Re: Faith in Op Grange

by HelenMeg 30.03.15 10:48

Reply: This is back to the theories that (a) Gerry McCann was carrying his newly-dead daughter through the streets of Praia da Luz at 10pm on 3 May 2007 just as his wife and Tapas 7 friends were raising the alarm and (b) that the Smiths' sighting was genuine. As you know, I don't buy all his for one second

Admitting that the girl could have died in the apartment thus blowing away the abductor scenario

No I dont buy the theory that Gerry was carrying a newly-dead daughter around the streets either. But I am of the opinion that he carried a 'live' girl around the streets to give the abduction scenario greater credibility... hence for me, the Crimewatch showing the e-fits above GM's head was an encouraging move. Especially seeing the look of discomfort / horror on the MC Can faces

by Angelique 30.03.15 11:00

I have always held the opinion that this was a whitewash and stated this many moons ago.

When Cameron said it was to help the family and investigate the abduction it just confirmed my opinion. Everything seems to be going to plan. Even the length of time OG has run on, to the announcement that enough is enough, it's obvious to me that there is a strategy involved and everything is done "at the due time".

I find it very irritating that I can see the manipulation of the " public's perception" (as Tony states) but the majority of "the public" don't.

by **Tony Bennett** 30.03.15 11:08

HelenMeg wrote:Reply: This is back to the theories that (a) Gerry McCann was carrying his newly-dead daughter through the streets of Praia da Luz at 10pm on 3 May 2007 just as his wife and Tapas 7 friends were raising the alarm and (b) that the Smiths' sighting was genuine. As you know, I don't buy all his for one second

Admitting that the girl could have died in the apartment thus blowing away the abductor scenario

2nd reply: No. Redwood carefully made room for the scenario that Madeleine was murdered by an abductor who then fled with her body

No I don't buy the theory that Gerry was carrying a newly-dead daughter around the streets either. But I am of the opinion that he carried a 'live' girl around the streets to give the abduction scenario greater credibility...

2nd reply: A theory with zero evidence to support it, unless you count ONE of the two Smith e-fits as looking like Gerry McCann - with which I cannot agree

hence for me, the Crimewatch showing the e-fits above GM's head was an encouraging move. Especially seeing the look of discomfort / horror on the McCann faces

2nd reply: I didn't see any 'look of horror'. They did seem a bit more tense and nervous than usual, though. But why would they be 'horror-struck' or 'discomforted'? They had seen Exton's e-fits for well over 5 years, and had used the claimed Smith 'sightings' to their advantage for the same period...in the Channel 4 'Mockumentary'...on their website...in Kate's book...and so on.

The McCanns have nothing to fear from Grange. The Prime Minister said Grange was 'to help the family'. The official remit (dragged out of Grange by a series of FOI Act questions) was to pursue only 'the abduction'. The taxpayer funded the age-progressed image of Madeleine aged 9. Every single utterance by Grange, every single leak, has reinforced the message that we are looking for a girl who was abdcuted betweeen 9.10pm and 10pm on 3 May 2007.

To believe that all of this has been an expensive, cunning deception to catch out the McCanns may be no more than wishful thinking, however understandable that may be

by Doubter 30.03.15 12:14

DaSteelMan wrote:
aquila wrote:I'm still in camp whitewash.

Lot's are.

However no one can give credible evidence of whitewash based upon fact - only hearsay, feeling and insinuation.

It's the British way to be pessimistic, I understand that.

Could not agree more .

Great opening post by the way DSM thumbsup

by Liz Eagles 30.03.15 12:32

Doubter wrote:
DaSteelMan wrote:
aquila wrote:I'm still in camp whitewash.

Lot's are.

However no one can give credible evidence of whitewash based upon fact - only hearsay, feeling and insinuation.

It's the British way to be pessimistic, I understand that.
Could not agree more .

Great opening post by the way DSM

To say 'it's the British way to be pessimistic' is a bit of a cop out to a discussion when there is so much out and out reason to believe Operation Grange is not the real deal.

To label pessimism as a British trait simply doesn't cut the mustard. It smacks of 'always look on the bright side of life', 'the seven steps to successful (add your own sunny cause) etc to put across a positive opinion - and it's only an opinion. It's akin to saying 'my opinion is positive, keep the faith all you non-believers, OG is doing a grand job and is getting to the end game and will find justice for Madeleine'.

Operation Grange didn't even begin with a decent remit dedicated to finding out what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Pessimistic? No, realistic.

by HelenMeg 30.03.15 12:46

It seems we are still divided, as ever, on whitewash or no whitewash.

If any of us here were asked the best way to go about whitewashing this case - would we have managed it in this way? Making SY look complete idiots - announcing that the remit was to investigate an abduction only - not being seen to interview the TAPAS 9 etc . That is all stuff that is going to project WHITEWASH ... but if you were running a whitewash - would you not at least make an illusion that it looks like a serious investigation / review?

In other words - because it has the very appearance of an incompetent whitewash - it surely cannot be ..

by Liz Eagles 30.03.15 13:05

When did SY/OG ever say 'we are here to find justice for Madeleine McCann', when did Andy Redwood ever say that? He didn't.

What he did say was....help the parents, look into the abduction as though it had happened in the UK and then in TWO bizarre 'reconstructions' that bore little relevance to the disappearance of Madeleine took it to Crime Watch after a build up of weeks about a 'revelation moment'.

What followed was 'the big dig', 'hanging out of a helicopter', 'dogs from South Wales Police', the 'Alison Saunders CPS big meet with the Portuguese authorities' and many other things.

Operation Grange leaks like a sieve. Nicola Wall might be saying little but then again she doesn't have to say anything as the Police Confederation, the national media, the pre-emptive stuff written by senior police allied to Westminster and Missing People are all doing their damndest to close down OG and court public opinion to the conclusion in so many slimy ways.

I want to know what happened to this little girl. I want to know why, after all this money and expertise not a bloody thing of value has come to light.

by Doubter 30.03.15 13:07

aquila wrote:
Doubter wrote:
DaSteelMan wrote:
aquila wrote:I'm still in camp whitewash.

Lot's are.

However no one can give credible evidence of whitewash based upon fact - only hearsay, feeling and insinuation.

It's the British way to be pessimistic, I understand that.
Could not agree more .

Great opening post by the way DSM
To say 'it's the British way to be pessimistic' is a bit of a cop out to a discussion when there is so much out and out reason to believe Operation Grange is not the real deal.

To label pessimism as a British trait simply doesn't cut the mustard. It smacks of 'always look on the bright side of life', 'the seven steps to successful (add your own sunny cause) etc to put across a positive opinion - and it's only an opinion. It's akin to saying 'my opinion is positive, keep the faith all you non-believers, OG is doing a grand job and is getting to the end game and will find justice for Madeleine'.

Operation Grange didn't even begin with a decent remit dedicated to finding out what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Pessimistic? No, realistic.

But pessimism is good when it comes to certain things .

by Doubter 30.03.15 13:11

aquila wrote:When did SY/OG ever say 'we are here to find justice for Madeleine McCann', when did Andy Redwood ever say that? He didn't.

What he did say was....help the parents, look into the abduction as though it had happened in the UK and then in TWO bizarre 'reconstructions' that bore little relevance to the disappearance of Madeleine took it to Crime Watch after a build up of weeks about a 'revelation moment'.

What followed was 'the big dig', 'hanging out of a helicopter', 'dogs from South Wales Police', the 'Alison Saunders CPS big meet with the Portuguese authorities' and many other things.

Operation Grange leaks like a sieve. Nicola Wall might be saying little but then again she doesn't have to say anything as the Police Confederation, the national media, the pre-emptive stuff written by senior police allied to Westminster and Missing People are all doing their damndest to close down OG and court public opinion to the conclusion in so many slimy ways.

I want to know what happened to this little girl. I want to know why, after all this money and expertise not a bloody thing of value has come to light.

But no one knows what may or may not have come to light . Yet .

by plebgate 30.03.15 13:20

I think if anything of great significance had come to light we would have heard by now.

by Knitted 30.03.15 13:27

HelenMeg wrote:Snipped "would you not at least make an illusion that it looks like a serious investigation / review?"

In other words - because it has the very appearance of an incompetent whitewash - it surely cannot be ..

If you posed the question "Is the UK Police's hunt for Madeleine genuine or part of a cover up?" I suspect that the very great majority people wandering around any given shopping centre on any given day would say "Eh? Of course it's genuine the Police have been digging up everywhere to find her", (or something like that). So, for most people (which is what counts) Grange does indeed give off the necessary reassurances of being anything but a bona fide serious investigation/review, (albeit, now, an overly expensive one). Thus those who view Grange as a whitewash are very much the minority.

As it happens I have an open mind, but I do lean a fair way into the "something isn't right, somewhere" scenario based upon the seemingly restrictive remit. (i.e. If the obvious word 'crime' had been instead of the word 'abduction' I'd personally not be concerned by comments made in the media by who the Police might say are out of scope).

by Liz Eagles 30.03.15 13:32

Knitted wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:Snipped "would you not at least make an illusion that it looks like a serious investigation / review?"

In other words - because it has the very appearance of an incompetent whitewash - it surely cannot be ..
If you posed the question "Is the UK Police's hunt for Madeleine genuine or part of a cover up?" I suspect that the very great majority people wandering around any given shopping centre on any given day would say "Eh? Of course it's genuine the Police have been digging up everywhere to find her", (or something like that). So, for most people (which is what counts) Grange does indeed give off the necessary reassurances of being anything but a bona fide serious investigation/review, (albeit, now, an overly expensive one). Thus those who view Grange as a whitewash are very much the minority.

As it happens I have an open mind, but I do lean a fair way into the "something isn't right, somewhere" scenario based upon the seemingly restrictive remit. (i.e. If the obvious word 'crime' had been instead of the word 'abduction' I'd personally not be concerned by comments made in the media by who the Police might say are out of scope).

Oh Knitted, I'm agreeing with you...again.

by jeanmonroe 30.03.15 13:35

Doubter wrote:

But no one knows what may or may not have come to light . Yet .
=========================

"Miss!, Miss!, i know!, i know!. The 8 day 'dig' on the 'snail', in PDL, Portugal, by 29 full time cops/staff from the UK's elite SY/MET and other UK police forces, last year, found a single, tattered, SOCK, Miss"

"Excellent! GOLD star for you JeanM"

by Liz Eagles 30.03.15 13:39

jeanmonroe wrote:Doubter wrote:

But no one knows what may or may not have come to light . Yet .
=========================

"Miss!, Miss!, i know!, i know!. The 8 day 'dig' on the 'snail', in PDL, Portugal, by 29 full time cops/staff from the UK's elite SY/MET and other UK police forces, last year, found a single, tattered, SOCK, Miss"

@jeanmonroe thumbsup

by Guest 30.03.15 13:57

sar wrote:Post deleted

Is this comment helpful?

by DaSteelMan 30.03.15 14:29

sar wrote:Post deleted.

Unnecessary

by Liz Eagles 30.03.15 14:30

DaSteelMan wrote:
sar wrote:Post deleted

Unnecessary

Utterly revolting.

by DaSteelMan 30.03.15 14:36

I think I've put across my points of views to a deep extent throughout this thread, to the point that I would just be going around in circles.

I think we have all reached a limit to the information that's out there. I believe we are in end game and its just a case of waiting.

I am in a minority that it is not a whitewash and I accept that. I still have yet to see proper evidence to suggest a whitewash. Just insinuation.

Thank you for allowing me to get it off my chest.

by ChippyM 30.03.15 14:46

jeanmonroe wrote:Doubter wrote:

But no one knows what may or may not have come to light . Yet .
=========================

"Miss!, Miss!, i know!, i know!. The 8 day 'dig' on the 'snail', in PDL, Portugal, by 29 full time cops/staff from the UK's elite SY/MET and other UK police forces, last year, found a single, tattered, SOCK, Miss"

"Excellent! GOLD star for you JeanM"

.......but ....why does everyone insist only a sock was found? Surely an investigation does not reveal ongoing forensics results before the investigation is ended.

   The reports of a sock came from people observing the scene, not the police. How did the observers know what the objects were, they didn't analyse them!

"An item of clothing, believed to be a man's sock, was removed from the scene but was thought to have been ruled out of the investigation."            [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

    Why does everyone focus on this report from the media but ignore reports of other objects being removed?

From Martin Geissler , ITV who was also observing the scene,

" I understand police have unearthed "an object" at the new search site this morning, it's been sent away for analysis.'
" important to note that lots of "pieces of evidence" were removed from the first search area last week. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The police said after the searches "At this time no evidence relating to Madeleine McCann has been identified. However it has given us an essential understanding of the activity on and people that have used this piece of land."

Maybe the search of the snail was not to find evidence of Madeliene but evidence that someone had been on that land who said they weren't? Maybe it was to prove that someone carried out some kind of activity there or disposed of something there, whilst all the time that person is denying they were there?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

IF police wanted to build a case against a suspect/s but the earlier investigation had only ever turned up 'flimsy' DNA evidence
( maybe due to a crime scene being trampled through on the night of the crime and cleaned etc.) They would probably keep what they find in any dig or other activity quiet until they have all the evidence they need together to prove a case.
IF police were trying to prove a crime but are 99% sure they can never find a body, maybe the next best strategy is to prove beyond doubt that certain people were doing certain things which they have lied about in their statements?
To think OG would announce at intervals that they had found seemingly unconnected objects or DNA would be ridiculous but it seems many people are of the opinion that Grange not doing this means they have found absolutely nothing.

by Doubter 30.03.15 14:57

ChippyM wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:Doubter wrote:

But no one knows what may or may not have come to light . Yet .
=========================

"Miss!, Miss!, i know!, i know!. The 8 day 'dig' on the 'snail', in PDL, Portugal, by 29 full time cops/staff from the UK's elite SY/MET and other UK police forces, last year, found a single, tattered, SOCK, Miss"

"Excellent! GOLD star for you JeanM"

.......but ....why does everyone insist only a sock was found? Surely an investigation does not reveal ongoing forensics results before the investigation is ended.

   The reports of a sock came from people observing the scene, not the police. How did the observers know what the objects were, they didn't analyse them!

"An item of clothing, believed to be a man's sock, was removed from the scene but was thought to have been ruled out of the investigation."            [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

    Why does everyone focus on this report from the media but ignore reports of other objects being removed?

From Martin Geissler , ITV who was also observing the scene,

" I understand police have unearthed "an object" at the new search site this morning, it's been sent away for analysis.'
" important to note that lots of "pieces of evidence" were removed from the first search area last week. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The police said after the searches "At this time no evidence relating to Madeleine McCann has been identified. However it has given us an essential understanding of the activity on and people that have used this piece of land."

Maybe the search of the snail was not to find evidence of Madeliene but evidence that someone had been on that land who said they weren't? Maybe it was to prove that someone carried out some kind of activity there or disposed of something there, whilst all the time that person is denying they were there?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

IF police wanted to build a case against a suspect/s but the earlier investigation had only ever turned up 'flimsy' DNA evidence
( maybe due to a crime scene being trampled through on the night of the crime and cleaned etc.) They would probably keep what they find in any dig or other activity quiet until they have all the evidence they need together to prove a case. To think they would announce at intervals that they had found seemingly unconnected objects or DNA would be ridiculous but it seems many people are of the opinion that Grange not doing this means they have found absolutely nothing.

Thank you ChippyM you saved me a type out .

Nobody trying to build a case would give a running commentary and arm their suspects . Especially suspects that have a 'scenario bank' that can be called upon to explain away any future questions .

by jeanmonroe 30.03.15 16:05

Well, I ain't giving my GOLD STAR, back!

Not NOW, not EVER!

by HelenMeg 31.03.15 10:28

If this is, as many believe, a whitewash... could someone tell me what they anticipate happening?
i.e will OG finally announce that they are terminating the investigation for whatever reason? Any views on timescales?

It is going to be very diffcult for them to come up with a decent closing statement. Do you think they will 'give in' at an agreed time in conjunction with a similar statement from the PJ?

To me, it seems that if the did close it down it would be far more complicated than actually finding & revealing the truth

by jeanmonroe 31.03.15 12:06

will OG finally announce that they are terminating the investigation for whatever reason? Any views on timescales?
===========================================

They can't, imo, terminate the investigation, UNTIL they 'know' EXACTLY what the second 'tranche' of PJ 'released' files might contain.

Even they (OG) must have learnt 'something' from the first 'release' of PJ 'files'.

EXPOSING Stuart Prior, Leicestershire Police, supposedly, lead investigator, into Madeleine's 'disappearance', to 'infamy and ridicule'.

PJ: "We don't tell Stuart Prior anything, he is, in our opinion, here only to protect the McCanns" (owtte)

by Richard IV 31.03.15 14:45

HelenMeg wrote:If this is, as many believe, a whitewash... could someone tell me what they anticipate happening?
i.e will OG finally announce that they are terminating the investigation for whatever reason? Any views on timescales?

It is going to be very diffcult for them to come up with a decent closing statement. Do you think they will 'give in' at an agreed time in conjunction with a similar statement from the PJ?

To me, it seems that if the did close it down it would be far more complicated than actually finding & revealing the truth

Trouble is - many people like TB, Kiko, PeterMac have sent Operation Grange information with leads to follow up which cast much doubt on the Mcs story. They can`t just ignore these - they will have to explain why they didn`t follow them up surely. It`s tax payers money so SY are working for us and must justify their actions.

by **Tony Bennett** 31.03.15 14:54

Richard IV wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:If this is, as many believe, a whitewash... could someone tell me what they anticipate happening?
i.e will OG finally announce that they are terminating the investigation for whatever reason? Any views on timescales?

It is going to be very diffcult for them to come up with a decent closing statement. Do you think they will 'give in' at an agreed time in conjunction with a similar statement from the PJ?

To me, it seems that if the did close it down it would be far more complicated than actually finding & revealing the truth

Trouble is - many people like TB, Kiko, PeterMac have sent Operation Grange information with leads to follow up which cast much doubt on the Mcs story. They can`t just ignore these - they will have to explain why they didn't follow them up surely. It`s tax payers money so SY are working for us and must justify their actions.

@ Richard IV

Wishful thinking on your part, I'm afraid.

Despite all the bogus claims by Scotland Yard that this would be an 'open' and 'transparent' investigation etc. etc., at the end of the day the content of police investigations is NOT open to any disclosure of information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

So we may never know.

The police can refuse to allow any investigation of their actions, and in extremis, of course, they can 'lose' or destroy embarrassing evidence.

Oh, but hang on a tick...people have been writing to the IPCC demanding an investigation into Grange.

Now they could force the Met to explain its actions.

Let's hope, then, they will do their job...

by **PeterMac** 31.03.15 15:26

For what it is worth - probably not very much - I find some of the first post persuasive, and in alignment with some things I have been musing over.

by Guest 31.03.15 15:44

What if the bombshell was dropped in election week?

I don't think it will be because I'm still convinced it's a whitewash... but what if?

But if Peter is having second thoughts well...

by **PeterMac** 31.03.15 16:33

BlueBag wrote:What if the bombshell was dropped in election week?
I don't think it will be because I'm still convinced it's a whitewash... but what if?
But if Peter is having second thoughts well...

I don't think my thoughts add up to a hill of beans
but as has been reported several of us have been suppling Grange with arguments and evidence to show

The Last Photo is almost certainly a forgery, and very probably taken on Sunday 29th
The wind and weather conditions rule out absolutely any whooshing curtains
The wind and weather conditions rule out almost certainly the 'Last Photo's being taken on 3rd
The Dossier of Death was prepared - possibly not in its entirety - by Philomena, and she appeared on the Sky news bulletin - repeatedly !
Sedation of the children by an intruder is impossible

and so on.
It is a long list, and included a discussion of Tannerman and a refutation of his very existence. Redwood took that one up of course, but failed to bring out that this trapped the McCanns even deeper into what some might think is a conspiracy. He pretended that it opened out the 'window of opportunity' when in fact it closes it down 'ad absurdam'

by HelenMeg 31.03.15 16:41

One things for sure - we can have no faith in MSM:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

so I'm staking my faith in Op Grange to bring some results very soon.

by Guest 31.03.15 16:42

Most importantly -IMO- OG failed to find any evidence of the much trumpeted abduction

This is where the case rests

The McCanns will be branded to have been somehow involved in their little girls disappearance ad perpetuam

A sorry fate indeed, what with the Twins growing up in due course, poor mites