quite possibly the most interesting person i have ever known and their career path through various agencies is fascinating, more so the differences between what the general public see/know and what is actually happening.

As such, my view on the parents guilt on the murder/disposal and the fact that SY are secretly putting a case together against them, have done a complete u-turn.

Fair enough, at least you have confirmed it's not a certain Mr Gamble...

by woodforthetrees 12.02.15 15:19

Jamming wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Jamming wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:This is a very vague assumption based on your thinking that the released PII files are the entire files and also 'fact' and not just Amarals theory.

A more plausible one is that they have evidence (DNA) and intelligence, but cannot locate the person or have enough evidence for a clear conviction. More importantly, they will be focusing on trying to locate the body, as that will hold vital clues.

Regardless of whether the parents are guilty or not (only Amarals investigation thinks they are and after recent conversations i have had, i now do not believe they disposed of her), SY do not think they are guilty and are not investigating the parents or tapas.

These recent conversations that have changed your mind on things, mind telling us who they were with ?

Absolutely not. I would not jeopardize their 20+yr career, or put myself in that situation. Sorry.

All i will say is that they have first hand experience and access to information and are 100% credible. Quite possibly the most interesting person i have ever known and their career path through various agencies is fascinating, more so the differences between what the general public see/know and what is actually happening.

As such, my view on the parents guilt on the murder/disposal and the fact that SY are secretly putting a case together against them, have done a complete u-turn.

Fair enough, at least you have confirmed it's not a certain Mr Gamble...

Ha ha, no, not Jim Gamble

by Dr What 12.02.15 18:07

'All i will say is that they have first hand experience and access to information'

I seem to recollect that not all the PJ files and information has been released and so I assume that no matter how experienced someone may or may not be, they would not be in a position to be 100% certain about anything in this case.However, like the rest of us, they may draw their own conclusions based on the information that has been released.

by rustyjames 12.02.15 23:11

Dr What wrote:
'All i will say is that they have first hand experience and access to information'

I seem to recollect that not all the PJ files and information has been released and so I assume that no matter how experienced someone may or may not be, they would not be in a position to be 100% certain about anything in this case.However, like the rest of us, they may draw their own conclusions based on the information that has been released.

Annex 37 on May 1st's calls would appear to be missing and of particular interest ....

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4447-the-concise-phone-thread#97960

dewi lennard ‏@kikoratton 4 Jan 2013
PJ are hanging onto Annex 37 - Kate #McCann 's mobile calls on 1 May. Must be dynamite!! But then, I've been telling you that for two years.

by j.rob 12.02.15 23:57

Absolutely not. I would not jeopardize their 20+yr career, or put myself in that situation. Sorry.

All i will say is that they have first hand experience and access to information and are 100% credible. Quite possibly the most interesting person i have ever known and their career path through various agencies is fascinating, more so the differences between what the general public see/know and what is actually happening.

As such, my view on the parents guilt on the murder/disposal and the fact that SY are secretly putting a case together against them, have done a complete u-turn.

-----

Well - you might be in a minority of one. There is nothing that indicates to me that the parents and their friends are not complicit in what happened, in some way. Nothing whatsoever. From the very beginning and right up to this day.

by Gaggzy 13.02.15 0:35

j.rob wrote:Absolutely not. I would not jeopardize their 20+yr career, or put myself in that situation. Sorry.

All i will say is that they have first hand experience and access to information and are 100% credible. Quite possibly the most interesting person i have ever known and their career path through various agencies is fascinating, more so the differences between what the general public see/know and what is actually happening.

As such, my view on the parents guilt on the murder/disposal and the fact that SY are secretly putting a case together against them, have done a complete u-turn.

-----

Well - you might be in a minority of one. There is nothing that indicates to me that the parents and their friends are not complicit in what happened, in some way. Nothing whatsoever. From the very beginning and right up to this day.

Oh-oh. Looks as if we've got someone who is ITK (in-the-know) and surprise surprise - is not prepared to 'reveal their source.'