Re: Sky News - 6 months to find Maddie

by **Nina** 04.04.16 0:17

Verdi wrote:The above post is supposed to relate to this..

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

I've got this new laptop - we're not bonding. The damn thing is totally self controlled and ignores my instructions, I've never known the like. The cursor flits about nillywilly deleting here adding there, moving text around and it even finds stuff to add when I'm not looking - it's driving me bonkers.

You know what they say - a bad worker always blames the tools.

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 0:20

Tony...

Is it troublesome that we have different views/perceptions?

We see things differently but both our opinions are valid.

I continue to say that you may be right and I am willing to admit if/when I'm wrong.

It's interesting to see your perception of the comments on the graphic and appreciate you taking your time to comment.

Until I get some official 'news' about what the investigation contains I will continue to believe/hope that my perception of what I see is valid and carry on working with the timelines and facts from the files as you suggested. :)

I value your opinion as I hope (and think) you do mine.

Your areas of expertise are way above anything I could even contemplate knowing, so hopefully we can bring our own opinions/beliefs and give an opportunity for others to express and believe theirs.

I appreciate being challenged and being made to second guess myself but also hope that opinions are respected, as I respect yours and others on here.

It's never been a matter of whos right and whos wrong...its about looking at the issues and being able to freely express one's opinions regardless of whether others agree.

As you know, after studying the timelines for more than 4 years prior to creating the videos, I have many thoughts that to date I have never shared and some that have taken years to be recognised. I offer my opinions and the reasons for them and allow everyone to view them in whichever way they feel is appropriate for them however, I dont know that I'm correct. I just provide the info for others to form their own opinions

I can't expect people without the knowledge of all the timelines to understand and believe the various individual discrepancies, and in the same way your wealth of knowledge is not in place for me when I give my opinions on your areas of expertise, but I am not afraid to give my opinion and not afraid to admit to being wrong if/when the time comes.

Thats what I love about discussions and why I respect those that don't make judgements.

Thanks Tony for all you have input into the case.. We don't have to agree to have respect smilie

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 0:23

whodunit wrote:@Tony Bennett--"
8. ST bringing in 'RELIABLE cadaver dogs'? @ HideHo? Were Eddie & Keela not reliable?"

I missed this bit. What were the findings of these 'RELIABLE' dogs--as opposed to the unreliable dogs?

I was pointing out they used cadaver dogs so how could it be declared that they were unreliable... (no distinction about Eddie and Keela) it was just to note that the dogs ARE reliable

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 0:39

Verdi wrote:
Sorry HiDeHo but what the flippin' heck has this got to do with public opinion? I haven't a clue how things go on in your neck of the woods but I can't say I've ever heard of the proceeds of a police criminal investigation being guided by public opinion.

Just my opinion that in this case Scotland Yard cannot suddenly report the McCanns are guilty and I am still waiting to hear what they CAN prosecute the McCanns for.

That is an honest question. I have never been clear on that and would really like to have the answer.

Public opinion once UK public have read the files, is what I believe the McCanns fear the most, hence the effort to do all they can to prevent the UK from learning they exist, never mind read and discuss them.

Thats what they pay huge amounts of money for... To stop the media reporting on the facts from the files.

That is why I started the FB group where we focus only/mainly on the files and facts from quotes/interviews etc.

One day, whether the McCanns are charged or not, I believe that the UK with hopefully find out the details from the files and public opinion will change... This time they wont be able to change public opinion by using Hanover to win an award for changing public opinion from hostility to sympathy as they did in 2007.

With the help of the facebook groups (CMOMM FB group included) with approximately 100,000 members combined we are attempting to make that change as well as on this forum.

The UK needs to know the truth

We are all doing our best to make that happen.

Again, I would love to know what everyone considers to be the best they could hope for from Scotland Yard. An honest question.

by Mariita 04.04.16 1:22

I don't believe this has anything to do with how many or how few have read the files. So SY will finally, after 'enough' public awareness, change direction and turn their eyes on the parents plus friends? No, don't think that will happen....ever

by Guest 04.04.16 7:28

Mariita wrote:I don't believe this has anything to do with how many or how few have read the files. So SY will finally, after 'enough' public awareness, change direction and turn their eyes on the parents plus friends? No, don't think that will happen....ever

There has never been anything stopping them turning their attention to parents and friends.

It would be bog standard policing.

Something we have yet to see from the UK police.

by **Jill Havern** 04.04.16 8:15

HiDeHo wrote:With the help of the facebook groups (CMOMM FB group included) with approximately 100,000 members combined we are attempting to make that change as well as on this forum.

100,000 members?

You would think that 10,000 signatures for the Petition would be do-able as the link is shared constantly around the groups, yet only 2,387 have signed.

Order the Home Office to publish a report on the Madeleine McCann inquiry

Enquiries by British (and Portuguese) police forces have cost around £15 million in 8 years. The public is now entitled to a full report on how that has been spent. The report should cover the role of the government, the security services & UK police forces.

Madeleine was reported missing over 8 years ago. The Portuguese, Leicestershire, the Met & other police forces have spent huge amounts of time & money on the case, but there seems no prospect of further progress. Given the huge interest in the case, the public needs the fullest possible explanations and answers.

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

by **Tony Bennett** 04.04.16 8:26

HiDeHo wrote:Tony...

We see things differently but both our opinions are valid. Until I get some official 'news' about what the investigation contains I will continue to believe/hope that my perception of what I see is valid and carry on working with the timelines and facts from the files as you suggested

It's interesting to see your perception of the comments on the graphic and appreciate you taking your time to comment. I appreciate being challenged and being made to second guess myself but also hope that opinions are respected, as I respect yours and others on here. It's never been a matter of who's right and who's wrong...its about looking at the issues and being able to freely express one's opinions regardless of whether others agree. That's what I love about discussions and why I respect those that don't make judgments.

I value your opinion as I hope (and think) you do mine.

Is it troublesome that we have different views/perceptions?

Good morning Lizzie,

No it's not troublesome grouphug

I agree with all you say above. Despite the claims of certain others, robust debate and conflicting opinions have always been welcomed by Jill and her Moderators on CMOMM - but on the other hand, the forum also exists (as you say) for people to challenge the opinions of others if there is a basis for challenging them.

You wrote: "It's never been a matter of who's right and who's wrong..." Yes, but it absolutely matters what is right and what is wrong.

Either Madeleine was abducted, or she wasn't.

Either the dogs sniffed the past presence of a corpse - or they didn't.

Either David Payne and Kate McCann met at Apartment G5A at 6.30pm on 3 May - or they didn't.

And so on.

On the subject of Operation Grange, I think there are only two possible views:

A. It has always been a genuine search for the truth and OG has been bluffing the McCanns for 5 years by pretending to rule them out and pretending to look for an abductor

OR

B. It was, from the very beginning, an expensive charade designed to continue to influence public perception that this was an abduction - when it wasn't.

I take your point that we don't finally know.

But my reading of the runes differs from yours.

I remain in 'Camp B' as I did back on 11 May 2011.

That was 1,789 days ago yes

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 12:13

Lol Tony :)

Yes, you are right about whos right or wrong... I was thinking in relation to right now though... and who's right or wrong regarding how we all get along... (or something like that) laughat

At least I didn't spell it 'whose' winkwink

Regarding my stance on OG, as someone pointed out to me, they don't share my optimism but they share my standpoint as we don't know what has been happening in the investigation, who has been questioned, what has been asked etc

I will need to hear (in a direct quote from SY) what has been accomplished/not accomplished in the investigation before I make any assumptions. I'm not good at guessing.

by Mariita 04.04.16 12:40

HiDeHo wrote:Lol Tony :)

Yes, you are right about whos right or wrong... I was thinking in relation to right now though... and who's right or wrong regarding how we all get along... (or something like that) At least I didn't spell it 'whose'

Regarding my stance on OG, as someone pointed out to me, they don't share my optimism but they share my standpoint as we don't know what has been happening in the investigation, who has been questioned, what has been asked etc

I will need to hear (in a direct quote from SY) what has been accomplished/not accomplished in the investigation before I make any assumptions. I'm not good at guessing.

The parents and their holiday friends are no suspects - isn't that a direct quote from SY?

by Guest 04.04.16 12:42

BlueBag wrote:
Mariita wrote:I don't believe this has anything to do with how many or how few have read the files. So SY will finally, after 'enough' public awareness, change direction and turn their eyes on the parents plus friends? No, don't think that will happen....ever
There has never been anything stopping them turning their attention to parents and friends.

It would be bog standard policing.

Something we have yet to see from the UK police.

According to ex-DCI Andy Redwood, Operation Grange was to take everything back to the beginning and start afresh - therefore their first port of call would naturally be to investigate the parents and their friends. They had already taken two years to study the translated PJ files before commencing a renewed investigation, yet on the surface they chose to completely ignore the work undertaken by the PJ immediately following Madeleine's disappearance.

I haven't a clue what's been going on behind closed doors at the Belgravia incident room these past five years but I have seen information that has been put out out for public consumption i.e. Crimewatch, press coverage of their various 007'esque (non productive) trips to Portugal and the many up-dates of their latest whimsical lines of inquiry.

If the McCanns and/or their friends are the focus of their attention, why the need to publicize inconsequential e-fits of Mr. Nobody and spread abroad ridiculous stories about burglars etc.

Long and short of it is, UK law enforcement agencies have no jurisdiction over a case such as this so the whole fiasco is nothing but a total waste of time and public money. Unless the case is an element of something on a national/international scale that can take years to come together - considering some of the information contained in the PJ files, that is a distinct possibility but I doubt if Operation Grange would have been assigned to undertake an inquiry/investigation if that be the case. Only as a cover-up but that takes us back to square one.

by **Tony Bennett** 04.04.16 12:54

HiDeHo wrote:Lol Tony...Yes, you are right about whos right or wrong...I was thinking in relation to right now though...and who's right or wrong regarding how we all get along...(or something like that)

Regarding my stance on OG, as someone pointed out to me, they don't share my optimism but they share my standpoint as we don't know what has been happening in the investigation, who has been questioned, what has been asked etc. I will need to hear (in a direct quote from SY) what has been accomplished/not accomplished in the investigation before I make any assumptions. I'm not good at guessing.

12.13pm over here, either 6.13am or 7.13am over there, 'on the case' bright and early once again I see, Lizzie thumbup

Right, here's another challenge for you. You said you have no idea...

* what's been happening in the investigation
* who has been questioned
* what has ben asked
* what has been accomplished/not accomplished.

On the contrary. Let me answer you with a direct quote from a 2015 Guardian article;

QUOTE

In a statement, police said the vast majority of the work reviewing all the material collated since May 2007 has now been completed and encompasses more than 40,000 documents from UK and foreign law enforcement agencies, as well as various private investigation companies.

No arrests have been made, despite officers investigating 60 people of interest, taking 1,338 statements, collecting 1,027 exhibits and investigating 560 lines of enquiry.

The Met said it had investigated 650 known sex offenders in connection with the case, as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world, receiving 200 emails a week from members of the public.

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

UNQUOTE

Now, the above list of statistics excludes a number of other things that OG previously listed, e.g.

1. Examining over 10,000 mobile 'phone call records
2. Applying for mobile 'phone data from 31 countries
3. Applying for numerous rogatary interviews of suspects etc.

In addition to that, OG publicly named IIRC 11 suspects who were to be interviewed and, Lizzie, they even told us that each one would be asked a proforma list of IIRC 254 questions, one of which was 'Did you kill Madeleine McCann?"

Plus, as I said before, we have had paraded for us in the British press a smelly bin man, a tractor driver from the Cape Verde Islands, an OC bloke with duplicate keys, six men in a white van, and so on and so forth.

My point?

That we do already know a heck of a lot about this investigation.

And I stick by saying that all of this is elaborate window dressing, sheer smoke and mirrors, to create an entirely false impression that this is a bona fide criminal investigation. Was that Crimewatch programme in 2013 designed to find the abductor? No, no, a thousand times no. It was heavily marketed so that 7 million people watched it. The programme successfully reinforced public perception about 'the abduction'.

======

P.S. You wrote:   "At least I didn't spell it 'whose'..." winkwink

REPLY: Hmmm, my goodness, yes, that would have made things even worse

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 13:01

Mariita wrote:
HiDeHo wrote:Lol Tony :)

Yes, you are right about whos right or wrong... I was thinking in relation to right now though... and who's right or wrong regarding how we all get along... (or something like that) At least I didn't spell it 'whose'

Regarding my stance on OG, as someone pointed out to me, they don't share my optimism but they share my standpoint as we don't know what has been happening in the investigation, who has been questioned, what has been asked etc

I will need to hear (in a direct quote from SY) what has been accomplished/not accomplished in the investigation before I make any assumptions. I'm not good at guessing.
The parents and their holiday friends are no suspects - isn't that a direct quote from SY?

OG may very well have said that... BUT there are several lines of inquiry... so maybe not suspects in ONE line of Inquiry

Also... not suspects as of that moment... Does that mean they cant be suspects at a later date... They are not CLASSIFIED as suspects at that time..

Remember what happened before?

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 13:31

TONY wrote:P.S. You wrote: "At least I didn't spell it 'whose'..." [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

REPLY: Hmmm, my goodness, yes, that would have made things even worse [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

That was in reference to my recent incorrect use of that word that Tony corrected me on. English grammar was not my best subject and in preparation for my 'O' levels I was told to learn it parrot fashion...lol However, it has never stopped me, and I welcome being corrected. Thanks Tony smilie

Regarding this

TONY wrote:Right, here's another challenge for you. You said you have no idea...

* what's been happening in the investigation
* who has been questioned
* what has ben asked
* what has been accomplished/not accomplished.

On the contrary. Let me answer you with a direct quote from a 2015 Guardian article;

QUOTE

In a statement, police said the vast majority of the work reviewing all the material collated since May 2007 has now been completed and encompasses more than 40,000 documents from UK and foreign law enforcement agencies, as well as various private investigation companies.

No arrests have been made, despite officers investigating 60 people of interest, taking 1,338 statements, collecting 1,027 exhibits and investigating 560 lines of enquiry.

The Met said it had investigated 650 known sex offenders in connection with the case, as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world, receiving 200 emails a week from members of the public.

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

UNQUOTE

Now, the above list of statistics excludes a number of other things that OG previously listed, e.g.

1. Examining over 10,000 mobile 'phone call records
2. Applying for mobile 'phone data from 31 countries
3. Applying for numerous rogatary interviews of suspects etc.

In addition to that, OG publicly named IIRC 11 suspects who were to be interviewed and, Lizzie, they even told us that each one would be asked a proforma list of IIRC 254 questions, one of which was 'Did you kill Madeleine McCann?"

Plus, as I said before, we have had paraded for us in the British press a smelly bin man, a tractor driver from the Cape Verde Islands, an OC bloke with duplicate keys, six men in a white van, and so on and so forth.

My point?

That we do already know a heck of a lot about this investigation.

And I stick by saying that all of this is elaborate window dressing, sheer smoke and mirrors, to create an entirely false impression that this is a bona fide criminal investigation. Was that Crimewatch programme in 2013 designed to find the abductor? No, no, a thousand times no. It was heavily marketed so that 7 million people watched it. The programme successfully reinforced public perception about 'the abduction'.

YES!! You are right!

I have to admit to passing all of that off as only an effort to eliminate as much as possible so 'no stone left unturned' if ever there was need for the McCanns to use an 'unfinished' investigation as part of their defence.

They have SEVERAL lines of Inquiry and one of them has to be regarding the information about the McCanns...

THATS the part of the investigation (one of the lines of Inquiry) that we have no information on.

What they have looked at (or are looking at) regarding the events and statement contradictions of the McCanns and the Tapas7...and the dogs.... and the DNA etc etc winkwink

I passed information to SY that there may have been a car used by them during the week (no confirmation if it WAS used during that week) but the information WAS reviewed and accepted and entered into the investigation.

That little piece of info is not floating about on its own... Its there with all the OTHER info about the McCanns smilie

by noddy100 04.04.16 13:57

Doug D wrote:Good to see Tracey is always on the ball with her impeccable reporting and always gets it right!

19th September 2015:

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

3rd April 2016:

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

why change the spelling?

by Liz Eagles 04.04.16 14:41

noddy100 wrote:
Doug D wrote:Good to see Tracey is always on the ball with her impeccable reporting and always gets it right!

19th September 2015:

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

3rd April 2016:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
why change the spelling?

Yesterday's internet version of Tracey Kandohla's name in the Express was placed in caps and showed KANDOHIA.

You can't make this stuff up.

by comperedna 04.04.16 16:13

But that's exactly what they do...police, press and the main players... make the stuff up... and at our expense...sigh.

by whodunit 04.04.16 16:52

As far as we know, has SY ever done their own interviews of the McCanns or any of the Tapas group? If not, why not?

by Guest 04.04.16 17:07

Operation Grange - Official Remit..

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

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 17:34

whodunit wrote:As far as we know, has SY ever done their own interviews of the McCanns or any of the Tapas group? If not, why not?

We don't know...

So..

SY don't seem to have a good reputation and along with the possible political 'coverup' there is a belief there is a 'whitewash'.

Have SY ever had major and successful investigations?

As pointed out by Tony, the media/SY have given info about 'suspects' and activities digging in PdL. I see that as ultimately a POSITIVE as there can be no claims in any possible future defence that all lines of inquiry were not followed as well as it suggests the probability of NO abductor.

They claim the McCanns are not suspects, but that is non specific over a period of time as that could change at any minute or just be referring to ONE or so lines of inquiry. Have they ever said the McCanns have been eliminated from ALL their lines of inquiry?

Have they given ANY details regarding the McCanns?

Are they ALLOWED to give any details regarding the McCanns in the current investigation or is there something in place similar to the PJ investigation where they were (according to Goncalo Amaral) required to sign a confidentiality agreement...

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

I am not saying there is NOT a 'whitewash'. There is no proof and unless/until I hear something that confirms the probability I remain hopeful there is not.

Regarding the info about the CURRENT investigation, I can't make any judgement on what they have and haven't done regarding the McCanns as I dont know and as far as I know, none of us do.

I also do not know if they are sworn to secrecy about any line of inquiry that may refer to the McCanns.

I don't recall seeing anything to say they have been eliminated from all lines of inquiry...

I also have no idea when they close the investigation whether they can charge the McCanns for anything other than Fund Fraud.

All I am saying regarding Scotland Yard is that I DON'T KNOW and apart from the details Tony pointed out... DOES ANYONE KNOW?

by **Tony Bennett** 04.04.16 17:37

whodunit wrote:As far as we know, has SY ever done their own interviews of the McCanns or any of the Tapas group?

YES. They have >>>

1. Invited them, especially Kate McCann, to assist a forensic artist to draw up an 'age-progressed' sketch of Madeleine as she might look at around the age of 9 or 10. Kate McCann's input was said by D C I Andy Redwood to have been 'very helpful'

2. According again to D C I Redwood but also to the McCanns, the McCanns have been regularly briefed by the SY team and kept abreast of all developments, including Redwood's TV apperarances. The McCanns have often professed themselves 'satisfied' or even 'very satisfied' with the 'progress' being made by the SY team [even though that seems to be no progress at all], and

3. The McCanns and their team gave the BBC extensive assistance with the details of the 'reconstruction' used in the Crimewatch McCann Special of 14 October 2013, probably being able to have the final say-so over the script to be used. Though the BBC is supposed to be neutral, and is supposed to have 'investigative jourmalists on its staff, the reconstruction portrayed the events of that week in Praia da Luz in complete accordance with the McCann Team's script.

So @ whodunit, lots of interviews by SY with the McCanns, but not one of them likely to have been an 'interview under caution'.

That was never going to be likely given that on the day the SY Review was announced (12 May 2011), the Prime Minister's spokesman expressly stated that the purpose of the SY Review was, quote, 'to help the family'.

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 17:42

TONY BENNETT wrote:So @ whodunit, lots of interviews by SY with the McCanns, but not one of them likely to have been an 'interview under caution'.

That was never going to be likely given that on the day the SY Review was announced (12 May 2011), the Prime Minister's spokesman expressly stated that the purpose of the SY Review was, quote, 'to help the family'.

So what does he know winkwink

What are your thoughts regarding the secrecy agreement from the original investigation?

Could it be in place once again?

by **Tony Bennett** 04.04.16 18:04

HiDeHo wrote:
What are your thoughts regarding the secrecy agreement from the original investigation? Could it be in place once again?

Secrecy?!*?!@*?!!

One of the few things that I find truly laughable about Operation Grange has been the way they often trotted out, parrot-like, the phrase: "We are not going to give a running commentary on our investigation".

Yet we have had...

* numerous press releases and statements

* Redwood touring the TV studios

* Grange officers filmed collecting boxes from Metodo 3

* Grange officers filmed in helicopters and with pickaxes

* regular updates on how many documents have been studied (to the nearest whole number), numbers of suspects, mobile 'phones checked, rogatory letters issued, sex offenders checked out, lines of enquiry pursued, suspects interviewed (and their names given as well, even though they were not arrested), number of lines of enquiry pursued, statements taken, exhibits found and labeled...you name it - they've counted it! And told us

* regular leaks about a whole swathe of possible suspects

* their own hour-long TV show, provided courtesy of the BBC...

...there has never been an investigation in the history of this nation with such a constant running commentary being given

by whodunit 04.04.16 18:13

Thanks for your reply, @Tony Bennett.

I wonder how long the Home Office will keep up with these 6 months extensions? It's quite a good strategy if the intent is to prevent the McCanns from having to go out of pocket to find their 'missing' child.

by Guest 04.04.16 19:26

whodunit wrote:Thanks for your reply, @Tony Bennett.

I wonder how long the Home Office will keep up with these 6 months extensions? It's quite a good strategy if the intent is to prevent the McCanns from having to go out of pocket to find their 'missing' child.

I think quite a lot of dirty washing has been laundered since this masquerade hit the headlines in May 2007.

by NickE 04.04.16 19:40

I believe the main reason why the case is not solved after 9 years is that all focus has been on May 3 from start but I hope SY have lifted their eyes from that date and have rewind the tape to Sunday/Monday.
Even if they have become aware of these days there will be trouble I think, there´s lack of witness statements and observations from these days because no one paid any attention,all were fooled.
Iám still positive because there are people who knows what happened and they are the weak link and that link get weaker and weaker for every year.

IMO

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 19:48

I will just say that I don't know if it's a whitewash or how much jurisdiction SY have over the main part of the case regarding the McCanns being complicit, dogs, DNA etc. Fund?...maybe.

Unless/Until I hear that the McCanns are eliminated from all lines of inquiry or they were never included in the investigation, I'm not prepared to accuse SY of anything

What I am looking forward to is the PJ investigation, and of course Goncalo Amaral decision.

Can't wait for both of THOSE threads smilie

BTW...Thanks everyone for challenging me on my thoughts. I have always loved discussions with 'pros' as well for that reason. Makes me second guess myself or realise I'm wrong.

I have learned a lot from CMOMM discussions. Thanks Tony and Jill (I'm not going anywhere...just felt like saying that) laughat

by Guest 04.04.16 20:08

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

"I see that as ultimately a POSITIVE as there can be no claims in any possible future defence that all lines of inquiry were not followed as well as it suggests the probability of NO abductor."

That is not a possibility. The UK cannot prosecute in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the Portuguese authorities were, and still are, the primary investigative force.

I don't recall ever having heard of the accused using 'unfinished' investigation as part of their defence - I think the very notion would be laughed out of court. That aside, even if the scenario is a possibility, there is no way the McCanns can use it. When the case was archived by the Portuguese authorities back in the summer of 2008, the McCanns had every opportunity to contest the archiving process but they didn't do that did they? Instead they publicly expressed relief that their ordeal was over and the arguido status lifted - or so they thought + and more importantly still, the McCanns failed to fully cooperative with the Portuguese police during the official investigation + the remainder of the Tapas crew declined to assist the PJ by returning to PdL for a reconstruction!

"Have they given ANY details regarding the McCanns?"

Perhaps you can answer that as you said up-thread..

"They have SEVERAL lines of Inquiry and one of them has to be regarding the information about the McCanns..."

"What they have looked at (or are looking at) regarding the events and statement contradictions of the McCanns and the Tapas7...and the dogs.... and the DNA etc etc"

"I also have no idea when they close the investigation whether they can charge the McCanns for anything other than Fund Fraud."

As I said previously, Operation Grange is part of the Serious Crimes and Homicide Squad. Their initial remit was to coordinate all case documentation, including that of the dubious private detectives engaged by McCann Inc. (snort!) and to undertake an independent inquiry, which two years later turned into yet another official (for the want of a better word) investigation.

For the fund to be investigated by the Fraud Squad, it will first be essential to determine that Madeleine is no longer alive and that the McCanns and the board of directors appointed to administer the fund are aware that Madeleine is no longer alive. I don't think the Inc. are stupid enough to lay themselves open to fraud by way of this fund management - significantly why I imagine, they elected for a limited company rather than the more appropriate charity label.

Cunning. Not clever - cunning!

by Guest 04.04.16 20:36

Apologies for going off top for a moment but I had to chuckle.

I received a letter today from HM Revenue and Customs ~~asking~~ instructing me (shiver shiver shake and quiver) to verify something by way of an official declaration.

Not for them the landlord of the local 'Pig and Whistle' who's probably the most honest bloke you could ever meet. No, not for them some lowly, probably dishonest burly chavvy publican - they look to the more upstanding members of society, such as doctors, lawyers, police chiefs and such like.

Now where did I put that yellow pages directory, must be somebody in there that will verify a document for someone they don't know from adam - for a fixed nominal fee. Rats, Berty would do it for a pint..

by **HiDeHo** 04.04.16 21:25

Verdi, I don't always express what I mean correctly. :)

As mentioned I don't know what SY can prosecute the McCanns for or what they could achieve regarding the McCanns and the investigation thats within their jurisdiction. (Hence I'm still looking for an answer to what could they produce as a best case scenario when closed.

What I (maybe naively) meant was IF there was ever a trial in Portugal, then all bases have been covered, no stone unturned as I thought that maybe they would be able to claim that suspects were not followed up.

I'll stick to my timelines :)

Say 'Hi' to Berty from me :)