Outrage as yet more thousands discovered to have been jettisoned at Maddie inquiry

Outrage as yet more thousands discovered to have been jettisoned at Maddie inquiry

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

 A new disgrace in the €16.4 million police investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has erupted in the British media. It now appears that the Operation Grange ‘Maddie probe’ has involved the hiring of private investigators from firms that were actually being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office for “allegedly overcharging” the British government. According to a report in the Sunday Times, both firms were under suspicion of putting in bogus charges for the electronic tagging of released prisoners who were either “dead, back in prison or had fled the country”. One of the companies, G4S, has “since repaid more than €130 million to the Treasury” over the scandal, but it is still another low moment for the Metropolitan Police which has come under enormous criticism for spending so much money on the Maddie investigation over the past eight-plus years, without coming up with one single charge or provable theory. According to stories in the media today, “up to 81 officers from private security firm G4S were recruited to assist Operation Grange - even though at one stage 31 detectives were assigned to work on the case full-time”. G4S was also involved in Operations Yewtree, the Met’s child sex abuse inquiry, and Withern - a probe into the 2011 London riots. But it is the Maddie angle that has inflamed tabloid media, as it centres on the “failed” aspects of police investigations this far, and how much they have cost the British taxpayer. The information emerged as a result of documents obtained under Freedom of Information laws, explained the Sunday Times, quoting shadow police minister Jack Dromey as saying: “The public will be rightly concerned at the creeping privatisation of core police functions and that the policing of their communities is being increasingly handed over to private companies”. Where the revelations will leave the already “drastically scaled down” Maddie investigation is anyone’s guess. Here in Portugal, the PJ’s parallel investigation remains ongoing, although not exclusively focused on finding the British toddler who disappeared without trace from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in May 2007. As a police source told us late last year, the case has been “worrying, because in most cases where no-one is arrested or charged, we know what happened, we just can’t prove it. “But in this case, rigorously, there is no definitive idea on what happened. We don’t know a thing”. As Sky News Martin Brunt said on air last October, “it is a case of £10 million spent and nothing achieved”. Since then, the investigation’s total expenditure has increased, with the figure of €16.4 million due to be reached by April this year.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

FROM NATASHA DONN'S ARTICLE:

Portuguese Police source, 2016:   "There is no definitive idea on what happened. We don’t know a thing”.

Sky News chief crime reporter, Martin Brunt, 2015: “It is a case of £10 million spent and nothing achieved”. 

CLARENCE MITCHELL,  2010:

"It's a complete mystery".

==============

Despite the combined efforts of:

1. Portuguese Police force, ££millions
2. Leicestershire Police, over £500,000
3, Scotland Yard, £12 million and counting
4. Brian Kennedy
5. Metodo 3
6. Kevin Halligen
7. Henri Exton
8. Former Det Insp Dave Edgar
9. Former Det Sgt Arthur Cowley
10. A visit to Portugal by the current Director of Public Prosecutions and her Deputy
11. MI5
12. Control Risks Group
13. Special Branch
14. The former Head of the government's Media Monitoring Unit
15. Tens of thousands of newspaper headlines and articles
16, Dozens of in-depth TV interviews with the McCanns
17. The efforts of Jim Gamble and CEOP
18. Danny Collins
19. Donal McIntyre
20. A £2 million programme by BBC Crimewatch
21. Thousands of zany ideas from so-called 'psychics'
22. Hundreds of dud sightings
23. Two age-progressed images of Madeleine
24. Literally dozens of expensive lawyers
25. Millions of pounds raised by a generous British public -
26. And literally dozens of suspects, persons of interest and 'people we want to eliminate from our enquiries'...


ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

So many need paid in the 'Maddie Probe', especially the parents.

Tony Bennett wrote:FROM NATASHA DONN'S ARTICLE:

Portuguese Police source, 2016:   "There is no definitive idea on what happened. We don’t know a thing”.

Sky News chief crime reporter, Martin Brunt, 2015: “It is a case of £10 million spent and nothing achieved”. 

CLARENCE MITCHELL,  2010:

"It's a complete mystery".

==============

Despite the combined efforts of:

1. Portuguese Police force, ££millions
2. Leicestershire Police, over £500,000
3, Scotland Yard, £12 million and counting
4. Brian Kennedy
5. Metodo 3
6. Kevin Halligen
7. Henri Exton
8. Former Det Insp Dave Edgar
9. Former Det Sgt Arthur Cowley
10. A visit to Portugal by the current Director of Public Prosecutions and her Deputy
11. MI5
12. Control Risks Group
13. Special Branch
14. The former Head of the government's Media Monitoring Unit
15. Tens of thousands of newspaper headlines and articles
16, Dozens of in-depth TV interviews with the McCanns
17. The efforts of Jim Gamble and CEOP
18. Danny Collins
19. Donal McIntyre
20. A £2 million programme by BBC Crimewatch
21. Thousands of zany ideas from so-called 'psychics'
22. Hundreds of dud sightings
23. Two age-progressed images of Madeleine
24. Literally dozens of expensive lawyers
25. Millions of pounds raised by a generous British public -
26. And literally dozens of suspects, persons of interest and 'people we want to eliminate from our enquiries'...


ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

And despite the combined efforts of these two who found ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If only they read some of the threads on this forum, paid attention to the evidence, the official police files and the dossier of evidence that was handed to them on a plate, they may have solved the crime by now, and at very little expense.

Looks like the Met were not competent enough to take on the case.  We are going to have to spell it out for them, in black and white.

Having said that, in fairness, that old line that we see in every press report "Madeleine disappeared from her bed on May 3rd 2007" had most of us fooled for a long time - perhaps it's time to tell these bungling cops to look back towards April 29th

sharonl wrote:If only they read some of the threads on this forum, paid attention to the evidence, the official police files and the dossier of evidence that was handed to them on a plate, they may have solved the crime by now, and at very little expense.

Looks like the Met were not competent enough to take on the case.  

It was never an issue of competence.

It was an issue of direction - i.e. what Operation Grange was directed to do, via the 'abduction only' remit.

Career criminals and corrupt police officers, of which we know there are thousands in this country, are often highly intelligent, and certainly blessed with cunning, together with highly-honed skills of lying and manipulation.

I am sure for example that DCI Andy Redwood and DCI Nicola Wall are competent, i.e. more than capable of working out for themselves which lines of enquiry they really should have pursued in this case.

Should it ever transpire that Madeleine was not abducted, what will their excuse be?

'Only obeying orders'?

Tony Bennett wrote:

sharonl wrote:If only they read some of the threads on this forum, paid attention to the evidence, the official police files and the dossier of evidence that was handed to them on a plate, they may have solved the crime by now, and at very little expense.

Looks like the Met were not competent enough to take on the case.  

It was never an issue of competence.

It was an issue of direction - i.e. what Operation Grange was directed to do, via the 'abduction only' remit.

Career criminals and corrupt police officers, of which we know there are thousands in this country, are often highly intelligent, and certainly blessed with cunning, together with highly-honed skills of lying and manipulation.

I am sure for example that DCI Andy Redwood and DCI Nicola Wall are competent, i.e. more than capable of working out for themselves which lines of enquiry they really should have pursued in this case.

Should it ever transpire that Madeleine was not abducted, what will their excuse be?

'Only obeying orders'?

Spot on, Tony!

sharonl wrote:If only they read some of the threads on this forum, paid attention to the evidence, the official police files and the dossier of evidence that was handed to them on a plate, they may have solved the crime by now, and at very little expense.

Looks like the Met were not competent enough to take on the case.  We are going to have to spell it out for them, in black and white.

Having said that, in fairness, that old line that we see in every press report "Madeleine disappeared from her bed on May 3rd 2007" had most of us fooled for a long time - perhaps it's time to tell these bungling cops to look back towards April 29th

April 29th/ 30th sounds about right to me .

pennylane wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

sharonl wrote:If only they read some of the threads on this forum, paid attention to the evidence, the official police files and the dossier of evidence that was handed to them on a plate, they may have solved the crime by now, and at very little expense.

Looks like the Met were not competent enough to take on the case.  

It was never an issue of competence.

It was an issue of direction - i.e. what Operation Grange was directed to do, via the 'abduction only' remit.

Career criminals and corrupt police officers, of which we know there are thousands in this country, are often highly intelligent, and certainly blessed with cunning, together with highly-honed skills of lying and manipulation.

I am sure for example that DCI Andy Redwood and DCI Nicola Wall are competent, i.e. more than capable of working out for themselves which lines of enquiry they really should have pursued in this case.

Should it ever transpire that Madeleine was not abducted, what will their excuse be?

'Only obeying orders'?

Spot on, Tony!

Yes

Spot on, as always.

So Operation Grange wasted millions in taxpayers money, looking for an abductor that doesn't exist.  

Shouldn't they have at least reached the conclusion that no abduction took place, by now?  It didn't take us or the portuguese police long to work that one out and Moita Flores has already proven that the abduction was impossible.

Either Operation Grange knew that there was no abduction, in which case we have corruption, or the team are extremely naive.  

If corruption is the answer (most likely) where has this money gone?  No one is really going to search for something that doesn't exist, are they?

sharonl wrote:

pennylane wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

sharonl wrote:If only they read some of the threads on this forum, paid attention to the evidence, the official police files and the dossier of evidence that was handed to them on a plate, they may have solved the crime by now, and at very little expense.

Looks like the Met were not competent enough to take on the case.  

It was never an issue of competence.

It was an issue of direction - i.e. what Operation Grange was directed to do, via the 'abduction only' remit.

Career criminals and corrupt police officers, of which we know there are thousands in this country, are often highly intelligent, and certainly blessed with cunning, together with highly-honed skills of lying and manipulation.

I am sure for example that DCI Andy Redwood and DCI Nicola Wall are competent, i.e. more than capable of working out for themselves which lines of enquiry they really should have pursued in this case.

Should it ever transpire that Madeleine was not abducted, what will their excuse be?

'Only obeying orders'?

Spot on, Tony!

Yes

Spot on, as always.

So Operation Grange wasted millions in taxpayers money, looking for an abductor that doesn't exist.  

Shouldn't they have at least reached the conclusion that no abduction took place, by now?  It didn't take us or the portuguese police long to work that one out and Moita Flores has already proven that the abduction was impossible.

Either Operation Grange knew that there was no abduction, in which case we have corruption, or the team are extremely naive.  

If corruption is the answer (most likely) where has this money gone?  No one is really going to search for something that doesn't exist, are they?

Paid the wages of lead swingers, and meal/travel expenses.

MRNOODLES wrote:

sharonl wrote:

pennylane wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

sharonl wrote:If only they read some of the threads on this forum, paid attention to the evidence, the official police files and the dossier of evidence that was handed to them on a plate, they may have solved the crime by now, and at very little expense.

Looks like the Met were not competent enough to take on the case.  

It was never an issue of competence.

It was an issue of direction - i.e. what Operation Grange was directed to do, via the 'abduction only' remit.

Career criminals and corrupt police officers, of which we know there are thousands in this country, are often highly intelligent, and certainly blessed with cunning, together with highly-honed skills of lying and manipulation.

I am sure for example that DCI Andy Redwood and DCI Nicola Wall are competent, i.e. more than capable of working out for themselves which lines of enquiry they really should have pursued in this case.

Should it ever transpire that Madeleine was not abducted, what will their excuse be?

'Only obeying orders'?

Spot on, Tony!

Yes

Spot on, as always.

So Operation Grange wasted millions in taxpayers money, looking for an abductor that doesn't exist.  

Shouldn't they have at least reached the conclusion that no abduction took place, by now?  It didn't take us or the portuguese police long to work that one out and Moita Flores has already proven that the abduction was impossible.

Either Operation Grange knew that there was no abduction, in which case we have corruption, or the team are extremely naive.  

If corruption is the answer (most likely) where has this money gone?  No one is really going to search for something that doesn't exist, are they?

Paid the wages of lead swingers, and meal/travel expenses.

And trips to Praia Da Luz, staying in their top hotels - Mini breaks in exchange for photo shoots for Rebekah (set up the review or else) Brooks' media circus.  

Wasn't it also Ms Brooks who was accused of paying corrupt officers at the MET for information on other cases?

Known sources from the media empire of a certain "clan" have had an extremely close association for years of having supplied illicit payments to both serving and non-serving Police Officers for information on "individual suspects" in unsolved murder trials, notably the brutal murder of Daniel Morgan 10 March 1987.  You just need to check out certain names that have become known in the "hacking of phones" outcome and serving police officers' conduct?

I haven't been on the forum much, of late, as I have been busy with other things, so I don't know if this information has already been posted. If it has, can admins please move or delete?

Madeleine – 74,000 calls/texts – Matthew Oldfield

Page 13
Matthew Oldfield makes no contact before the alert is given. The first record of the three days is an SMS that he receives, from the number TMobileej (this value is unknown, however it is in the data base sent by TMN) for 22:45:05 hours of day 3.
The person with whom he contacts more is with his wife Rachael Manpilly, who, by 00:08:01 hours, of day 4 would be outside the radius of action of the antennas of Praia da Luz, or be with the phone off. This contact between the two appears only in Matthew’s records.
One of the situations that have any interest to emphasize is that he receives an SMS number 447958879879, by 00:08:12, day 4, which according to Vodaphone databases was in the UK. This number does not trigger the antennas of Praia da Luz, but contacts with numbers 447773335588, 447930535254, 44797018745, 447984763199, 447985111885, 447985609362, 447986976122, that yes activate antennas of Praia da Luz, some even on May 2, as is the case of number 447986976122 (first constant activation of the TMN database is on 02-05-2007, at 09:14:42 hours); and the number 447985111885 (first activation on 02-05-2007, at 13:04:46 hours). The other five only activate antennas of Praia da Luz on the day 4. These phones shall not contact each other.
In table 6 are registered the communications of Matthew Oldfield.
{Table 6 is at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
There are two pairs of overlapping phone calls on 3 May 2007at 22:51 and 23:06.

The comment about Rachael being out of Luz or having her mobile switched off seems odd. Perhaps there’s more in her phone analysis.}



Mobile phones

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I have now managed to gain sufficient experience of Windows 10 and bash Microsoft Edge into shape to be able to stop learning Microsoft and return to more productive endeavours. So it is time to think about what is on the menu.
As a background task, I am cross-indexing Kate’s book ‘Madeleine’ in a way that helps me to look it up efficiently, as I use it as a major source. I doubt that this will lead to any articles on ShiningInLuz, but one never knows.
I also want to get on with the Foot Luz series of photographs of relevant bits of Luz that do not show well or at all on Google StreetView. Essentially, that will make available a complete virtual visit to Luz, for those who are not able to make the journey personally.
Quite shortly, the time limit runs out re the information sent to Operation Grange concerning lists and sources of phone numbers of a historic nature in Luz. If Operation Grange remains uncommunicative, it will then be time to pass the phone numbers and the methods of harvesting more to the McCanns. At that time I will publish a sample of such numbers on ShiningInLuz, and explain how these can be used to break down the traffic around the time of Madeleine’s disappearance.
Staying with the 74,000 phone calls, now that this has been translated I want to return to the analysis conducted by Inspector Paulo Dias, to see if anything worthwhile can be taken from it.
I want to start thinking about what a guided tour of Luz for someone with a fair degree of familiarity with the case would cover, and the best way of doing it. This will be required for my visitor to Luz in Spring 2016. It will also be required if Operation Grange is shelved and a new team is appointed, to get them up to speed more quickly.
Hopefully, I can expand the Luz In Aspic series, covering establishments that were open then but are now closed. On that front I need to update my map of Luz that shows the facilities open in the immediate hours around Madeleine’s disappearance, as I am aware of a few issues with the last one I published.
There are two further tracks I am looking at that might or might not bear fruit, and until they do, there is no point in publishing and further information. My success or otherwise in these areas is limited by the ban on investigating a crime in Portugal, restricting oneself to discussion only, since I have no intention of breaking the law.
I will simply say on both tracks that these could be pursued legally and fairly easily by a person or persons located outside of Portugal, a factor which may be important if Operation Grange is shelved and the McCanns return to action.
And as a final note self, I need to re-index all the statements as my current one isn’t working well enough, and that is obviously going to be an elephant task.

The above information was taken from this link: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

There are a lot more links on the above link

Has the Pacifico Bar Golf Society ever been discussed on this forum?


Edited to add that I now have the answer to the question asked.

Hilarious: 38 officers, > 3year and they still needed help from outside?

They seems to gravitate to the same criminal "agencies" as the pathetic parents.

IMO PeterMac should have been asked to help (officially).

Of the 81 ex cops employed to help, how many achieved PeterMac's grade of Superintendent while serving in the police force?

AFAIK PeterM has sent in numerous documents and points of interest for info. to the official Met search and I believe it would be obvious that he has read most (if not all) of the released files over numerous years from the documents he has sent.

Who better then (IMO) than an ex Superintendent to ask for help with the ongoing case of Missing Maddie?

plebgate wrote:IMO PeterMac should have been asked to help (officially).

Of the 81 ex cops employed to help, how many achieved PeterMac's grade of Superintendent while serving in the police force?

AFAIK PeterM has sent in numerous documents and points of interest for info. to the official Met search and I believe it would be obvious that he has read most (if not all) of the released files over numerous years from the documents he has sent.

Who better then (IMO) than an ex Superintendent to ask for help with the ongoing case of Missing Maddie?

Can I ask where Peter Mac is? ........he is missed

Sophiebubbles wrote:

plebgate wrote:IMO PeterMac should have been asked to help (officially).

Of the 81 ex cops employed to help, how many achieved PeterMac's grade of Superintendent while serving in the police force?

AFAIK PeterM has sent in numerous documents and points of interest for info. to the official Met search and I believe it would be obvious that he has read most (if not all) of the released files over numerous years from the documents he has sent.

Who better then (IMO) than an ex Superintendent to ask for help with the ongoing case of Missing Maddie?

Can I ask where Peter Mac is? ........he is missed

He's busy working on several Maddie projects "behind the scenes" but will be back later.