Re: **NEW** Daily Mirrors, 18, 21 & 22 Apr - EX-DETECTIVE COLIN SUTTON IS ACTIVELY CONTRIBUTING TO THIS THREAD (was: Daily Mirror, 18 Apr 2017 "What REALLY happened the night Madeleine disappeared")

[Tony Bennett]

Colin Sutton has been online here for the past 30 minutes. Do join in the discussion Colin. And maybe give us the benefit of your wisdom aand experience... by telling us how many 'errors' you have found in PeterMac's 20 chapters of his FREE ebook.

PeterMac? Now there's an ex-detective whose work we DO respect




.

[oatlandish]

"2 TARGETED KIDNAP BY A TRAFFICKING GANG

This is the most likely scenario once those closely linked to Madeleine have been ruled out."


That is an important part of the quoted piece to keep in mind.

My view, as I gave to The Mirror, is that they have not been ruled out, either by the PJ or Op. Grange.  However the editorial slant given to what I said to the reporter has pushed this to the very back of the piece.

I have taken part in three pieces for the 10-year anniversary - the Mirror, the Australian TV film and the Sky TV film.  

The Australians never told me they had 'new evidence', I don't know what this is but I was asked about police procedures in these cases and not asked to give an opinion as to what actually happened.  

The Sky film will be, I hope, a much more balanced piece than anything else in the mainstream media.  I am sure you will have a view once you see it -as will I, as once again it has to go through an editing process, but in what I have recorded I have tried to deal with some of the inconsistencies, to point out that the Portuguese investigation was nowhere near as bad as it is painted, that the McCanns have nevr been eliminated and that Grange was too restricted either to do this or to have a meaningful impact on the case.

I am sceptical about abduction being the only valid scenario and will continue to be so.  In taking that view in the mainstream media, one is subject to legal and editorial restrictions which of course do not exist on a forum.  My choice therefore is either to give up and not take part or to do so and try to push the boundaries each time so that the concept of alternative theories can gradually be published more widely.  I chose the latter.  

I am cross that The Mirror piece has been adjusted so much that it gives precedence to a hypothesis which I don't feel is the most likely. It is the first time I have done this sort of work for that paper and this is an outcome which has not happened when working for others.  No newspaper or TV company has ever told me what conclusion I should come to and if they did I would run a mile.  Once I have told them what i think, though, I am at their mercy as to what they use and do not use.

I will remain interested in this case, remain a member of this forum and will be happy, after the Sky film airs, to take part in discussions with members about the film and the case.  

However - and I am no snowflake, believe me - I will not do so if people think it is acceptable to direct abuse towards me for what I believe or what I do.  I promise I will be polite and reasoned and I expect that in return.  That is reasonable is it not?

Colin.


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

A Moderator writes:  Great respect to you Colin Sutton for sharing your views publicly as you have had the guts to do just now. To members:  Please show Colin the respect he is entitled to as a fellow-member of CMOMM - and for which this forum has been renowned for the past 7 years and 5 months - Mod

[RosieandSam]

I have a printed copy of the 8-page pull-out in my hand (I didn't buy it ... honest Gov, I am staying with friends!)

I am trying to find the articles on line so that you know (for certain) what a load of rubbish has been spouted.

The Colin Sutton article is Page 4


Page 7 - article on Amaral (Title in printed version: Amaral is now a shadow of his former self .... and still utterly unrepentant)




Madeleine McCann cop utterly unrepentant after damning book blaming Kate and Gerry

Goncalo Amaral is a shadow of his former self but says he still has no sympathy for the parents of the missing youngster

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

• 23:00, 21 APR 2017
  
• Updated23:03, 21 APR 2017
  

Amaral is utterly unrepentant (Photo: Daily Mirror)
The graffiti on the side of the run-down apartment building reads “Foda a policia”. You don’t need to be fluent in Portuguese to figure out the expletive-laden translation.

This crime-ridden Lisbon estate is home to the ex-detective once tasked with solving [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]’s disappearance.
The past decade has not been kind to Goncalo Amaral, the former high-flying head of the Policia Judiciariac. He was sacked from the Maddie probe after criticising [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and making mistakes.

Amaral then penned a damning book pointing the finger of blame at her parents, Kate and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. He accused them of covering up her death and faking her abduction.

The couple sued, sparking an eight-year libel battle that the ex-cop has now won.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Amaral has published a book about the case  (Photo: AFP)

But the fight took a heavy toll on the dad-of-three, who is a pale shadow of the larger-than-life Portimao chief tasked with solving the case in May 2007.

In the early days, he was alleged to work just four-and-a-half-hours a day. Sporting a large beer belly, he regularly enjoyed three-hour lunches.

Amaral, 57, split from second wife Sofia in 2012, blaming the pressures of the case. He moved back to the tough Lisbon suburb of Olivais, where he grew up. His expensive suits and fedora are gone.

So too has the beer belly and chauffeur-driven Mercedes, replaced by a battered Citroen Picasso.

But the arrogance remains – as the Mirror discovered when we confronted Amaral last week.

He cruelly said he has no sympathy for the McCanns, who mark the 10th anniversary of Maddie’s [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]next month.
Amaral also refused to apologise for the mistakes that hampered the early days of the probe. Instead, he threatened to have our reporter and photographer arrested.

But it was his cruel refusal to offer any sympathy to Kate and Gerry that was the most damning.

The couple blame him for a string of errors at the beginning of the much-criticised probe. But Amaral, who resigned in June 2008 after a 27-year career, is unrepentant.

Asked if he would apologise to the McCanns for botching the probe, he said: “No”. He has previously accused Kate and Gerry, of trying to ruin his life. Amaral blames them for his decision to quit, giving up one third of his pension pot as a result.

Asked if he had any sympathy for them ahead of the 10th anniversary, Amaral replied: “No.”

He now spends his days writing crime novels and drinking pints in the Cabeca de Touro bar in Olivais.

One local said: “He used to be a big guy, a face, everyone around here knows him. Now he just blends in, he isn’t the big man any more. We all know about the Madeleine case. It was not good for him.”

It is a far cry from his time on the Algarve, when he was regarded as one of the country’s most dogged detectives.

But even when he was handed joint control of the Madeleine case in May 2007, Amaral was already mired in controversy.

He was under investigation for his role in covering up an alleged attack on the mother of another missing girl, Joana Cipriano, nine. Three officers were accused of beating a confession out of mum Leonor.

Joana’s body was never found but Leonor and brother Joao were convicted of her murder in 2005.

The three officers were cleared of torture but Amaral was convicted in 2009, after his retirement, of falsifying documents.
He blamed “political pressure” for the verdict and 18-month suspended sentence.

Later that year, Kate and Gerry began their legal battle after he penned The Truth of the Lie.

At one point, Amaral was so broke he relied on £50,000 in donations from the UK to defend the libel action. Some of it came from anti-McCann trolls.

Amaral was eventually ordered to pay £360,000 after Kate and Gerry won their defamation case in 2015.

But the order was overturned in April 2016, forcing the McCanns to appeal in Portugal’s Supreme Court.

Senior judges sided with him in February and their ruling angered the McCanns by saying they had not yet been proved to be innocent.

Lawyers for the couple lodged a complaint but judge Jorge Manuel Roque Nogueira dismissed it.


They may still decide to try the European courts but this is considered unlikely. Amaral is now set to sue the McCanns.


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

[Jill Havern]

"2 TARGETED KIDNAP BY A TRAFFICKING GANG

This is the most likely scenario once those closely linked to Madeleine have been ruled out."


That is an important part of the quoted piece to keep in mind.

My view, as I gave to The Mirror, is that they have not been ruled out, either by the PJ or Op. Grange.  However the editorial slant given to what I said to the reporter has pushed this to the very back of the piece.

I have taken part in three pieces for the 10-year anniversary - the Mirror, the Australian TV film and the Sky TV film.  

The Australians never told me they had 'new evidence', I don't know what this is but I was asked about police procedures in these cases and not asked to give an opinion as to what actually happened.  

The Sky film will be, I hope, a much more balanced piece than anything else in the mainstream media.  I am sure you will have a view once you see it -as will I, as once again it has to go through an editing process, but in what I have recorded I have tried to deal with some of the inconsistencies, to point out that the Portuguese investigation was nowhere near as bad as it is painted, that the McCanns have nevr been eliminated and that Grange was too restricted either to do this or to have a meaningful impact on the case.

I am sceptical about abduction being the only valid scenario and will continue to be so.  In taking that view in the mainstream media, one is subject to legal and editorial restrictions which of course do not exist on a forum.  My choice therefore is either to give up and not take part or to do so and try to push the boundaries each time so that the concept of alternative theories can gradually be published more widely.  I chose the latter.  

I am cross that The Mirror piece has been adjusted so much that it gives precedence to a hypothesis which I don't feel is the most likely. It is the first time I have done this sort of work for that paper and this is an outcome which has not happened when working for others.  No newspaper or TV company has ever told me what conclusion I should come to and if they did I would run a mile.  Once I have told them what i think, though, I am at their mercy as to what they use and do not use.

I will remain interested in this case, remain a member of this forum and will be happy, after the Sky film airs, to take part in discussions with members about the film and the case.  

However - and I am no snowflake, believe me - I will not do so if people think it is acceptable to direct abuse towards me for what I believe or what I do.  I promise I will be polite and reasoned and I expect that in return.  That is reasonable is it not?

Colin.


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

A Moderator writes:  Great respect to you Colin Sutton for sharing your views publicly as you have had the guts to do just now. To members:  Please show Colin the respect he is entitled to as a fellow-member of CMOMM - and for which this forum has been renowned for the past 7 years and 5 months - Mod

Thank you Colin.

I'm sure you could understand our dismay at what was printed.

What do you think of Eddie and Keela alerting to all things McCann that suggested Maddie died in the apartment, was transported in their hire car 3 weeks later?

How does that fit in with any other scenario?

And what did you think of retired Police Superintendent PeterMac's free e-book?

[oatlandish]

I have great faith in the abilities of these dogs in general.  On the handful of occasions I used (different) dogs operationally they were reliable in that they directed us to areas where forensic material was found.  I accept that dog findings alone are not evidential.  

One of the areas of this case where my understanding is lacking is what happened after Eddie and Keela indicated - how the material was then analysed and how it came to be discounted.

[Tony Bennett]

"2 TARGETED KIDNAP BY A TRAFFICKING GANG

This is the most likely scenario once those closely linked to Madeleine have been ruled out."


That is an important part of the quoted piece to keep in mind.

My view, as I gave to The Mirror, is that they have not been ruled out, either by the PJ or Op. Grange.  However the editorial slant given to what I said to the reporter has pushed this to the very back of the piece.

I have taken part in three pieces for the 10-year anniversary - the Mirror, the Australian TV film and the Sky TV film.  

The Australians never told me they had 'new evidence', I don't know what this is but I was asked about police procedures in these cases and not asked to give an opinion as to what actually happened.  

The Sky film will be, I hope, a much more balanced piece than anything else in the mainstream media.  I am sure you will have a view once you see it -as will I, as once again it has to go through an editing process, but in what I have recorded I have tried to deal with some of the inconsistencies, to point out that the Portuguese investigation was nowhere near as bad as it is painted, that the McCanns have nevr been eliminated and that Grange was too restricted either to do this or to have a meaningful impact on the case.

I am sceptical about abduction being the only valid scenario and will continue to be so.  In taking that view in the mainstream media, one is subject to legal and editorial restrictions which of course do not exist on a forum.  My choice therefore is either to give up and not take part or to do so and try to push the boundaries each time so that the concept of alternative theories can gradually be published more widely.  I chose the latter.  

I am cross that The Mirror piece has been adjusted so much that it gives precedence to a hypothesis which I don't feel is the most likely. It is the first time I have done this sort of work for that paper and this is an outcome which has not happened when working for others.  No newspaper or TV company has ever told me what conclusion I should come to and if they did I would run a mile.  Once I have told them what i think, though, I am at their mercy as to what they use and do not use.

I will remain interested in this case, remain a member of this forum and will be happy, after the Sky film airs, to take part in discussions with members about the film and the case.  

However - and I am no snowflake, believe me - I will not do so if people think it is acceptable to direct abuse towards me for what I believe or what I do.  I promise I will be polite and reasoned and I expect that in return.  That is reasonable is it not?

Colin.


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

A Moderator writes:  Great respect to you Colin Sutton for sharing your views publicly as you have had the guts to do just now. To members:  Please show Colin the respect he is entitled to as a fellow-member of CMOMM - and for which this forum has been renowned for the past 7 years and 5 months - Mod

Thank you Colin for your brave response. 

You have confirmed in writing above that the Daily Mirror has seriously misrepresented your views in their article. This means they are guilty of breaching the IPSO (press standards) Editors' Code of Practice.

A complaint to IPSO will be made.

This is what happened the last time I made a compliant to IPSO:

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

[RosieandSam]

Yes, great respect to Colin for explaining the process, just before I post what is on page 5 of the Mirror pull-out (juxtaposed with Colin's article on Page 4) without author attribute, therefore appearing to be part of Colin's article/hypotheis.

Article title in pull-out: WHAT HAPPENED TO HER

The on-line article is written by Paul Jollands who wrote Colin's article

The 5 main suspects in Madeleine McCann's disappearance examined as 10th anniversary approachesLittle Maddie had been asleep in the apartment with her twin siblings while her parents enjoyed dinner at a nearby restaurantByPaul Jollands


• 23:00, 21 APR 2017
  
• Updated23:29, 21 APR 2017
  
  

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

[jeanmonroe]

"At one point, Amaral was so broke he relied on £50,000 in donations from the UK to defend the libel action. Some of it came from anti-McCann trolls."
-----------------------------------------------------------

AND 'SOME OF THE DONATIONS' (£1,000) CAME FROM 'EX SERVING/CURRENTLY STILL SERVING' UK METROPOLITAN POLICE SERVICE 'OFFICERS'!

[Keitei]

I have great faith in the abilities of these dogs in general.  On the handful of occasions I used (different) dogs operationally they were reliable in that they directed us to areas where forensic material was found.  I accept that dog findings alone are not evidential.  

One of the areas of this case where my understanding is lacking is what happened after Eddie and Keela indicated - how the material was then analysed and how it came to be discounted.

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

The government have interfered.  Now Gordon Brown did visit FSS........

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


Could we also be losing sight of:

* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls with Dr Gerald McCann on his mobile 'phone in May 2007?

* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls in May 2007 begging the Portuguese authorities to release the description of 'Tannerman'?

* Gordon Brown's visits to the FSS in Birmingham Leicestershire Constabulary (September 2007)?

* Gordon Brown being 'phoned about Dr Goncalo Amaral's removal from his post even before Amaral himself was informed?

* Gordon Brown's conversations with Jose Socrates, Portuguese Prime Minister, in October 2007 about Madeleine McCann?

* The Home Office's obstruction of the Rogatory Letters?

* Leicestershire Police's delay of nearly 6 months in forwarding the statements of Drs Katarina and Arul Gaspar to the Portuguese Police? 

Many people continue to benefit from and have an interest in the maintenance of the 'Madeleine McCann Mystery'


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

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

It has been said that Martin Grime, dog handler, was met at Faro Airport by MI5 and it was requested that he "downplay" his report on the dogs findings. I do not know if this is fact.

See PeterMac's post on that thread here:  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[Keitei]

"At one point, Amaral was so broke he relied on £50,000 in donations from the UK to defend the libel action. Some of it came from anti-McCann trolls."
-----------------------------------------------------------

AND 'SOME OF THE DONATIONS' (£1,000) CAME FROM 'EX SERVING/CURRENTLY STILL SERVING' UK METROPOLITAN POLICE SERVICE 'OFFICERS'!

Copy here [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] together with another post & copy of their donation 

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

MPS -

MPS from an anonymous but very large group of Brit. police officers, outraged at the way in which an SIO has been treated. This strikes at the very basis of the way investigations whould be conducted, “Without Fear or Favour, Malice or ill will”. The world can clearly see where the malice and ill-will are in this case.

£1,000

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

P M

In memory of my mother, a Magistrate, who died last year. She brought me up to have proper values. At the moment this is the only way I can do the 'right thing'. Call me a Troll if you wish. When the great unwashed called Police officers PIGS they responded with "Yes. It stands for Pride, Integrity, and Guts." You, Sir, have those qualities.

£1,000

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

2277

richard board

Good luck to you..I am a retired police officer of some 13 years...Like many many others I have no doubts that what you say in the book is the truth. Support you all the way.

[Phoebe]

Any illusions which might have existed that the build up to the 10th anniversary were extraordinarily quiet or that the McCanns were in any way cowed by the Supreme Court statement must surely be shattered now. I suspect hatchet jobs all around from the Mirror to the Australian special to the Sky report alluded to by Colin Sutton. Team McCann has been in overdrive to smear all doubters and salvage, as much as possible, their reputation with the uninformed Joe Soap. The level of vitriol directed at Dr. Amaral now matches the worst level it ever sank to. "Beer belly, 3 hour lunches, the man with questions to answer over police brutality, fired from the P.J." etc. It is disgusting and won't have been helped by misrepresenting Colin Sutton's points or portraying Pat Brown (as I suspect they will) as an attention seeking conspiracy loon.

[Jill Havern]

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

Has anyone bought this to see what the Special pull-out is all about?
Who is the Top SY cop who is dissing the PJ again?

[Doug D]

Apologies to all. That's twice in a week I've been out & actually bought a paper!

Photo copies of the full 'Special Pullout' herewith. (Sorry I can't scan it).

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

[Jill Havern]

Thank you muchly DougD

I like your carpet

[RosieandSam]

Yes, I posted to say I have a copy.  I have been posting the page references and similar on-line articles so that everyone knows what is in the 8-page pull out.

Okay, I have found pages 6 and other half of 7 (the Amaral story is also on page 7)



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


The title in the pull-out is CLUELESS

There is no author given in the pull-out but it is attributed to information from Colin Sutton in the text



"Colin Sutton says some of the Policia Judiciaria’s errors hampered the investigation.

But he also said Portuguese authorities received unwarranted criticism concerning other aspects of the massive probe.

Here the ex-Met detective confronts the biggest errors made by the PJ – and defends other decisions they took."

The on-line author is, one again, Paul Jollands

[Jill Havern]

So, is the whole of the Special pull-out about Colin?

Maybe he can tell us what bits are true and what bits aren't?

[RosieandSam]

I have found pages 2 and 3


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

There is no author given in the pull-out but includes a photo of Colin Sutton in PDL

The on-line author is, once again, Paul Jollands

Also on Pages 2 and 3 (small insert article)

They are an inseparable pair say friends

matches with this on-line article:

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

----------------------------------------------------------------

Page 8 of the pull-out

We must never give up ..... but it may take a deathbed confession

Attributed to Colin Sutton in the text

Matches with this on-line article:

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

On-line articles both written by Paul Jollands

[RosieandSam]

So, is the whole of the Special pull-out about Colin?

Maybe he can tell us what bits are true and what bits aren't?

Other than the Amaral article by Martin Fricker, the rest is attributed to Colin.  It is an 8-page pull-out (as shown by Doug D above) so it is Front page and 7 pages of articles.  Only half a page on page 7 is NOT Colin Sutton.

Oh, and the little article at the bottom of Pages 2 and 3 is attributed to 'friends' and NOT Colin.

(I have only just finished cross-checking and finding on-line)

[sallypelt]

I have found pages 2 and 3


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

There is no author given in the pull-out but includes a photo of Colin Sutton in PDL

The on-line author is, once again, Paul Jollands

Also on Pages 2 and 3 (small insert article)

They are an inseparable pair say friends

matches with this on-line article:

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

----------------------------------------------------------------

Page 8 of the pull-out

We must never give up ..... but it may take a deathbed confession

Attributed to Colin Sutton in the text

Matches with this on-line article:

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

On-line articles both written by Paul Jollands

Not this Paul Jollands.............surely? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Such a "glowing" CV

[ChippyM]

Well Colin Sutton does say in one paragraph, the most likely scenario in this type of situation is that someone close to the child (friends/family) knows what happened.

It's rather overshadowed somewhat by the ginormous 'BOTCHED and CLUELESS' headlines next to Mr Amaral and the 'Top Ten favorite patsies of the last 10 years ' feature!   

I hope these Journalists will feel thoroughly ashamed in the not too distant future for their total bias and repression of free discussion.

[RosieandSam]

Yes, Colin is stated to have said that on page 4 (in his hypothesis about possible scenarios), but on page 8 it is contradicted:

"The ex-Scotland Yard policeman says there is no evidence the couple or their friends had anything to do with [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]’s disappearance from apartment 5A of the Ocean Club on May 3 2007. He says it will remain the biggest mystery of its time.

(..)

"The tragedy is I don’t think we will ever know what happened. When [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] finishes, and the indications are that will be in the next year or so, the case will never be re-investigated again.

“Whatever happened, it’s extremely unlikely Madeleine is still alive. That’s partly due to the huge publicity.

(...)

“Having said that, for as long as there is no evidence to say she is dead then the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]must continue.

“Investigators have to assume she is alive and fully re-investigate the case from that aspect. For Kate and Gerry’s sake they have to continue to believe she is alive somewhere.

“The trafficking scenario is the strongest line and needs to continue to be looked at."

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

[Jill Havern]

I have found pages 2 and 3


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

There is no author given in the pull-out but includes a photo of Colin Sutton in PDL

The on-line author is, once again, Paul Jollands

Also on Pages 2 and 3 (small insert article)

They are an inseparable pair say friends

matches with this on-line article:

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

----------------------------------------------------------------

Page 8 of the pull-out

We must never give up ..... but it may take a deathbed confession

Attributed to Colin Sutton in the text

Matches with this on-line article:

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

On-line articles both written by Paul Jollands

Not this Paul Jollands.............surely? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Such a "glowing" CV

To be fair he's published 33 articles since December 2010 with an average of 178 words

That many eh?

Heck Tracey Kandohla publishes more than that before breakfast!

[Jill Havern]

So, is the whole of the Special pull-out about Colin?

Maybe he can tell us what bits are true and what bits aren't?

Other than the Amaral article by Martin Fricker, the rest is attributed to Colin.  It is an 8-page pull-out (as shown by Doug D above) so it is Front page and 7 pages of articles.  Only half a page on page 7 is NOT Colin Sutton.

Oh, and the little article at the bottom of Pages 2 and 3 is attributed to 'friends' and NOT Colin.

(I have only just finished cross-checking and finding on-line)

So quite a lot of misrepresentation then.

[RosieandSam]

Page 2 of the MADDIE EXAMINED pull-out starts with an introdution to Colin Sutton.  It would appear that he went to PDL with Martin Fricker who wrote the Amaral article and harrassed GA to get some quotes.

I have typed out the introduction

Almost 10 yeears since Madeline McCann disappeared, police are nearer to finding her.

And the mystery remains just how the three-year-old could vanish from her family's apartment at a busy resort in the Algarve.

That awfu moment came on 3rd May 2007, as Kate and Gerry ate tapas with friends yards away.

Since then, an estmated £21.8million has been spent on the hunt for the youngster, whose 14th birthday is weeks away.

But there are no concrete clues as to Madeleine's whereabouts or what happened to her. 

Now the Mirror has enlisted a decorated former Scotland Yard detective to conduct a thorough case review.

Colin Sutton discovered a string of police blunders, conflicting witness accounts and missed opportunities in the vital early stages of the investigation.

Colin is no stranger to cracking difficult cases.

During his time as a Met Detective Chief Inspector, he nailed 13-year-old Milly Dowler's killer Levi Bellfield and serial 'nighstalker' rapist Delroy Grant, of Brockley, South London, who was jailed for life in 2011.

Dad-of-two Colin, 56, is retired and lives with his wife in Suffolk.  Here are his conclusions.

Reporting from Portugal by MARTIN FRICKER.

[Sceptic]

I think the clue to the source of this pullout and thefore its editorial bias is the fact that The Find Madeleine Helpline number is given for any information to help the enquiry.

There are no contact numbers given for Operation Grange or the Portuguese police.

This is in its majority reputation management

[Jill Havern]

Hmmmmm.......I've got my sceptical head back on.

[Sceptic]

I have great faith in the abilities of these dogs in general.  On the handful of occasions I used (different) dogs operationally they were reliable in that they directed us to areas where forensic material was found.  I accept that dog findings alone are not evidential.  

One of the areas of this case where my understanding is lacking is what happened after Eddie and Keela indicated - how the material was then analysed and how it came to be discounted.

Colin thankyou very much fo your honesty and clarification
May I ask in your experiance have you ever known as much money and resources spent by the family of a missing person on their own reputation management

[oatlandish]

Thank you all for returning this thread to sensible adult discussion. 

I can tell you how the Mirror piece was put together - I spent 2 days in PdL with Martin Fricker and a photographer.  I didn't, on this occasion, actually write anything - Martin interviewed me and we discussed the case and the possibilities of what had happened.  He had a list of these possibilities and I gave my view on them one by one - generically as well as how they might apply to this individual case.  I had nothing to do with the piece on Mr. Amaral; my personal opinion of it was that it was pretty unpleasant.

Most of what I said forms the 5 numbered paragraphs on the bottom half of page 4.  I didn't have any control over the relative prominence given to them, had I done so then point 1 would have had the greatest or at least equal prominence.

My views on the Portuguese investigation form much of what was printed on the bottom halves of pages 6 and 7.  Emphasis here on the criticisms is not mine - but we must I think accept that there are some valid criticisms to be made.  Equally I believe that we should not apply the standards we expect of British officers operating within the British culture and criminal justice system to those operating in a quite different context.

On the final page I did say that I believe that Madeleine is dead but that I understand that it is difficult for many to give up hope.  I said - as I believe - that there is/are a person/persons who know what happened to Madeleine and that I fear that now only information from one of them will solve the case.  This was written as "... if the culrprit makes a confession." Which is very similar but also can be read in a quite different sense.

Just to be absolutely clear, currently my overall position is this:

I do not know what happened to Madeleine.  I do not think the official investigations by the PJ or Scotland Yard have disclosed this either.  I have read a lot of hypothesising and logical thought by many different people - both pro- and anti-abduction -  with varying levels of experience and expertise. Much of what they say, much of the evidence which is available, can point to logical conclusions either for or against the abduction hypothesis. 

But the important point for me is that the accepted best practice in these cases is to ensure that the parents and those close to the missing child are eliminated at an early stage.  The good reason for this is that, statistically and experientially, they are most likely to be involved.  If the PJ tried to do this but could not and Operation Grange didn't actually try to as it was never a part of their remit, then I don't think it can sustainably be said that Madeleine's disappearance was investigated to the depth it ought to have been.  

Of course there are, sadly, some cases where the evidence is not to be found, where the best possible investigation will not yield the answer.  I am not convinced this case is one of those because I am not sure it has been investigated as thoroughly as it could have been.

[RosieandSam]

I think the clue to the source of this pullout and thefore its editorial bias is the fact that The Find Madeleine Helpline number is given for any information to help the enquiry.

There are no contact numbers given for Operation Grange or the Portuguese police.

This is in its majority reputation management

Well spotted Sceptic!

It says,

CAN YOU HELP?

Anyone with information about Madeleine McCann's disappearance should call the Find Madeleine Investigation line on:

0845 8384699
OR EMAIL
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

--------------------------------------------------

By the way ..... bottom of page 8 says

IN TOMORROW'S SUNDAY MIRROR MORE SHOCKING REVELATIONS

[plebgate]

Thank you all for returning this thread to sensible adult discussion. 

I can tell you how the Mirror piece was put together - I spent 2 days in PdL with Martin Fricker and a photographer.  I didn't, on this occasion, actually write anything - Martin interviewed me and we discussed the case and the possibilities of what had happened.  He had a list of these possibilities and I gave my view on them one by one - generically as well as how they might apply to this individual case.  I had nothing to do with the piece on Mr. Amaral; my personal opinion of it was that it was pretty unpleasant.

Most of what I said forms the 5 numbered paragraphs on the bottom half of page 4.  I didn't have any control over the relative prominence given to them, had I done so then point 1 would have had the greatest or at least equal prominence.

My views on the Portuguese investigation form much of what was printed on the bottom halves of pages 6 and 7.  Emphasis here on the criticisms is not mine - but we must I think accept that there are some valid criticisms to be made.  Equally I believe that we should not apply the standards we expect of British officers operating within the British culture and criminal justice system to those operating in a quite different context.

On the final page I did say that I believe that Madeleine is dead but that I understand that it is difficult for many to give up hope.  I said - as I believe - that there is/are a person/persons who know what happened to Madeleine and that I fear that now only information from one of them will solve the case.  This was written as "... if the culrprit makes a confession." Which is very similar but also can be read in a quite different sense.

Just to be absolutely clear, currently my overall position is this:

I do not know what happened to Madeleine.  I do not think the official investigations by the PJ or Scotland Yard have disclosed this either.  I have read a lot of hypothesising and logical thought by many different people - both pro- and anti-abduction -  with varying levels of experience and expertise. Much of what they say, much of the evidence which is available, can point to logical conclusions either for or against the abduction hypothesis. 

But the important point for me is that the accepted best practice in these cases is to ensure that the parents and those close to the missing child are eliminated at an early stage.  The good reason for this is that, statistically and experientially, they are most likely to be involved.  If the PJ tried to do this but could not and Operation Grange didn't actually try to as it was never a part of their remit, then I don't think it can sustainably be said that Madeleine's disappearance was investigated to the depth it ought to have been.  

Of course there are, sadly, some cases where the evidence is not to be found, where the best possible investigation will not yield the answer.  I am not convinced this case is one of those because I am not sure it has been investigated as thoroughly as it could have been.

Thank you for clarifying things and Thanks to Tony for letting us know that a complaint will now be made.   They never learn.