Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: British Police / Government Interference :: 'Operation Grange' set up by ex-Prime Minister David Cameron
Page 1 of 1 • Share
Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Colin
I've started this thread so that members can ask you questions.
I ask that this thread is kept polite and unchallenging.
I will start by asking you this please:
What evidence do you adduce to support your theory that Madeleine was Abducted?
Not for silly stories about secret tunnels and gangs and groups and caves and hellish lairs and traffickers and luxury yachts and childless millionaires who want a child with genetic and behavioural defects . . .
but some scrap of 'evidence' to show if, and how an abduction could conceivably have taken place between GM's visit and JT's sighting on 3/5/7
1:20s is the Window of Opportunity.
I've started this thread so that members can ask you questions.
I ask that this thread is kept polite and unchallenging.
I will start by asking you this please:
What evidence do you adduce to support your theory that Madeleine was Abducted?
Not for silly stories about secret tunnels and gangs and groups and caves and hellish lairs and traffickers and luxury yachts and childless millionaires who want a child with genetic and behavioural defects . . .
but some scrap of 'evidence' to show if, and how an abduction could conceivably have taken place between GM's visit and JT's sighting on 3/5/7
1:20s is the Window of Opportunity.
____________________
[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 image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Given that Gerry saw Madeleine in her bed at around 9pm and was still at the rear entrance gate at 9.15pm; given that Jane Tanner walked past the front of 5A just after this and entered her flat next door where she then remained (an observer waiting for opportunity would have noted this); given that Russell then walked past the front of 5A and along by the side-gate few moments later; given that Jez was walking in the area with the pushchair; given that the tapas chef arrived in his car and parked alongside the Tapas reception at 9.10; given that the Carpenters were walking in the vicinity at 9.30ish, given that Mrs. Fenn was home upstairs; given that Matt walked to the apartment at 9.30pm, leaving say, at 9.35pm - do you really believe that a planned abduction would have gone ahead that night with such a high level of activity around the target flat and people upstairs and coming and going to next door?
Phoebe- Posts : 1367
Activity : 3046
Likes received : 1659
Join date : 2017-03-01
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
I woud like to ask Colin this if i may please.
Why do you think the McCanns lied about the shutters being tampered with?
What reason could they have for doing this?
If you had been the lead detective in this case, and bearing in mind had no evidence of an abduction having taken place, would you have found this suspicous to say the least?
Thanks.
Why do you think the McCanns lied about the shutters being tampered with?
What reason could they have for doing this?
If you had been the lead detective in this case, and bearing in mind had no evidence of an abduction having taken place, would you have found this suspicous to say the least?
Thanks.
Silverspeed- Posts : 350
Activity : 443
Likes received : 55
Join date : 2014-01-19
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
One question .....how do you explain the fact that both of the dogs (Eddie and Keela) alerted in the apartment and the hire car at the same positions ?
Rothley1- Posts : 10
Activity : 32
Likes received : 16
Join date : 2017-02-04
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Genuine question. Who decides which ex detectives get their theories published and which are gagged and sued ? Colin Sutton must know.
justagrannynow- Posts : 40
Activity : 108
Likes received : 66
Join date : 2017-02-09
Location : France
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Colin,
It's been suggested by the McCanns and widely reported in the media that Madeleine and the twins were all drugged by the 'abductor'.
The reasons for this being that Madeleine didn't shout or scream when she was removed from the apartment and the twins stayed comatose through all the noise and disruption that later followed. Kate McCann, in her book, tells how she had to check the twins to make sure they were still breathing.
As an ex detective, could you please explain how it would be possible for an 'abductor' to sedate 3 young children in such a short time without leaving any evidence behind and how do you think the 'abductor' achieved this?
It's been suggested by the McCanns and widely reported in the media that Madeleine and the twins were all drugged by the 'abductor'.
The reasons for this being that Madeleine didn't shout or scream when she was removed from the apartment and the twins stayed comatose through all the noise and disruption that later followed. Kate McCann, in her book, tells how she had to check the twins to make sure they were still breathing.
As an ex detective, could you please explain how it would be possible for an 'abductor' to sedate 3 young children in such a short time without leaving any evidence behind and how do you think the 'abductor' achieved this?
Patience- Posts : 120
Activity : 257
Likes received : 113
Join date : 2016-04-23
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
It's the dogs' finding not being acknowledged which puzzles me. Why is there never any mention by British Police of the fact that they alerted to blood and cadaver scent.
dazedandconfused- Posts : 49
Activity : 52
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2010-07-23
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Hi Colin, I want to ask;
- Earlier you said you believe Madeleine is dead, what evidence has led you to this conclusion?
- You also said police should keep looking for a live child. Is this really the proper procedure if the balance of evidence is that the child is dead?
- Have you read the forensic reports in the case files, if not, why not?
- Earlier you said you believe Madeleine is dead, what evidence has led you to this conclusion?
- You also said police should keep looking for a live child. Is this really the proper procedure if the balance of evidence is that the child is dead?
- Have you read the forensic reports in the case files, if not, why not?
ChippyM- Posts : 1334
Activity : 1817
Likes received : 467
Join date : 2013-06-15
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Colin - Good Morning. I'm hoping that by getting in quickly before you become inundated with questions you might feel inclined to help me with a couple of queries.
1.My main question/s is/are quite simple and regards forms used by the Met during 2007:
- Was there a standardised format for Form MG11?
- Was Form MG11 supplied hard copy; digitally as a pdf doc (locked content); digitally as a Word or similar doc (content unlocked and available for alteration); or, did individual stations/officers draw up their own copies?
2.Secondly, and of less importance (to me) than the above but still entirely relevant, I would genuinely like to know if you have an opinion/or feel free to express your opinion on why the following UK Police Guidelines on investigating missing persons don't appear to have been followed/considered in the setting of Operation Grange's seemingly blinkered review remit:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Guidance on the Management, Recording and Investigation of Missing Persons 2010
Pages 70/71:
5.4 Links to Serious Offences
The majority of missing person enquiries are quickly resolved. In a few cases, however, the report of a missing person is the first step in a major crime case. Therefore, the initial stages of any missing person enquiry should commence on the basis that the case may escalate into a serious crime enquiry. It is always easier to rein back from the early stages of a major enquiry than it is to recover missed opportunities resulting from a miscalculation in the early stages.
It is now widely recognised that missing is a key indicator in identifying victims of various crime types.
5.4.1 Homicide
One of the fundamental facts to be determined in a missing person investigation is the reason why the subject has disappeared. In cases where the circumstances are suspicious or are unexplained, use the maxim:
IF IN DOUBT, THINK MURDER.
Failure to apply such thinking in past cases has led to the loss of valuable investigative opportunities. This can ultimately result in failure to trace the missing person or to establish sufficient evidence to convict a perpetrator.
The status of the relationship between the missing person and the person making the initial report can also be important. Investigators should not always assume that such relationships are stable. There have been numerous cases where the person reporting the crime and/or the missing persons has been found to be the perpetrator of the crime.
Thanks in advance for your time.
1.My main question/s is/are quite simple and regards forms used by the Met during 2007:
- Was there a standardised format for Form MG11?
- Was Form MG11 supplied hard copy; digitally as a pdf doc (locked content); digitally as a Word or similar doc (content unlocked and available for alteration); or, did individual stations/officers draw up their own copies?
2.Secondly, and of less importance (to me) than the above but still entirely relevant, I would genuinely like to know if you have an opinion/or feel free to express your opinion on why the following UK Police Guidelines on investigating missing persons don't appear to have been followed/considered in the setting of Operation Grange's seemingly blinkered review remit:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Guidance on the Management, Recording and Investigation of Missing Persons 2010
Pages 70/71:
5.4 Links to Serious Offences
The majority of missing person enquiries are quickly resolved. In a few cases, however, the report of a missing person is the first step in a major crime case. Therefore, the initial stages of any missing person enquiry should commence on the basis that the case may escalate into a serious crime enquiry. It is always easier to rein back from the early stages of a major enquiry than it is to recover missed opportunities resulting from a miscalculation in the early stages.
It is now widely recognised that missing is a key indicator in identifying victims of various crime types.
5.4.1 Homicide
One of the fundamental facts to be determined in a missing person investigation is the reason why the subject has disappeared. In cases where the circumstances are suspicious or are unexplained, use the maxim:
IF IN DOUBT, THINK MURDER.
Failure to apply such thinking in past cases has led to the loss of valuable investigative opportunities. This can ultimately result in failure to trace the missing person or to establish sufficient evidence to convict a perpetrator.
The status of the relationship between the missing person and the person making the initial report can also be important. Investigators should not always assume that such relationships are stable. There have been numerous cases where the person reporting the crime and/or the missing persons has been found to be the perpetrator of the crime.
_____________________
Thanks in advance for your time.
skyrocket- Posts : 755
Activity : 1537
Likes received : 732
Join date : 2015-06-18
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
IMO Colin will not be back to answer any questions but just in case - Colin what do you think of PeterM's latest?
Copied from a different thread on this site:
by [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Today at 3:44 am
This is a precis for a new chapter of PeterMac's FREE e-book, currently being written:
Recent hysterical Press reports are still concentrating on who could have done it, and are refusing to concentrate on whether it was done at all.
I could believe in an Abduction if I was presented with evidence of the MO - The Modus Operandi - the evidential signs which detectives look for when investigating a report of crime, and which when placed in sequence can tell the story of what happened.
Many criminals stick to a particular MO which can be revealing for future detection
The list of points is long, but includes
Point of entry - window, door, front, back, side, locked or unlocked
Method of entry - was it forced, using instrument or bodily pressure, duplicate key, by fraud, by intimidation, silent, . . .
Tools used - blunt instrument, sharp instrument, brick, concrete, wood, ladder, climbing . . .
Times between -
Day of week -
Point of exit - as entry, or using door, climbing on furniture
Method of exit
Search - was this orderly professional, or amateur,
Items taken - money, antiques, etc
Marks and items left at scene - fingerprints, foot prints, DNA, hair, clothing fibres, bodily fluids and solids, cigarette ends, artefacts from elsewhere
Victim - age, gender, characteristics
Trademark - eating food from fridge, drinking from bottles or glasses, using facilities, wanton damage to specific items, use of fire to hide evidence, cleaning, attempt removal of forensics
Witnesses
And so on.
Here we have - NOTHING.
No point of entry,
No method of entry, (even Mitchell conceded both these)
No time window
No search
No items taken
No marks of any sort, inside or outside
No trademark
No witnesses
What then do we have ?
We have two people insisting that “For us, there is only the abduction theory possible", without providing or being able to point to a single piece of evidence.
And we have the top police and detectives of two Countries after a 10 year investigation unable to find a single piece of credible evidence
And by that we do not mean unable to find 'sufficient evidence to prosecute' - but unable to find a single piece of evidence.
Until we have that, there is no point in speculating about who might have done 'it'.
Copied from a different thread on this site:
by [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Today at 3:44 am
This is a precis for a new chapter of PeterMac's FREE e-book, currently being written:
Recent hysterical Press reports are still concentrating on who could have done it, and are refusing to concentrate on whether it was done at all.
I could believe in an Abduction if I was presented with evidence of the MO - The Modus Operandi - the evidential signs which detectives look for when investigating a report of crime, and which when placed in sequence can tell the story of what happened.
Many criminals stick to a particular MO which can be revealing for future detection
The list of points is long, but includes
Point of entry - window, door, front, back, side, locked or unlocked
Method of entry - was it forced, using instrument or bodily pressure, duplicate key, by fraud, by intimidation, silent, . . .
Tools used - blunt instrument, sharp instrument, brick, concrete, wood, ladder, climbing . . .
Times between -
Day of week -
Point of exit - as entry, or using door, climbing on furniture
Method of exit
Search - was this orderly professional, or amateur,
Items taken - money, antiques, etc
Marks and items left at scene - fingerprints, foot prints, DNA, hair, clothing fibres, bodily fluids and solids, cigarette ends, artefacts from elsewhere
Victim - age, gender, characteristics
Trademark - eating food from fridge, drinking from bottles or glasses, using facilities, wanton damage to specific items, use of fire to hide evidence, cleaning, attempt removal of forensics
Witnesses
And so on.
Here we have - NOTHING.
No point of entry,
No method of entry, (even Mitchell conceded both these)
No time window
No search
No items taken
No marks of any sort, inside or outside
No trademark
No witnesses
What then do we have ?
We have two people insisting that “For us, there is only the abduction theory possible", without providing or being able to point to a single piece of evidence.
And we have the top police and detectives of two Countries after a 10 year investigation unable to find a single piece of credible evidence
And by that we do not mean unable to find 'sufficient evidence to prosecute' - but unable to find a single piece of evidence.
Until we have that, there is no point in speculating about who might have done 'it'.
____________________
Judge Judy to shifty witnesses - LOOK AT ME - Um is not an answer.
If I forget to add it to a post everything is In My Opinion and I don't know anything for sure.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Hi Colin
I did ask this on another thread.
In Jan 2009, Andrew Dickman (associate of McCann benefactor Brian Kennedy) set up a domain name for a company called Alphaig Ltd. Later in the year, Clarence Mitchell told us that the McCanns had hired a team of crack detectives. These were very often referred to in the media and via Clarence as Alpha Group Investigations. It turns out that this company does not exist but it seems of though the name was taken from a well established "Alpha Investigations Group" which had nothing whatsoever to do with the McCanns or their detectives. In June 2009, McCann detective Arthur Cowley set up the company Alphaig Limited with assets of no more than £550 and a cash balance of £800. This company had no website, no contact details and definitely not the required resources to search for a missing child.
Please could you explain why this one man band was employed to search for Madeleine, why were the public led to believe that it was a team of crack detectives and why were they not sacked by the McCanns when they failed to follow up vital leads in Barcelona and when they were caught clowning around in Germany.
I did ask this on another thread.
In Jan 2009, Andrew Dickman (associate of McCann benefactor Brian Kennedy) set up a domain name for a company called Alphaig Ltd. Later in the year, Clarence Mitchell told us that the McCanns had hired a team of crack detectives. These were very often referred to in the media and via Clarence as Alpha Group Investigations. It turns out that this company does not exist but it seems of though the name was taken from a well established "Alpha Investigations Group" which had nothing whatsoever to do with the McCanns or their detectives. In June 2009, McCann detective Arthur Cowley set up the company Alphaig Limited with assets of no more than £550 and a cash balance of £800. This company had no website, no contact details and definitely not the required resources to search for a missing child.
Please could you explain why this one man band was employed to search for Madeleine, why were the public led to believe that it was a team of crack detectives and why were they not sacked by the McCanns when they failed to follow up vital leads in Barcelona and when they were caught clowning around in Germany.
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Dear Colin,
What do you make of the statistic that 24 out of 25 young children that go missing do so as consequence of someone known to them?
What do you make of the statistic that 24 out of 25 young children that go missing do so as consequence of someone known to them?
Rogue-a-Tory- Posts : 647
Activity : 1115
Likes received : 454
Join date : 2014-09-10
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
For me the No 1 question has always been:
Why the cadaver/blood dog and car DNA evidence wasn't followed up? If the dogs were good enough for the FBI, why not the PJ and SY?
Why the cadaver/blood dog and car DNA evidence wasn't followed up? If the dogs were good enough for the FBI, why not the PJ and SY?
JulieC- Posts : 79
Activity : 160
Likes received : 75
Join date : 2017-03-10
Age : 60
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
One more question from me Colin
If you were involved in the investigation of a missing child and two well respected UK doctors made formal statements that suggested that there were paedophiles amongst her parents group of friends at the time that she went missing, would you dismiss the evidence, put it aside for 6 months or investigate those who were named?
If you did investigate and found those who were named to have strong alibi's in this particular case, would you then dismiss the evidence or open a separate case to investigate the alleged paedophilia?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
If you were involved in the investigation of a missing child and two well respected UK doctors made formal statements that suggested that there were paedophiles amongst her parents group of friends at the time that she went missing, would you dismiss the evidence, put it aside for 6 months or investigate those who were named?
If you did investigate and found those who were named to have strong alibi's in this particular case, would you then dismiss the evidence or open a separate case to investigate the alleged paedophilia?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Colin has done a runner.
He won't answer these questions because he has no good answers.
These are all fair-minded questions.
Come on Colin. Prove me wrong.
He won't answer these questions because he has no good answers.
These are all fair-minded questions.
Come on Colin. Prove me wrong.
Guest- Guest
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
According to the her parents (and Dave Edgar recently again) Madeleine is still alive and out there somewhere so why is Mainstream Media publishing 'death' as a scenario but the McCanns and their cohorts are not taking libel action against said media?
sammyc- Posts : 268
Activity : 383
Likes received : 113
Join date : 2011-10-06
Location : UK
Re: Questions thread for member ex Met Police, Colin Sutton (oatlandish)
Which BBC drama series did you advise on?
MRNOODLES- Posts : 751
Activity : 1059
Likes received : 298
Join date : 2013-07-04
Similar topics
» Respected officer (Colin Sutton) slams Portuguese police for not staging Madeleine McCann reconstruction
» **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")
» Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent
» Colin Sutton on tv again: Soham 15 years on
» Colin Sutton Revisited
» **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")
» Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent
» Colin Sutton on tv again: Soham 15 years on
» Colin Sutton Revisited
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: British Police / Government Interference :: 'Operation Grange' set up by ex-Prime Minister David Cameron
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum