Libel trial summing up - daily mail

TexMac wrote:

whatsupdoc wrote:Quote
After this week, Smithman will be the central focus of glamour-girl, Vogue-featured, 'I-paint-my-nails-to-impress-the-men' DCI Nicola Wall


I find that funny , Tony.

I find it disgusting - extremely sexist, and showing a dreadful bias and a total lack of respect for DCI Wall even before she starts her new role.
If we all want justice for Madeleine, shouldn't EVERYONE be 100% supportive and encouraging of DCI Wall?

whatsupdoc wrote:

TexMac wrote:

whatsupdoc wrote:Quote
After this week, Smithman will be the central focus of glamour-girl, Vogue-featured, 'I-paint-my-nails-to-impress-the-men' DCI Nicola Wall


I find that funny , Tony.

I find it disgusting - extremely sexist, and showing a dreadful bias and a total lack of respect for DCI Wall even before she starts her new role.
If we all want justice for Madeleine, shouldn't EVERYONE be 100% supportive and encouraging of DCI Wall?

TexMac... You are right but you went too deep. 

Did DCI Wall really say that or was it some journo writing for shoe-size-IQ readers? It all sounded out of place for a DCI.

I fear the trench has been dug too deep now and DCI Wall will be treading water till her next promotion and early retirement.

WMD wrote:

Joss wrote:

Realist wrote:

BlueBag wrote:

Realist wrote:The part of Goncala's theory that I've always found to be implausible (at least according to his video and I presume the book is the same) is that he appears to be of the opinion that the McCann's daughter died accidentally and her body was disposed of between the hrs. of 8.30 and 10 pm. on the third inst. May 2007.

As previously stated, it just isn't realistic that such a series of serious events could occur in so short a time span. There just wasn't the opportunity for Madelaine to meet with a fatal accident, one of the McCanns returning to the apt. to find her dead,  clean up the apt, concoct a phoney kidnapping story, make the decision to dispense with the body in the presence of their friends,  and dispose of it with no apparent means of transport so methodically that it would never be found. Again, as previously stated, maybe he had libel in mind when writing the book and was giving the McCanns a certain degree of the benefit of the doubt as opposed to what he really thinks occurred.

As for Gerry McCann stating what other than an abduction could have been the reason for his daughter's disappearance  is naivety personified, because there could be any number of other obvious reasons, all of which by default would involve himself, his wife and their friends.

I agree.

IMO Tuesday night was the start of the demise.

Precisely and it flies in the face of the dog's scentings, because a corpse would have had to have been in the apt. for a longer period of time than Goncala's synopsis allows for.

I have been told that a corpse does not have to be in place for very long at all for dogs to detect cadaver evidence? I would of thought at least an hour or two, but that is not accurate. I have researched it on the internet but could not find much that says accurately how long it would take for dogs to detect that kind of evidence, so it seems there are some discrepencies with it.

I've seen mentioned that cadaver scent can start after just 10 minutes,the trouble is,no one knows just how sensitive the dogs noses are and we have no way of telling exactly.Also along the same lines.There are variables in age,sex,cause of death,which is why one supposes the dogs can't be relied upon alone.

plebgate wrote:I couldn't care less whether she wears nail polish, has her hair flowing or wears 5 inch heels, get on with the job in hand is all I care about.    Do the best for Maddie end of.

plebgate wrote:Why can't people just get on with their jobs and not give a care about what men or other women think about them.   Why do so many "career" women feel they have to go on tv or give magazine interviews to tell us about their need to be seen as feminine or wear make up etc.

I couldn't care less whether she wears nail polish, has her hair flowing or wears 5 inch heels, get on with the job in hand is all I care about.    Do the best for Maddie end of.

TB has posted a good deal to be thinking about so let's hope that this thread is not going to be derailed because of a comment (his opinion) about the new Chief of the investigation.

Woofer wrote:I wish people would get their facts straight before jumping to conclusions.

The Vogue piece was about women in the MET from a practical dress perspective AND it mentioned 3 or 4 example women, of which DCI Wall was one.  And saying that she paints her nails does NOT in any way translate into painting her nails to attract men.  Why are some people on here trying to discredit the lady before she has even taken over?  Propagandists in action I see.

Was DCI Wall carpeted? - of course not

Were they all carpeted? - of course not.

Would they have consulted their superiors before doing it? - of course.  It would have been considered good PR, especially for the readership of Vogue.

Tony Bennett wrote:

TexMac wrote:

whatsupdoc wrote:Quote
After this week, Smithman will be the central focus of glamour-girl, Vogue-featured, 'I-paint-my-nails-to-impress-the-men' DCI Nicola Wall

I find that funny , Tony.

I find it disgusting - extremely sexist, and showing a dreadful bias and a total lack of respect for DCI Wall even before she starts her new role.
If we all want justice for Madeleine, shouldn't EVERYONE be 100% supportive and encouraging of DCI Wall?

NO.

Instead, they should be writing to the Independent Police Complaints Commission demanding that DCI Andy Redwood be investigated for perverting the course of justice for his IMO obviously bogus attempt to try to pass off two e-fits of very different blokes as the same man - and moreover claiming that any of the Smiths could possibly produce such clear e-fits as those two, given that

* they had seen him over a year before (allegedly) drawing up those e-fits
* it was dark when they saw him
* the street lighting was week
* they only saw him for a few seconds
* his face was down and partly hidden
* they all waited 13 days in the midst of an international publicity blitz before telling the police about their sighting.

Moreover, as we all know:

1. DCI Andy Redwood accepted a remit - given by someone the Met Police refuses to reveal - that he was only to investigate an abduction, and
2. His boss, Det Chief Supt Hamish Campbell, was the disgraced detective who fitted up Barry Bulsara/George for the killing of Jill Dando by a professional hit-man, a crime never solved, and quite possibly carreid out by Britiosh secuirty services.

As for DCI Nicola Wall, IF she had insisted on the remit being changed before being appointed, yes, I would support her.

But she did not. She is stuck with a remit only of investigating an abduction, therefore IMO she has accepted the poisoned chalice, and no good will come of her appointment.

And I stand by my comments about DCI Nicola Wall, which were not in any way sexist. I would have said exactly the same had any male admitted - as Wall did - that she glammed up herself up to impress the males in her office, and appeared in a celebrity magazine - as Wall did in Vogue.  

I do not think these are the actions of a police officer that we should take seriously. She has been in the Met 25 years, her career has obviosuly stalled at the modest level of DCI, and she has less than 5 years to go to retirement. What better option than to do the bidding of boss-of-the-Met Bernard Hogan-Howe and continue to run this corrupt investigation, which is clearly getting nowhere, for another two years - then get a handy promotion to Detective Superintendent and so nicely enhance her police pension, wnhich she can take in 2019.

Joss wrote:

WMD wrote:
I've seen mentioned that cadaver scent can start after just 10 minutes,the trouble is,no one knows just how sensitive the dogs noses are and we have no way of telling exactly.Also along the same lines.There are variables in age,sex,cause of death,which is why one supposes the dogs can't be relied upon alone.

I don't really think the time that a body can be detected after death by the dogs that are highly trained for such a job really matters, but the fact they alert to cadaver in a very well trained dog is reason IMO to take very serious note of their findings, because they are pretty much always right. I think they are a very valuable means of assisting police in their work of investigating crime, and i have the highest regard for what they do, they are amazing animals, not just for detecting the deceased, but they are also used successfully for many other types of work as well.

Tony Bennett wrote:

TexMac wrote:

whatsupdoc wrote:Quote
After this week, Smithman will be the central focus of glamour-girl, Vogue-featured, 'I-paint-my-nails-to-impress-the-men' DCI Nicola Wall

I find that funny , Tony.

I find it disgusting - extremely sexist, and showing a dreadful bias and a total lack of respect for DCI Wall even before she starts her new role.
If we all want justice for Madeleine, shouldn't EVERYONE be 100% supportive and encouraging of DCI Wall?

...
And I stand by my comments about DCI Nicola Wall, which were not in any way sexist.
...

WMD wrote:

Joss wrote:

WMD wrote:
I've seen mentioned that cadaver scent can start after just 10 minutes,the trouble is,no one knows just how sensitive the dogs noses are and we have no way of telling exactly.Also along the same lines.There are variables in age,sex,cause of death,which is why one supposes the dogs can't be relied upon alone.

I don't really think the time that a body can be detected after death by the dogs that are highly trained for such a job really matters, but the fact they alert to cadaver in a very well trained dog is reason IMO to take very serious note of their findings, because they are pretty much always right. I think they are a very valuable means of assisting police in their work of investigating crime, and i have the highest regard for what they do, they are amazing animals, not just for detecting the deceased, but they are also used successfully for many other types of work as well.

I agree,but what I'm saying is the dogs can't be relied upon solely,Various timelines have been purported and unless or until someone says that the body was put there at such and such a time then there is no corroboration,or with out further forensics which hasn't been forthcoming so far.

Joss wrote:

WMD wrote:

Joss wrote:

WMD wrote:
I've seen mentioned that cadaver scent can start after just 10 minutes,the trouble is,no one knows just how sensitive the dogs noses are and we have no way of telling exactly.Also along the same lines.There are variables in age,sex,cause of death,which is why one supposes the dogs can't be relied upon alone.

I don't really think the time that a body can be detected after death by the dogs that are highly trained for such a job really matters, but the fact they alert to cadaver in a very well trained dog is reason IMO to take very serious note of their findings, because they are pretty much always right. I think they are a very valuable means of assisting police in their work of investigating crime, and i have the highest regard for what they do, they are amazing animals, not just for detecting the deceased, but they are also used successfully for many other types of work as well.

I agree,but what I'm saying is the dogs can't be relied upon solely,Various timelines have been purported and unless or until someone says that the body was put there at such and such a time then there is no corroboration,or with out further forensics which hasn't been forthcoming so far.

I think with the forensics they have already had on this case and the dog evidence, they could probably piece together a theory of Madeleine having died in 5A, and also with no evidence of an abduction it would also make that theory a more likely probability, and a stronger case for the prosecution. Cases have been prosecuted without a body successfully with Circumstantial evidence alone, and i think without all the political interference in this case, it would more than likely have already been through a Trial by now.

aquila wrote:
@Tony,

As a female, I didn't find your remarks sexist. Since when did being a relatively senior female police officer lead to an interview with Vogue? It's not professional, it undermines the role of female officers and to my mind brings the uniform into celebrity status. I'm surprised Nicola wasn't carpeted for that interview - well that's of course if the powers within the MET give a toss.

Theresa May with Kitten heels and a new head of OG with an interview about her femininity in Vogue under her belt arriving in PDL with long blonde hair not tied back.

Gawd help Madeleine. The media circus goes on and on.

WMD wrote:

Joss wrote:

WMD wrote:

Joss wrote:

WMD wrote:
I've seen mentioned that cadaver scent can start after just 10 minutes,the trouble is,no one knows just how sensitive the dogs noses are and we have no way of telling exactly.Also along the same lines.There are variables in age,sex,cause of death,which is why one supposes the dogs can't be relied upon alone.

I don't really think the time that a body can be detected after death by the dogs that are highly trained for such a job really matters, but the fact they alert to cadaver in a very well trained dog is reason IMO to take very serious note of their findings, because they are pretty much always right. I think they are a very valuable means of assisting police in their work of investigating crime, and i have the highest regard for what they do, they are amazing animals, not just for detecting the deceased, but they are also used successfully for many other types of work as well.

I agree,but what I'm saying is the dogs can't be relied upon solely,Various timelines have been purported and unless or until someone says that the body was put there at such and such a time then there is no corroboration,or with out further forensics which hasn't been forthcoming so far.

I think with the forensics they have already had on this case and the dog evidence, they could probably piece together a theory of Madeleine having died in 5A, and also with no evidence of an abduction it would also make that theory a more likely probability, and a stronger case for the prosecution. Cases have been prosecuted without a body successfully with Circumstantial evidence alone, and i think without all the political interference in this case, it would more than likely have already been through a Trial by now.

I've underlined the political bit,unless this removed then the case will never be solved.Wonder what Amaral thinks of the latest interviews.

Joss wrote:

plebgate wrote:Why can't people just get on with their jobs and not give a care about what men or other women think about them.   Why do so many "career" women feel they have to go on tv or give magazine interviews to tell us about their need to be seen as feminine or wear make up etc.

I couldn't care less whether she wears nail polish, has her hair flowing or wears 5 inch heels, get on with the job in hand is all I care about.    Do the best for Maddie end of.

TB has posted a good deal to be thinking about so let's hope that this thread is not going to be derailed because of a comment (his opinion) about the new Chief of the investigation.

I agree, it matters not what she looks like or how she competes in a mainly male oriented position, but it would of been more useful to write an article about her investigative skills as a DCI over the time of her lengthy career, and maybe a bit about her perhaps new approach in this very lengthy ongoing case of a missing little girl Madeleine McCann, and how she might hope to reach a conclusion into what happened to Maddie, IMO.