As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

by **Jill Havern** 19.08.16 7:13

As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

The Admin Team and I have been thinking hard about the impending closure, or suspension, of Operation Grange.

We all feel that we cannot let this moment go without a public protest being made by us on behalf of all the members of CMOMM, past and present, who have given so much time over nearly seven years in the search for the truth.

Probably nearly every CMOMM member and most guests here will fundamentally disagree with the government's and police's decision to investigate only 'the abduction'.

We plan to send an open letter to the Prime Minister and the Metropolitan Commissioner (and maybe to many others) making it clear what evidence the police should have been examining, and should now examine. And if any British police force is to spend any more time on this, we want the remit changed and not limited to 'the abduction'.

We want the letter to clearly put before the Prime Minister the evidence that the police should have been looking at.

And this is where I want your help please.

Please post up summaries of the evidence you think the police should now look at - forensic evidence, circumstantial evidence, photographic evidence - any leads at all which you think could lead to the arrest and conviction of those who are responsible for the disappearance of Madeleine.

In about four weeks' time, the Admin Team will review all the contributions and put before members a draft of the letter we propose to send.

Any help at all in compiling a schedule of evidence would be more than welcome.

Many thanks.

Jill Havern

by MayMuse 19.08.16 13:27

For starters;
Eddie & Keela "intelligence" & "findings"
The omitted answers from Kate McCann to the 48 questions initially posed to her by the PJ
David Payne & the Gaspar Statements
The anomalies in the book "madeleine" written by KM which by all account of the truth do not match their initial interview and stories?

Why & how can they "close" when they have not taken into account the above? they are glaringly obvious but sure there is much more to add!

by Guest 19.08.16 15:56

Not wishing to be a kill-joy but isn't this a rather ambitious project - admirable in principle, is it however a realistic concept? In my opinion this is a difficult area to broach, even though I totally agree with the desire to raise awareness and trouble the establishment by the knowledge that a sector of the international public are not prepared to be continuously hoodwinked by the UK authorities - would it perhaps be more advantageous to wait until Operation Grange is officially ended, or at least until further notification of it's intentions for the future. That might give the project more clout in the long run?

The UK authorities are only obliged to inform the public within specific parameters, it's common knowledge that they will only agree to provide information on any one issue if it's suits them so to do - otherwise they will hide behind all the clauses put in place for that very purpose. This has been proven in the past by the responses to FOI's; petitions; telephone calls; written communications - Tony Bennett's more recent letter to the Prime Minister by way of example.

That aside, although it's widely assumed that Operation Grange has only been working on the remit of abduction, there is no proof that I'm aware of to confirm that assumption. If forced into a corner they will of course deny that they have only considered and investigated the abduction theory, unless they can provide conclusive evidence that Madeleine was abducted. As much as I would like to think otherwise, the general public are in no position to demand anything from the authorities - they will always have a get-out clause at the ready.

Working from the outside in, so to speak, as the forum has been doing over the years seems to me to be a more powerful way of getting the message across, it's an acknowledged fact that the internet is monitored so I'm sure opinions about the case of Madeleine McCann are well known by now. If you work from the inside out, as proposed, by continuing with this project it won't force the authorities to be truthful - I don't like to think time has been wasted rather than put to better use.

In addition, opinions on this forum alone vary considerable onany one subject so the forum is not in a position to present itself as a united front in anything but justice for Madeleine McCann. Would it be preferable to re-think the mode of presentation if admin intend to proceed with this project? Not that I have any better ideas so don't ask 8-)!

Not very constructive I know but I can't see this as a positive way forward - I can't help but think it will expose the forum to ridicule.

sorry

by MayMuse 19.08.16 17:00

Can't think of a better time or solution to help to try and achieve some form of justice for Madeleine MCCann.
If we wait until OG closes then they can say ... The investigation is closed, finished and not answer/ignore? Stand to be corrected.
No matter which way you look it, this "investigations" it has failed Madeleine miserably and acutely.
The established remit of "abduction" was never intended to bring the truth and never could have...
How they can justify the collosal amount of funding spent only looking at the theory of "abduction" will never sit comfortably, ever!!!
Finding the truth of what happened to Madeleine was not in that remit!

Apart from what Amaral has been through to get to the truth for Madeleine, who has really been her advocate?

Reminds me of the saying if you don't stand for something you will stand for anything! Can't recall the author, but in this case there is a great deal of "standing for anything" going on except for those who have researched etc and seen through the lies; people (general public) on all counts who are complete strangers to Madeleine have cared more for her in seeking justice and truth than her own family!
IMHO

by MayMuse 19.08.16 17:07

A question that has always bothered me...
Who stood to gain from Madeleine's "disappearance" and who stood to lose?
And
How much money have the McCanns procured from her "disappearance"?
Not to mention through their daughter they are a "world wide" name?

There has been an "agenda" from day one!
IMHO

by bobbin 19.08.16 18:29

MayMuse wrote:A question that has always bothered me...
Who stood to gain from Madeleine's "disappearance" and who stood to lose?
And
How much money have the McCanns procured from her "disappearance"?
Not to mention through their daughter they are a "world wide" name?

There has been an "agenda" from day one!
IMHO

Does anyone remember the McCs being introduced to the EU Parliament re 'tagging' children or some such. Was this ever the agenda, a slow intro to getting all people tagged. A database of children and their movements of course would be valuable.

by Guest 19.08.16 23:26

MayMuse wrote:Can't think of a better time or solution to help to try and achieve some form of justice for Madeleine MCCann.
If we wait until OG closes then they can say ... The investigation is closed, finished and not answer/ignore? Stand to be corrected.
No matter which way you look it, this "investigations" it has failed Madeleine miserably and acutely.
The established remit of "abduction" was never intended to bring the truth and never could have...
How they can justify the collosal amount of funding spent only looking at the theory of "abduction" will never sit comfortably, ever!!!
Finding the truth of what happened to Madeleine was not in that remit!

Apart from what Amaral has been through to get to the truth for Madeleine, who has really been her advocate?

Reminds me of the saying if you don't stand for something you will stand for anything! Can't recall the author, but in this case there is a great deal of "standing for anything" going on except for those who have researched etc and seen through the lies; people (general public) on all counts who are complete strangers to Madeleine have cared more for her in seeking justice and truth than her own family!
IMHO.

If this is an indirect response to my observations then I think you've missed my point. I wish to make it perfectly clear that I cast no aspersions on the CMoMM team or members - this is not about high fives and back slapping, it's about the concept of the proposed project of compiling an extensive missive in the form of an open letter, questioning (as far as I understand it) various aspects of the past and present function of Operation Grange and how they've conducted their inquiry/investigation.

You say, I quote - "Can't think of a better time or solution to help to try and achieve some form of justice for Madeleine MCCann."

I'd be very interested to learn why you think this is the ideal time and/or solution to achieve some form of justice for Madeleine McCann. Rather than disrupt the purpose of this thread, I'd be happy to take it here for further discussion if you are willing to elaborate. It would be appreciated as I'm open to re-thinking my initial comments, given incentive..

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

Ta!

by MayMuse 20.08.16 8:39

Verdi wrote:
MayMuse wrote:Can't think of a better time or solution to help to try and achieve some form of justice for Madeleine MCCann.
If we wait until OG closes then they can say ... The investigation is closed, finished and not answer/ignore? Stand to be corrected.
No matter which way you look it, this "investigations" it has failed Madeleine miserably and acutely.
The established remit of "abduction" was never intended to bring the truth and never could have...
How they can justify the collosal amount of funding spent only looking at the theory of "abduction" will never sit comfortably, ever!!!
Finding the truth of what happened to Madeleine was not in that remit!

Apart from what Amaral has been through to get to the truth for Madeleine, who has really been her advocate?

Reminds me of the saying if you don't stand for something you will stand for anything! Can't recall the author, but in this case there is a great deal of "standing for anything" going on except for those who have researched etc and seen through the lies; people (general public) on all counts who are complete strangers to Madeleine have cared more for her in seeking justice and truth than her own family!
IMHO.
If this is an indirect response to my observations then I think you've missed my point. I wish to make it perfectly clear that I cast no aspersions on the CMoMM team or members - this is not about high fives and back slapping, it's about the concept of the proposed project of compiling an extensive missive in the form of an open letter, questioning (as far as I understand it) various aspects of the past and present function of Operation Grange and how they've conducted their inquiry/investigation.

You say, I quote - "Can't think of a better time or solution to help to try and achieve some form of justice for Madeleine MCCann."

I'd be very interested to learn why you think this is the ideal time and/or solution to achieve some form of justice for Madeleine McCann. Rather than disrupt the purpose of this thread, I'd be happy to take it here for further discussion if you are willing to elaborate. It would be appreciated as I'm open to re-thinking my initial comments, given incentive..

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

Ta!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It is in response to the proposed letter, I.E. timing before any "closure", of which I had already mentioned and nothing to do with any of your comments or high fives for anyone.
I was just supporting the "proposal" and gave some of my opinions for doing so, as it is unjust that "Madeleine McCann" can be allowed to fade into another case of a "missing" child with no resolution, especially after the millions spent in trying to find her. This case has not been the "norm" from day one, far from it and I think that the "establishment" ( at the very least) owe the public answers as to why so much evidence and intelligence appears to have been pushed aside.

by Michael99 20.08.16 12:55

Why not arrange a petition on GOV.site this has the advantage of guaranteed response if the numbers are reached, the wording is essential.

by willowthewisp 20.08.16 14:08

Michael99 wrote:Why not arrange a petition on GOV.site this has the advantage of guaranteed response if the numbers are reached, the wording is essential.

Hi Michael99,you could always start the "Petition" on the Government website of how to proceed with the wording on "your petition" if you are really interested in setting a petition up?

by Angelique 20.08.16 15:02

I think we should make a protest of some sort at least and what better way than by sending a letter to the "men in blue" at OG on behalf of Madeleine.

Although I don't adhere to the general view that interviewing the McCanns would clarify what happened to Madeleine I feel that after all our efforts and as MayMuse says, after all that Goncalo Amaral has gone through we should at least raise our voices against OG's obvious dismissal of Eddie and Keela's findings in the apartment, car and on clothing belonging to Kate.

by Guest 20.08.16 15:02

Michael99 wrote:Why not arrange a petition on GOV.site this has the advantage of guaranteed response if the numbers are reached, the wording is essential.

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

by Guest 20.08.16 15:29

Angelique wrote:I think we should make a protest of some sort at least and what better way than by sending a letter to the "men in blue" at OG on behalf of Madeleine.

Although I don't adhere to the general view that interviewing the McCanns would clarify what happened to Madeleine I feel that after all our efforts and as MayMuse says, after all that Goncalo Amaral has gone through we should at least raise our voices against OG's obvious dismissal of Eddie and Keela's findings in the apartment, car and on clothing belonging to Kate.

Unfortunately Operation Grange has been very economical with detail of their inquiry slash investigation. Not suggesting that is not normal when conducting a investigation into a serious crime in the UK, however, taking into consideration the public interest in this case (generated I think largely by the McCanns themselves); the nature of the case; the inordinate cost so far to the public purse and the authorities reluctance to be transparent when responding to FOI's, petitions etc - I agree that some positive response is not an unreasonable expectation.

The problem with the dog alerts is the fact that they weren't corroborated by forensic analysis and so become effectively useless. That is how I believe the authorities would respond if pushed, same with the clothing and Renault Scenic - I strongly suspect forensic samples have now been destroyed or lost in the myths of time. That is where Operation Grange has the advantage over us mere mortals - there is little or no information in the public domain as to exactly what Operation Grange has been up this past 5+ years.

Their initial claim was to collate all information appertaining to the case from the PJ files, the UK police files and private detectives hired by the McCanns (?); to then bring together and 'review' all the information in case something vital was missed, which covers just about every eventuality - a handy get out clause if ever there was! As I said before, they are not obligated to publish minute details of their review/investigation for public consumption, nor do I believe they ever will, even in the interest of transparency.

I'm sure Goncalo Amaral is continuing his crusade over yonder - that together with those working along side is, in my opinion, the only hope of seeing justice in the name of Madeleine McCann.

by Richard IV 20.08.16 17:58

I think there`s only one question that can be asked of The Met/Home Office and that is "What was your rationale for the word `abduction` in the remit and for Andy Redwood to claim the McCanns and their friends are innocent?"

How was this known at that time? Isn`t it rather daft to base an investigative review on what the prime suspects have told you?

But in reality I think Verdi`s thoughts on the matter are probably right.

by **sharonl** 20.08.16 18:29

They have spent millions following the McCanns line of inquiry and have found nothing. If we are going to start a petition I think it should be to keep Operation Grange open and to follow the official line of inquiry, giving the public answers and explanations for any official evidence that has been dismissed.

by willowthewisp 20.08.16 19:33

Get in touch with Rebekah Brooks to formally put Thersea May on the front page of the S**,oh you don't need to do that now Rebekah,she's the Prime Minister now,not dodgy Dave but cut from the same cloth?

by MayMuse 20.08.16 20:13

Another thing to add, where is the actual evidence of any "abduction" ?
OG have not produced any as far as I have seen; no matter how many "supposed" burglars were in the area?
Do they honestly think they can wind this up without full disclosure of their findings supported by actual evidence to justify an "abduction" & the millions spent, yet still have no clue as to what happened to Madeleine?
I don't think so!

To dismiss cadaver odour & blood where a child disappeared from & to declare any "innocence" of the parents without a " full" inquiry into their behaviour & lies is, in my opinion, dismissing Madeleine!
It seems that everything which has come to light over the years was not for Madeleine's sake, if ever it was!

As for the McCanns I have a sense they will breathe a sigh of relief with another running commentary of "thanks" for not finding what happened to their daughter!
IMHO

by Guest 20.08.16 20:44

As time passes it's so easy to forget that Portugal retain primacy over this case. I guess one can't argue with the UK's position as regards undertaking a review of the case once it had been archived in Portugal (although I think it was a bad move) but the subsequent investigation by Operation Grange was/is wrong - if not quasi illegal.

Scotland Yard strut around puffing out their chest and preening their feathers, telling the world how professional they are, how they are the only specialist unit on the planet that can solve a case like that of missing Madeleine McCann (wrong!) but their policy has always been - when things go wrong, blame Portugal!!! Broadly speaking, I think that is the line they will follow whether the case is shelved by the Metropolitan police or whether they continue to run Operation Grange on an empty tank. It should be remembered that whilst Madeleine McCann is the priority for venues such as this, she is not the priority as far as the UK establishment is concerned - she is hovering somewhere below zero on their scale of priorities. That is the insurmountable problem we are up against.

Unfortunately Goncalo Amaral publicly admitted that the PJ made mistakes, the UK authorities won't recognize that as human error or admit that no police department is infallible - no, they will capitalize on it and squeeze until there is no oxygen left to breath.

The Metropolitan police will never be forced to admit the truth! If the death of Dr. Kelly and the Princess of Wales can be kept buried - this as they say, is a doddle.

by Guest 20.08.16 23:52

MayMuse wrote:Another thing to add, where is the actual evidence of any "abduction" ?
OG have not produced any as far as I have seen; no matter how many "supposed" burglars were in the area?
Do they honestly think they can wind this up without full disclosure of their findings supported by actual evidence to justify an "abduction" & the millions spent, yet still have no clue as to what happened to Madeleine?
I don't think so!

To dismiss cadaver odour & blood where a child disappeared from & to declare any "innocence" of the parents without a " full" inquiry into their behaviour & lies is, in my opinion, dismissing Madeleine!
It seems that everything which has come to light over the years was not for Madeleine's sake, if ever it was!

As for the McCanns I have a sense they will breathe a sigh of relief with another running commentary of "thanks" for not finding what happened to their daughter!
IMHO

With respect, you're doing it again MayMuse - skirting around the purpose of the proposed missive by, sorry to say, stating the blooming obvious. As you know, this is not a fairy tale, there will never be a happy ending - that was foretold on the night of 3rd May 2007. Everything you say is true and reflects the consensus of opinion repeated over and over again on this forum but unfortunately that opinion has no impact of the UK authorities responsible for suppressing the truth behind the Madeleine McCann mystery.

One has to be realistic - making demands for information about this that and the other that occurs to the individual mind, will lead nowhere; it will only create further confusion and quite frankly, make a laughing stock of the whole lot of us - whatever our opinions. For example, it's no use isolating the issue of David Payne and his reported connection with the Gaspars - if the UK police are investigating a paedophile and/or child trafficking connection (the only possibility that could legitimately justify their involvement in an independent investigation in my opinion) then the information would be secreted.

If this venture is to proceed, to have any impact it needs to be confined to a global review (touché) of Operation Grange from beginning to end - no holes barred. There is little to be gained by probing issues that are but speculation/theory/opinion - call it what you will. The approach should adhere to what is known to be fact as far as possible, that's very little I know but I believe it's enough to draw an overall impression of the Operation Grange malpractice.

Again I say, the UK authorities are under no obligation to respond favourably to every question asked or issue raised, Freedom of Information Act or otherwise - if they want or need to withhold information by hook or by crook they will, you can be sure of that.

The proverbial thorn in the side however..

NB: I have confidence that Goncalo Amaral and his team in Western Europe in tandem with counterparts in and around here are the only chance for Madeleine McCann's memory. Even if (which I strongly suspect) the case never reaches a court of law, at least the filth behind the conspiracy might be exposed and Madeleine can rest in peace with the knowledge that people really do care.

by splurgegun 21.08.16 11:58

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't we have two live investigations ongoing in Portugal?

Isn't there a cold case review based in Porto?

And the investigation in collaboration with Operation Grange in Faro?

I'm sure Allison Saunders' visit was to ensure the lid stays shut on the Faro files but won't the Porto files be released eventually?

by willowthewisp 21.08.16 13:35

As Verdi has already stated,the"Establishment"will obfuscate with the FOI that people apply for and then use the Civil Service fine arts department to squirrel out reams of former woodlands,then simply say,it cannot be done on costs of over£50 per item of information.with regard to the Freedom Of Information Act Guidelines,set up by the Civil Service?
They must have been well versed to keep a pact of Silence by certain unknown person's and probably told to keep their"Private Life",very private with regard to what may have happened to the Missing Madeleine McCann!
There is too much information that has been disclosed to the public by former News Paper Editors on child abuse,what with the Mystery figures confiscating filmed evidence of the Guilty parties,Ex Police Officers who know,abandoned Pornographic material found on London Transport brought into the UK from Amsterdam,where they made the films with children from UK Care Homes?
Adverts placed in"Sparticus magazine"for meetings in Elm Guest House,Dolphin Sq and the PIE organisation actively targeting MP's Lords to lower the age of consent to procure sex to children to Ten Years of age!?
You have to understand that none of the"Members from Both Chambers" have/had actually indulged them selves into these depraved acts Committed to Minors and Scotland Yards finest have combined meticulously on many"Occasions" for evidence and have never found links to the"Right Honourable Members"?
The acts perpetrated on the Care Home Children, were figments of an overactive mind,exaggerating their feelings of being unloved,not wanted and were"Conspiracy Theories"to attack the very people who were caring for them?
Perhaps the MP's may put a special notice on Operation Grange,wrapped in tinsel,not to be opened for one hundred years,a bit like Dunblane Murders by Thomas Hamilton,Nothing to See here, Move along people?
CMoMM and it's members,alongside Mr Goncalo Amaral and his family will be there to carry on the Mantle, that is what the"Establishment Fear"the Truth of which they wish to keep hidden,under wraps?
To coin a phrase,"Where,Where,Where are the Abductors Gerry?,as you and your Tapas friends were checking every half an hour from 20.30 to the reported disappearance by Kate at 22.00 hrs, talking to Jez 21.25pm,yet Jane sees the Abductor at 21.15 after being sent by Kate to Hurry you Up,for what,meal going cold,like Robs?

by Grande Finale 27.08.16 2:42

12 million quid is a lot of money, but it has proved that there is absolutely no evidence of an abduction (not one atom of forensic material whatsoever for the money).

It's written in british law, that a police enquiry should look at ALL possible angles (even if evidence comes to light which helps a suspects case) OR the enquiry turns up evidence which may point to a persons guilt, (someone whom the police have previously thought of as innocent).

The same also applies to the crown prosecution service.

To not re-question the parents in a missing child case, having found no evidence of abduction, would amount to "misconduct in a public office".

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

by willowthewisp 27.08.16 14:55

Grande Finale wrote:12 million quid is a lot of money, but it has proved that there is absolutely no evidence of an abduction (not one atom of forensic material whatsoever for the money).

It's written in british law, that a police enquiry should look at ALL possible angles (even if evidence comes to light which helps a suspects case) OR the enquiry turns up evidence which may point to a persons guilt, (someone whom the police have previously thought of as innocent).

The same also applies to the crown prosecution service.

To not re-question the parents in a missing child case, having found no evidence of abduction, would amount to "misconduct in a public office".

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

Hi Grand Finale,Ref; Misconduct in Public Office,Sir Bernard Hogan Howe has chosen not to pursue any Misconduct in Public Office to the now resigned Assistant Commissioner Maxine De Brunner,as in his"Opinion"any findings do Not warrant "Misconduct In Public Office" against this fine former Assistant Commissioner,even though,Maxine was abusing her position granting £10,000 pound of Police Resources at her son's Private School,whilst implicating cuts to other departments at the same Time?

by **Jill Havern** 18.09.16 9:26

With the news today about Grange getting another £100,000 to prolong this case that has already been going for well over 5 years, I still intend to submit this letter very soon. This forum has important things to say and I still think that now is a very good time to act. Maybe it's an ever better moment, as we can be seen as reacting to this news.

If members would like to suggest any points you think should be raised with the Prime Minister and Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe then please post them here.

by willowthewisp 18.09.16 15:08

Get'emGonçalo wrote:With the news today about Grange getting another £100,000 to prolong this case that has already been going for well over 5 years, I still intend to submit this letter very soon. This forum has important things to say and I still think that now is a very good time to act. Maybe it's an ever better moment, as we can be seen as reacting to this news.

If members would like to suggest any points you think should be raised with the Prime Minister and Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe then please post them here.

Time to stop moving the Chess pieces,in this charade 14 moves at Check Mate is it?

by Ray_Sneek 18.09.16 17:02

Surely this investigation was doomed from the start by having a limited remit? I would suggest to the Prime Minister that they start again with an unlimited remit.

The following are all British and were all involved in those dodgy investigations: Brian Kennedy, Gary Hagland, Henri Exton, Dave Edgar, Arthur Cowley. Kennedy should be asked about why he appointed Metodo 3 and kept using them after the 'Maddie home by Christmas' fiasco. And why he created the bogus company ALPHAIG. Gary Hagland was an insider, an expert in money laundering for goodness sakes, working from Kennedy's house in Knutsford. He must know the internal secrets of the investigation. Dave Edgar is obviously dodgy because he said that Tannerman might be female. Arthur Cowley said he would take the McCann secrets to his grave. Henri Exton produced those two dodgy efits about which there are so many questions. There should be a new investigation and their first 5 lines of enquiry should be to interview the above five under caution of perverting the course of justice and extracting from them the truth about what they were all really up to.

Plus there are so many questions about the Find Madeleine Fund that the police should seize its bank accounts and 'follow the money'.

by sallypelt 18.09.16 21:43

Has Operation Hydrant ever been discussed on this Forum?

by **Tony Bennett** 18.09.16 22:29

sallypelt wrote:Has Operation Hydrant ever been discussed on this Forum?

@ sallypelt      A very good question, though somewhat off topic for this thread, I fear.

Funnily enough, only a few days ago one of Les Balkwell's contacts spoke to me about Simon Bailey, Chief Constable of Norfolk Police, who heads up Operation Hydrant. The person raised questions as to Mr Bailey's impartiality and suitability for his job, which involves a kind of supremo, umbrella role over all the various child sexual abuse operations going on at the moment. In other words, it is a very powerful position.

If you look at this article in the Guardian from 2014, you'll probably see why some people are concerned:

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

Top police officer: many viewing child abuse images should be treated on NHS

Norfolk chief constable Simon Bailey believes thousands on police database ‘pose no threat’ and don’t belong in prison

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

Norfolk chief constable Simon Bailey, also the Association of Chief Police Officers’ lead on child protection and abuse investigations. Photograph: Martin Godwin

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

Friday 5 December 2014 06.00 GMT

Thousands who view child abuse images online should be treated as patients by the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] rather than sent to prison because they pose no threat to children, says one of Britain’s leading police officers.

In an interview with the Guardian, Simon Bailey, chief constable of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] police and the Association of Chief Police Officers’ (Acpo) lead on child protection and abuse investigations, said that while police had a database of 50,000 people who regularly viewed indecent images of children, research suggested not all were an immediate threat.

“What academic research would say is between 16% and 50% of those people who have viewed indecent images of children are then likely to be ‘contact abusers’ [of children]. That can be as high as 25,000 or as low as 8,000. [This group] poses a threat,” he said. However, the remaining group of child sex offenders – who are committing a crime by viewing the material online – are “non-contact abusers” who Bailey says do not “need to come into the criminal justice system in terms of being put forward before a court”.

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

He added: “We have to think about an alternative solution. [We] need to engage with service providers from mental health and the health service to work with us to say these people need help.”

The new approach provoked a debate among child protection experts and health professionals over whether the police were in effect decriminalising child sex offences at a time when online abuse appears to be increasing.

David Cameron will call next week for further controls over child abuse images. There are thought to be more than 100m of them in circulation on the web, up from 7,000 in 1990.

Admitting the new strategy appeared “a very unpalatable response from a senior police officer,” Bailey said the decision to give priority to active paedophiles rather than browsers of images that include the rape and torture of children was “based on realism ... it is based upon the fact there will be a significant number of those people who will simply not go on to contact abuse.”

This week a doctor, Myles Bradbury, was jailed for 22 years for “grotesque” abuse of 18 vulnerable children in his care. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] in Canada had told their British counterparts he was buying indecent images of children on the internet, but UK investigators failed to act for 14 months, classifying him as low risk.

The new strategy, which is being implemented by police forces and Ceop, the child exploitation and online protection command of the National [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Agency, is a reversal of official thinking which has until now been that “anyone who possesses [images] poses a risk of committing contact sexual offences against children”.

Some have welcomed the shift. Jackie Craissati, fellow of the British Psychological Society and clinical and forensic director at an NHS trust, told the Guardian her reading of recent studies suggests 25% to 33% of web users of child abuse imagery should be “worried about”. She said: “A much larger group have nothing to suggest they are unconnected sex offenders.” Craissati welcomed the move to seek help from mental health specialists, but warned it would not be easy to get the NHS to engage with child sex offenders.

“First, if they had children, social services would have something to say about whether their kids could stay with them. Second, we are a long way off the NHS being comfortable about saying it is the health service’s job to treat these people. Third, the therapy is only effective for serious deviance. If you aren’t a problem then it does not work.”

Others were sharply critical. Jim Gamble, a former head of Ceop and now safeguarding chair for City of London and Hackney, said there had always been an academic debate about what proportion of men who download explicit sexual images of children also molest them.
He said it was conclusively answered by a 2008 US study of convicted web child sex abuse offenders which revealed 85% had admitted when taking lie detector tests that they had committed previously unacknowledged acts of sexual abuse against children, including rape.

“This is a gimmick by the police. It’s a nonsense. [Paedophiles] are manipulative and lie. They try to convince everyone else they are normal.

But they are not. They are upstairs in their bedrooms looking at pictures of child rape. The youngest child in these images I saw when I ran Ceop had an umbilical cord. I would ask these academics who think people who are viewing this stuff are OK if they would let these guys babysit their daughter or grandchildren.”

Bailey rebutted the idea that the police had “gone soft” on child sex crime, pointing out that in the 12 months since October last year 715 people had been arrested for possession of indecent images – the largest single haul in Ceop history. Last year fewer than 200 people were arrested.

He said: “We are at the beginning of a journey. That is why [Ceop boss] Johnny Gwynn and I are driving this agenda and starting to tackle the threat posed. The figures bear it out.”

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

So, a year after the Guardian published this interview with Chief Constable Simon Bailey, guess who was appointed by the government to head up Operation Hydrant?!

ETA:   I don't think this has been discussed on the forum. I will see if I can transfer this post to the 'News - Have Your Say' section and open an Operation Hydrant thread there.

ETA2:   And to bring this back swiftly on topic, although no British police officer could compel Julian Peribanez to be interviewed in caution, judging by what we read in Chapter 13 of his book, on this forum, about the dark and corrupt dealings of Metodo 3 and its boss Francisco Marco, I think we should inform the Prime Minister that he might well hold vital information about how genuine their search for Madeleine really was.

As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Operation Grange

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Ref;as operation grange is near to closure.

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Ref;as operation grange is near to closure.

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

As Operation Grange closes down

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Ref;Madeleine McCann

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Re: As Operation Grange heads for closure - a letter to be sent to the Prime Minister by CMOMM - please contribute

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Latest topics