Re: Madeline McCann: Fresh cash lifeline in search for missing child

by **Tony Bennett** 19.09.16 16:15

bobbin wrote:
Now that BREXIT is on its way, will Brits be able to call upon the favours of the European Court of Human Rights anymore?

In one word, YES.

Britain is a member of the European Union. The European Union does NOT run the European Court of Human Rights.

The Council of Europe runs the European Court of Human Rights. We are not coming out of the Council of Europe.

[Having said that, the Conservative government has frequently made noises about coming out of the Human Rights Court. In the opinion of many, there are good reasons to do so. Many of its decisions make a mockery of the concept of 'human rights'. Decisions like:

* giving an illegal immigrant the right to remain because of his cat
* sanctioning illegal gypsy/travellers' camps to protect their 'right to family life'
* telling Britain that prisoners must have the right to vote
* allowing convicted murderers and other serial criminals to remain here because (allegedly) their own home countries wouldn't treat them very well if sent back.

And so on...]

by plebgate 19.09.16 16:53

The money would only be signed off if compelling evidence was put forward - when will the taxpayer be told what this compelling evidence is?

"
adjective: compelling
[list=lr_dct_sf_sens]
[*]evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way.

"his eyes were strangely compelling"

synonyms:

[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.], engrossing, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], entrancing, transfixing, mesmerizing, [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.];
informal[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"she gave a compelling and intensely dramatic performance"

antonyms:

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

not able to be refuted; inspiring conviction.

"there is compelling evidence that the recession is ending"

synonyms:

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

"he had no compelling arguments for changing the status quo"

antonyms:

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

not able to be resisted; overwhelming.

"the temptation to give up was compelling"

[/list]

by DENNISSALLY 19.09.16 20:27

According to certain people on Twitter last night, they are saying that they are waiting on the outcome of the Supreme Courts decision. If he wins then his book is correct. Some even went as far as saying that the Mcanns will be arrested as there are no other lines of inquiry only them. It was also said that they as in Mcanns have been investigated & SY know they are guilty. These are not my opinions am only reporting on what I read myself & they all seemed in agreement it's only a matter of time.

by Guest 19.09.16 20:31

willowthewisp wrote:
Hi Verdi,Not really,in fact.

I made my reasoning quite clear in my original response to BlueBag - I can't elaborate.

by Guest 19.09.16 20:38

DENNISSALLY wrote:According to certain people on Twitter last night, they are saying that they are waiting on the outcome of the Supreme Courts decision. If he wins then his book is correct. Some even went as far as saying that the Mcanns will be arrested as there are no other lines of inquiry only them. It was also said that they as in Mcanns have been investigated & SY know they are guilty. These are not my opinions am only reporting on what I read myself & they all seemed in agreement it's only a matter of time.

Well, if twitter says so then it must be.

I don't think the factual sense of the book has ever been in question. The McCanns original litigation against Dr. Amaral was for defamation and harming the search.

If there was ever any likelihood of the McCanns being arrested it would have happened late summer 2007.

Wouldn't it be miraculous and inspirational if twitter was right? Important to keep things in perspective wouldn't you agree?

ETA: Not digging you out DENNISSALLY, I know you said it's not your opinion. It just exasperates me when people spread this kind of nonsense around without a shred evidence to back it up. If people are in the know then put your money where your mouth is, otherwise bog off.

by Liz Eagles 19.09.16 20:46

The newspaper article surrounding this thread couldn't be arsed to spell Madeleine's name correctly.

by DENNISSALLY 20.09.16 0:38

I agree Verdi, it's very frustrating when there are no links to follow it up, but it would be just marvellous if twitter was correct.

by MayMuse 20.09.16 3:06

Carrry On Doctor wrote:Full article

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

"A Whitehall source had indicated funding would be approved if “compelling evidence that justifies the use of additional taxpayers’ money” was provided by the team.
A spokesman for the Home Office said on Friday: “We have provided the Metropolitan Police with the funding required for Operation Grange to continue until at least the end of this financial year."

If true, IMO it suggests an outcome likely to be a form of truth, rather than whitewash/archival.
Here's hoping.

A "Whitehall" source? That's a new one.
It's always a "source", doesn't anyone put their name to anything anymore?

Dave and Arthur the private eyes for the McCanns once said they had compelling evidence, as I recall, and apparently passed all their "material" over to the police a few years back... Wonder if they have now "reviewed" that?

by jeanmonroe 20.09.16 14:00

Verdi wrote:James Murray finger on the pulse as always..

SCOTLAND Yard’s inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a holiday flat in Portgual in 2007 will continue until at least April after Home Office 'approval' of new funding.

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

Sunday 18th September 2016

Financing for the four-strong team of officers working on Operation Grange was due to end in October.

But a fresh request, believed to be for a sum of around £100,000, was submitted to the Home Office as the deadline approached and has now been signed off.

A Whitehall source had indicated funding would be approved if “compelling evidence that justifies the use of additional taxpayers’ money” was provided by the team.

A spokesman for the Home Office said on Friday: “We have provided the Metropolitan Police with the funding required for Operation Grange to continue until at least the end of this financial year.

“The resources required will be reviewed again at this point.”

So far the inquiry into Madeleine’s disappearance from the apartment in Praia de Luz has cost £12million. At its height more than 30 officers were on the case.

Last month the "German Madeline McCann" was found 15 years after the girl's disappearance.

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

I despair .

It 'seems', with 'age', i've become a 'Sage'! (a profoundly wise person; a person famed for wisdom.... someone venerated for the possession of wisdom, judgment, and experience....or NOT!)

My 'post', August 24th 2016.

"Please Amber ~~Theresa,~~ marm, I want some more"

WHO is Amber Rudd..........the 'new' Home Secretary? (the 'Home Office' that 'funds', with taxpayers money, OG)

Amber Rudd has enjoyed a steep elevation in status from working as "aristocracy co-ordinator" on Four Weddings And A Funeral to running Britain's counter-terrorism efforts, police forces, and immigration policies.

'running police forces'......including the MET. ('investigating' Madeleine McCann 'abduction')

Amber Rudd (4 'weddings')----->Huge Grant (4 'weddings')----->Missing People 'fundraiser'------> McCan'ts.

Don't 'expect' 'our Amber' to 'rock the boat' regards to granting 'unlimited taxpayer funding' for OG, any time soon, imo.

The 'show' MUST go on!

Way 'too many' BIG 'NAMES', 'involved', from 'PM's' down, ('including' T May, now) to 'protect' now, for it not to!

jta: 'But a fresh 'request', believed to be for a sum of around £100,000, was submitted to the Home Office as the deadline approached and has now been signed off.'

A 'request' from Huge Grant, 'possibly'?

by **Tony Bennett** 22.09.16 9:39

I tried to access this link:

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

...but it didn't work. Has the article been 'whooshed'?

by Carrry On Doctor 22.09.16 9:40

Tony Bennett wrote:I tried to access this link:

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

...but it didn't work. Has the article been 'whooshed'?

Works ok for me Tony

by willowthewisp 22.09.16 13:30

Home Secretary,Amber Rudd has a number of " Share Dealings" in Off Shore accounts according to the latest revelations from the leaked papers that had alerted World Leaders resigning from positions of Power in that scandal,"we'er All in this Together"Conservative Government?

by Liz Eagles 22.09.16 13:37

I sincerely hope that the Limited company (No Stone Unturned) has not availed itself to off-shore banking from the plethora of advisors available. That would really be taking the piss.

by jeanmonroe 22.09.16 13:50

willowthewisp wrote:Home Secretary,Amber Rudd has a number of " Share Dealings" in Off Shore accounts according to the latest revelations from the leaked papers that had alerted World Leaders resigning from positions of Power in that scandal,"we'er All in this Together"Conservative Government?

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

'It can be revealed UK home secretary was a main player at company whose CEO was jailed over a false statement'

'reveals her involvement with two companies in an offshore tax haven, and another where her co-director was jailed for fraud.'

'one of her co-directors, Mark O’Hanlon, an episode that led the Department of Trade and Industry to investigate, and in 2007 O’Hanlon was convicted of making a false statement and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment. He was jailed again in June 2013 following an unrelated fraud conviction.'

When 'asked' Ms Rud 'said'...'Mark who? Mark O'Hanlon, you say? Nope, sorry, i've never heard of the geezer'

by willowthewisp 22.09.16 14:42

jeanmonroe wrote:
willowthewisp wrote:Home Secretary,Amber Rudd has a number of " Share Dealings" in Off Shore accounts according to the latest revelations from the leaked papers that had alerted World Leaders resigning from positions of Power in that scandal,"we'er All in this Together"Conservative Government?

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

'It can be revealed UK home secretary was a main player at company whose CEO was jailed over a false statement'

'reveals her involvement with two companies in an offshore tax haven, and another where her co-director was jailed for fraud.'

'one of her co-directors, Mark O’Hanlon, an episode that led the Department of Trade and Industry to investigate, and in 2007 O’Hanlon was convicted of making a false statement and sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment. He was jailed again in June 2013 following an unrelated fraud conviction.'

When 'asked' Ms Rud 'said'...'Mark who? Mark O'Hanlon, you say? Nope, sorry, i've never heard of the geezer'

Hi Jeanmonroe,thanks for posting the link to the Guardian articles,especially a Former European Leader and her failure to disclose who she(Kroes)had worked for under the European Rules Commission?
Perhaps Amber Rudd when asked do you know Mark O'Hanlon,Reply"I'm not going to comment on that" "Ask the Dogs",Sandra!

by jeanmonroe 23.09.16 11:34

Verdi wrote:Madeleine McCann fund given £100k of government money to keep search alive until April

Last year’s account showed just £746,152 was left in the fund and it was now believed to stand at just £480,000.

And the couple face paying £434,000 to Portuguese former police chief Goncalo Amaral’s lawyers after losing libel action.

It would leave the funds at just £46,000.

What search?

I agree about the 'non' search, by McCan'ts.

Just an 'aside',

Has ANY UK Madia journo (SERIOUS 'journo'?) 'questioned/asked', WHERE £266,152 has 'disappeared to/ gone to', FROM Madeleines 'fund', in little over 1 year, since 'last year's accounts' were 'published'?

Just 'asking'.

by jeanmonroe 04.10.16 0:48

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

Oh dear, Amber...........how very 'hurtful and unhelpful' this Mirror 'investigation' might be.

by jeanmonroe 06.10.16 12:38

Theresa May yesterday 5th October 2016 at 'conference':

The Prime Minister said: “If you’re a boss who earns a fortune but doesn’t look after your staff, an international company that treats tax laws as an optional extra, a household name that refuses to work with the authorities even to fight terrorism, a director who takes out massive dividends while knowing that the company pension is about to go bust.

“I’m putting you on warning. This can’t go on anymore. A change has got to come.”

She later added: “It doesn’t matter to me who you are. If you’re a tax-dodger, we’re coming after you."

“If you’re an accountant, a financial adviser or a middleman who helps people to avoid what they owe to society, we’re coming after you too."

“An economy that works for everyone is one where everyone plays by the same rules, so whoever you are you – however rich or powerful – you have a duty to pay your tax. And we’re going to make sure you do.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I 'suggest' TM 'takes a stroll' from Downing Street, today, to her previous 'department', the Home Office, and 'have a word' with her 'new' Home Secretary, Amber Rud, about 'tax dodgers, financial advisors and middlewomen' and what does 'our Amber' KNOW about dodgy tax 'avoiders and evaders'!

Watch out, Amber, Theresa MAY, or is that MIGHT (?) be 'coming after YOU'!

If we 'think' THAT will 'ever happen' we will all be living in 'la la land' with TM!