Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

by **Jill Havern** 15.05.17 7:33

UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says 2507_mark

Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says 2507_mark

By
Mark Saunokonoko

Colin Sutton, a senior investigating officer in the Metropolitan Police from 2003 to 2011, appears on a Sky News documentary examining the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Source: Sky News.

Scotland Yard's six-year investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance was a poisoned chalice laced with critical errors because of a high level agenda to not interrogate the child's parents, according to a former UK detective.

The explosive revelations were made by retired Metropolitan Police homicide cop Colin Sutton, who at one time was touted as a possible candidate to lead Operation Grange and the search for Maddie, now missing for 10 years.

Operation Grange's narrow remit to focus only on the theory that the four-year-old was abducted from the family's holiday apartment in Portugal was unusual and a "missed opportunity", Sutton told nine.com.au.

In 2010, with planning underway to launch Operation Grange, Sutton received a phone tip off from "a very senior Metropolitan police officer", warning him about the looming investigation and how it would be handled.

The insider told Sutton, who served 30 years with London's Met before retiring in 2011, that the dozens of murder detectives assigned to Operation Grange would be instructed where they could and couldn't look.

"I immediately assumed that what was meant was that the [McCann] family and Tapas 7 [the group of seven friends on holiday with the McCanns] were a no-go area," Sutton said.

In May 2011, when Operation Grange was launched, the detective's instincts were proven correct.

The "crucial phrase", as Sutton calls it, in the Operation Grange remit was a line stating the review would be carried out "as if the abduction occurred in the UK".

That meant Kate and Gerry McCann, despite several concerning inconsistencies in their witness statements, were not to be looked at, Sutton said.

"It was almost this unspoken elephant in the room," he told nine.com.au.

"The rest of [the remit] is really of little consequence after that because that's sort of saying … we are only treating this as an abduction and we are not looking at any other scenario."

Sutton also hit out at Scotland Yard claims that the McCanns, who have always denied any involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine, had been cleared by Portugal's police force, the Policia Judiciaria (PJ).

Portuguese authorities shelved the investigation in 2008, 14 months after Madeleine vanished on May 3, 2007, and in doing so lifted arguidos (formal suspect) status from the McCanns.

"The PJ have never cleared anyone," Sutton said.

Ceasing the investigation "just meant they couldn't find enough evidence to proceed against them. Their view is that the parents are certainly not eliminated".

Sutton, who led more than 30 successful murder investigations, said it was well-rehearsed, best police practice in cases such as Madeleine McCann to eliminate those closest to the child first.

"Also any kind of investigation of murder or akin to murder the other place you need to eliminate early on is those that last saw the victim alive.

"In this case you've got essentially the same group of people who are both close to the victim and the last to see her alive. I'd always want to start with that.

"I don't understand why that hasn't been done [by Operation Grange], because it would appear to be in everyone's interest."

Earlier this month, Assistant Commissioner of London's Metropolitan Police Mark Rowley denied Scotland Yard had a closed mind to the possibility of Kate and Gerry McCann’s involvement.

"The involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese," Asst Com Rowley said during a media briefing.

"We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation."

When asked if Kate and Gerry McCann had ever been questioned as potential suspects by Scotland Yard detectives, Asst Com Rowley replied: "No."

Sutton said he disagreed with Asst Com Rowley's assessment. He said inconsistencies in some of Kate and Gerry's statements, Kate's 2011 book madeleine and also some of the witness accounts of the Tapas 7 disturbed him.

The Portugal detective who oversaw the original investigation, Goncalo Amaral, wrote a book theorising Maddie had died in apartment 5A, that Kate and Gerry had disposed of the body and the parents had faked their daughter's abduction.

After police found no forensic evidence in the apartment to back up claims of a break in, Gerry's statements to police detailing what doors he and Kate had used while checking on their three sleeping children changed.

Portugal's police also had some doubts over the accuracy of timelines provided by Kate and Gerry, and the Tapas 7, in the critical hours either side of Maddie being reported missing at 10pm.

Specialist cadaver and blood dogs were brought to Praia da Luz from the UK, and signalled hits inside apartment 5A and a hire car rented by the McCanns 25 days after Madeleine disappeared. DNA swabs were taken but ruled inconclusive.

"There was a part of me that always had this hope in the back of my mind that actually there was lots of busy and important covert work going on in the background of Operation Grange, that there was going to be some kind of bombshell announcement.

"I fear that is not going to be the case now. I fear it will just peter out and probably this thing will never get resolved."

It was "entirely possible" that some of Operation Grange's remit was forced upon Scotland Yard by government officials who rubber stamped the multi-million-dollar funding of the investigation, Sutton said.

In March Operation Grange was injected with an additional $150,000 to cover the investigation through to September, 2017.

FOLLOW: Mark Saunokonoko on Twitter for more McCann news and analysis

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/05/15/12/03/uk-police-guilty-of-flawed-tunnel-vision-in-hunt-for-maddie-mccann-answers#W2yUkWYCokv9k8pf.99

by Mirage 15.05.17 8:56

There was a part of me that always had this hope in the back of my mind that actually there was lots of busy and important covert work going on in the background of Operation Grange, that there was going to be some kind of bombshell announcement.

"I fear that is not going to be the case now. I fear it will just peter out and probably this thing will never get resolved."

It was "entirely possible" that some of Operation Grange's remit was forced upon Scotland Yard by government officials who rubber stamped the multi-million-dollar funding of the investigation, Sutton said."

I had faith in Colin Sutton because nobody, but nobody, who wasn't genuine, would point the finger at the Metropolitan police for failing to investigate a crime without fear or favour.

Well, I hope the "dozens of detectives" who left their scruples outside the door of that previously respected establishment in Belgravia are happy they never came up with a bombshell announcement about their "investigation".

Now they've had a bombshell announcement about themselves. And on the global stage. Serves them right too.

The ptb tried the troll nonsense once too often and it's backfired.

by Liz Eagles 15.05.17 9:06

Mirage wrote:There was a part of me that always had this hope in the back of my mind that actually there was lots of busy and important covert work going on in the background of Operation Grange, that there was going to be some kind of bombshell announcement.

There was a bombshell announcement. Smithman is important Tannerman is accounted for. No opinion from Colin Sutton as to this particular announcement or the reason for two, yes TWO differing Crime Watch productions.

"I fear that is not going to be the case now. I fear it will just peter out and probably this thing will never get resolved."

If it does peter out it will be all the more fruitful for pundits to give an opinion based on nothing but hearsay.

It was "entirely possible" that some of Operation Grange's remit was forced upon Scotland Yard by government officials who rubber stamped the multi-million-dollar funding of the investigation, Sutton said."

Still no whistle blowing.

I had faith in Colin Sutton because nobody, but nobody, who wasn't genuine, would point the finger at the Metropolitan police for failing to investigate a crime without fear or favour.

Well, I hope the "dozens of detectives" who left their scruples outside the door of that previously respected establishment in Belgravia are happy they never came up with a bombshell announcement about their "investigation".

Now they've had a bombshell announcement about themselves. And on the global stage. Serves them right too.

The ptb tried the troll nonsense once too often and it's backfired.

by Mirage 15.05.17 9:20

aquila wrote:
Mirage wrote:There was a part of me that always had this hope in the back of my mind that actually there was lots of busy and important covert work going on in the background of Operation Grange, that there was going to be some kind of bombshell announcement.

There was a bombshell announcement. Smithman is important Tannerman is accounted for. No opinion from Colin Sutton as to this particular announcement or the reason for two, yes TWO differing Crime Watch productions.

"I fear that is not going to be the case now. I fear it will just peter out and probably this thing will never get resolved."

If it does peter out it will be all the more fruitful for pundits to give an opinion based on nothing but hearsay.

It was "entirely possible" that some of Operation Grange's remit was forced upon Scotland Yard by government officials who rubber stamped the multi-million-dollar funding of the investigation, Sutton said."

Still no whistle blowing.

I had faith in Colin Sutton because nobody, but nobody, who wasn't genuine, would point the finger at the Metropolitan police for failing to investigate a crime without fear or favour.

Well, I hope the "dozens of detectives" who left their scruples outside the door of that previously respected establishment in Belgravia are happy they never came up with a bombshell announcement about their "investigation".

Now they've had a bombshell announcement about themselves. And on the global stage. Serves them right too.

The ptb tried the troll nonsense once too often and it's backfired.

"There is a tide in the affairs of men, which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures."

by pennylane 15.05.17 9:23

Excellent article by Mark Saunokonoko.

Operation Grange now has as much credibility as the McCanns themselves.

Keep up the pressure Mr Sutton, you are doing a superb job! roses

by Liz Eagles 15.05.17 9:33

pennylane wrote:Excellent article by Mark Saunokonoko.
Keep up the pressure Mr Sutton, you are doing a superb job!

Keeping up the pressure in Australian media? how is that going to help?

Channel whatever who misquoted Pat Brown and Colin Sutton is not a Murdoch enterprise. Now we have Colin Sutton being quoted by channel9 which is a Murdoch enterprise. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

At the risk of being labelled something or other, what power does the Australian media have other than to accommodate Colin Sutton, who hasn't blown a whistle?

It's the UK media that matters - and they're doing nothing to secure justice for Madeleine McCann.

by Sceptic 15.05.17 9:49

aquila wrote:
pennylane wrote:Excellent article by Mark Saunokonoko.
Keep up the pressure Mr Sutton, you are doing a superb job!
Keeping up the pressure in Australian media? how is that going to help?

Channel whatever who misquoted Pat Brown and Colin Sutton is not a Murdoch enterprise. Now we have Colin Sutton being quoted by channel9 which is a Murdoch enterprise. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

At the risk of being labelled something or other, what power does the Australian media have other than to accommodate Colin Sutton, who hasn't blown a whistle?

It's the UK media that matters - and they're doing nothing to secure justice for Madeleine McCann.

No wonder Colin wisely chose not to return back to this forum

by pennylane 15.05.17 9:55

aquila wrote:
pennylane wrote:Excellent article by Mark Saunokonoko.
Keep up the pressure Mr Sutton, you are doing a superb job!
Keeping up the pressure in Australian media? how is that going to help?

Channel whatever who misquoted Pat Brown and Colin Sutton is not a Murdoch enterprise. Now we have Colin Sutton being quoted by channel9 which is a Murdoch enterprise. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

At the risk of being labelled something or other, what power does the Australian media have other than to accommodate Colin Sutton, who hasn't blown a whistle?

It's the UK media that matters - and they're doing nothing to secure justice for Madeleine McCann.

You can diminish the importance of Colin Sutton's role all you want, that is your prerogative, but I disagree and believe he has dealt a devastating blow to Operation Grange, and as such also to the McCanns themselves. I also believe his valuable MSM exposé has greatly assisted Goncalo Amaral and his colleagues, who will most certainly quote him in the future. I like Mr Sutton's style, and I look forward to hearing more from him regarding this case in the future.

by Liz Eagles 15.05.17 10:00

Sceptic wrote:
aquila wrote:
pennylane wrote:Excellent article by Mark Saunokonoko.
Keep up the pressure Mr Sutton, you are doing a superb job!
Keeping up the pressure in Australian media? how is that going to help?

Channel whatever who misquoted Pat Brown and Colin Sutton is not a Murdoch enterprise. Now we have Colin Sutton being quoted by channel9 which is a Murdoch enterprise. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

At the risk of being labelled something or other, what power does the Australian media have other than to accommodate Colin Sutton, who hasn't blown a whistle?

It's the UK media that matters - and they're doing nothing to secure justice for Madeleine McCann.
No wonder Colin wisely chose not to return back to this forum

Well pardon me for breathing laughat

but the UK media has saturated their newspapers with all sorts of dreadful stuff, mostly supporting the McCanns and giving little attention to a three year old girl called Madeleine, other than to gain crowd sympathy as and when it suits and never forget the halls of academia writing articles on trolling which concentrate on the McCann case.

Now we have Colin Sutton's media storm and the UK media have been kinda quiet.

I recall UK media having the power to print their request for Scotland Yard to investigate the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Look where that went. The Leveson inquiry was a shambles and resulted in bugger all. There is no call from the UK media asking Colin Sutton to blow a whistle. No support for Colin. No siree. It's the bottom of the world reporting in so many ways.

Still, it sells newspapers.

by Liz Eagles 15.05.17 10:04

How many Brits read Australian newspapers?

by Phoebe 15.05.17 10:20

Colin Sutton has blown the whistle. Just because it's a whistle - blast based on his beliefs rather than those held by others does not diminish its value. Sutton believes Op.Grange is not a full and frank investigation- he has publicly said so. He believes the Tapas 9 have questions to answer - he has publicly said so. He believes there may have been political interference to protect he parents from investigation - he has publicly said so. I call that whistle-blowing.

by Liz Eagles 15.05.17 10:27

Phoebe wrote:Colin Sutton has blown the whistle. Just because it's a whistle - blast based on his beliefs rather than those held by others does not diminish its value. Sutton believes Op.Grange is not a full and frank investigation- he has publicly said so. He believes the Tapas 9 have questions to answer - he has publicly said so. He believes there may have been political interference to protect he parents from investigation - he has publicly said so. I call that whistle-blowing.

It's not whistle blowing unless you blow the whistle - and with the world's media at your feet, paying you for articles and reporting from north to south of the globe then you are fairly well guaranteed safety in blowing the whistle aren't you?

Otherwise it's fluff that sells newspapers and makes lucrative careers isn't it?

by Phoebe 15.05.17 10:34

aquila wrote:
Phoebe wrote:Colin Sutton has blown the whistle. Just because it's a whistle - blast based on his beliefs rather than those held by others does not diminish its value. Sutton believes Op.Grange is not a full and frank investigation- he has publicly said so. He believes the Tapas 9 have questions to answer - he has publicly said so. He believes there may have been political interference to protect he parents from investigation - he has publicly said so. I call that whistle-blowing.
It's not whistle blowing unless you blow the whistle - and with the world's media at your feet, paying you for articles and reporting from north to south of the globe then you are fairly well guaranteed safety in blowing the whistle aren't you?

Otherwise it's fluff that sells newspapers and makes lucrative careers isn't it?

[size=32]whistle-blower[/size]
noun
noun: whistleblower
[list=lr_dct_sf_sens]
[*]a person who informs on a person or organization regarded as engaging in an unlawful or immoral activity.
[/list]
[size]

From the above definition, as well as my understanding, I would describe Colin Sutton as a whistle-blower. he has informed those media prepared to carry his remarks that Op. Grange is not functioning as it should and that certain people are being protected.[/size]

by **Jill Havern** 15.05.17 10:35

Blowing the whistle would mean an official complaint to the IPCC for Misconduct in Public Office.

PeterMac asked DCI Nicola Wall to make a public statement a couple of weeks ago, in light of Colin's public statements, but so far:

lalala

by ChippyM 15.05.17 10:51

Usually a 'whistle-blower' is someone that is employed somewhere and draws attention to something within that organisation. They risk losing their job, reputation etc.

Imagine if he'd said all this when he'd been warned off Op.Grange, before it started and 11 million was wasted. When he was still employed by the MET. That would have been closer to whistle blowing, an employee attempting to stop a biased investigation, officers standing up in protest and saying they were not willing to go along with a farce. But what we have is a commentary on a remit that was available for people to read anyway. It's an opinion, not an act of whistle blowing.

by Mirage 15.05.17 10:54

Colin Sutton has said he was unsure whether OG were busy behind the scenes..... as were many members here and elsewhere for long periods of time.

Hopes were raised when the review became investigation, raised again when it was known it was being investigated by Homicide and Serious Case. Raised further when Alison Saunders DPP with senior colleague attended an in camera meeting with the Oporto team in Lisbon. Raised again when Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe made a slip of the tongue and mentioned MURDER live on air.

Colin Sutton knows the normal MO is to look at those close to the the child and those who last saw her - as he points out, the same people in this instance, so doubling up the criteria. It must have been hard to imagine 36 detectives were taking their pay for looking the other way.

He may have had his suspicions but he, like the rest of us, was not privy to what was going on in that incident room. With 36 detectives on the case, and the DPP involved, plus assurances that OG were working closely with the PJ, he must have had the same peaks and troughs of doubt and belief. It can't be easy to assimilate the notion that the investigation into an infant's demise has been fudged.

Look what happened to Brenda Leyland. He must have had fears about being a lone voice. Doubts about ruining a possible sting operation, perhaps with international implications. Bottom line, evidence was needed to voice his suspicions.

That came in the form of....

A. The Supreme Court ruling that clearly stated the McCanns had not been cleared.

And....

B. Mark Rowley's admission they had not investigated the McCanns because all that had been done by the Portuguese investigation.

At a stroke, the two ends of the Gordian knot were revealed and the McCann bandwagon unleashed.

by **Jill Havern** 15.05.17 11:01

ChippyM wrote:Usually a 'whistle-blower' is someone that is employed somewhere and draws attention to something within that organisation. They risk losing their job, reputation etc.

Imagine if he'd said all this when he'd been warned off Op.Grange, before it started and 11 million was wasted. When he was still employed by the MET. That would have been closer to whistle blowing, an employee attempting to stop a biased investigation, officers standing up in protest and saying they were not willing to go along with a farce. But what we have is a commentary on a remit that was available for people to read anyway. It's an opinion, not an act of whistle blowing.

Colin was asked last year if he would take part in the 10th Anniversary documentary so he must have known then what he was going to say.

So why didn't he just make an official Misconduct in Public Office complaint last year instead of waiting for the 10th Anniversary?

At the moment it's his word against his anonymous friend, who could just deny the call ever took place.

by **Tony Bennett** 15.05.17 11:31

Get'emGonçalo wrote:UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

By
Mark Saunokonoko

Colin Sutton, a senior investigating officer in the Metropolitan Police from 2003 to 2011, appears on a Sky News documentary examining the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Source: Sky News.

Scotland Yard's six-year investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance was a poisoned chalice laced with critical errors because of a high level agenda to not interrogate the child's parents, according to a former UK detective.

SNIPPED

Admittedly this is one Australian news source only.

Of course, if something very similar appeared in a British mainstream newspaper, it would assume much more significance.

But IMO the appearance of this article is significant, because...

a) it openly challenges the limited remit, and
b) it refers specifically e.g. to such things as 'inconsistences' in the McCanns' and Tapas 7's accounts of events.

I can't recall such things having been seen in a British mainstream news source before.

These are some of the statements in the article which I think have most significance:

"...critical errors because of a high level agenda to not interrogate the child's parents..."

"Operation Grange's narrow remit to focus only on the theory that the four-year-old was abducted from the family's holiday apartment in Portugal was unusual and a 'missed opportunity'..."

"In 2010...Sutton received a phone tip off from ' a very senior Metropolitan police officer', warning him about the looming investigation and how it would be handled. The insider told Sutton, who served 30 years with London's Met before retiring in 2011, that the dozens of murder detectives assigned to Operation Grange would be instructed where they could and couldn't look. 'I immediately assumed that what was meant was that the [McCann] family and Tapas 7 [the group of seven friends on holiday with the McCanns] were a no-go area', Sutton said".

"...the detective's instincts were proven correct. The 'crucial phrase', as Sutton calls it, in the Operation Grange remit was a line stating the review would be carried out 'as if the abduction occurred in the UK'. That meant Kate and Gerry McCann, despite several concerning inconsistencies in their witness statements, were not to be looked at, Sutton said."

"The rest of [the remit] is really of little consequence after that because that's sort of saying…we are only treating this as an abduction and we are not looking at any other scenario."

"Sutton also hit out at Scotland Yard claims that the McCanns...had been cleared...'The PJ have never cleared anyone', Sutton said. Ceasing the investigation 'just meantthey couldn't find enough evidence to proceed against them'."

Sutton...said it was well-rehearsed, best police practice in cases such as Madeleine McCann to eliminate those closest to the child first. 'Also any kind of investigation of murder or akin to murder the other place you need to eliminate early on is those that last saw the victim alive. In this case you've got essentially the same group of people who are both close to the victim and the last to see her alive. I'd always want to start with that. I don't understand why that hasn't been done [by Operation Grange]...'."

Sutton said he disagreed with [Met Police] Asst Com Rowley's assessment. He said inconsistencies in some of Kate and Gerry's statements, Kate's 2011 book madeleine and also some of the witness accounts of the Tapas 7 disturbed him.

"After police found no forensic evidence in the apartment to back up claims of a break in, Gerry's statements to police detailing what doors he and Kate had used while checking on their three sleeping children changed".

"Portugal's police also had some doubts over the accuracy of timelines provided by Kate and Gerry, and the Tapas 7, in the critical hours either side of Maddie being reported missing at 10pm".

"Specialist cadaver and blood dogs were brought to Praia da Luz from the UK, and signalled hits inside apartment 5A and a hire car rented by the McCanns 25 days after Madeleine disappeared".

"[Colin Sutton said that] It was 'entirely possible' that some of Operation Grange's remit was forced upon Scotland Yard by government officials who rubber stamped the multi-million-[pound] funding of the investigation".

++++++++++++++++++++

I am going to give Colin Sutton one cheer for what he has said. I'm not going to give him three cheers for all the reasons that Aquila and Verdi have advanced.

The reasons I give him one cheer are these:

* He could have chosen to continue to remain silent

* He has highlighted (and in specific terms) the theory advanced mainly by us on CMOMM, and also in Richard Hall's films, that lurking behind this extraordinary and mysterious disappearance of a three-year-old is a well-organised government cover-up, authorised by the very highest levels of the British political, government, secret service and media establishments

* He has admitted that one 'very senior Metropolitan Police Officer' knew in advance that this was going to be a high-level cover-up of the truth.

On that last point, I for one accept that Colin Sutton is telling us truth about the 'phone call he took back in May 2010. He has been waiting seven years to tell us this. But, as the saying goes, especially appropriate in these cases, "Better late than never".

What we need now

A 'very senior' Met Police Officer - which could surely only mean someone of Commissioner rank, Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, or whatever - clearly knew enough in May 2010 to be able to say to Colin Sutton, in terms: "This will be a corrupt investigation with no intention of getting to the truth. Avoid it at all costs".

I understand why Colin Sutton won't name him. No doubt the 'very senior' officer was speaking to him in strict confidence.

Colin Sutton has given us extra information - an extra piece of the jigsaw.

Undoubtedly, however, we now need to hear from that 'very senior' police officer.

He can tell us, most importantly, what he knew about the planning of the Operation Grange cover-up, who was involved in drawing up the contract, and what was behind the cover-up.

Come on, man. Speak up now!

POSTSCRIPT - The conversion of candyfloss

One good thing to come out of Colin Sutton's utterances is the conversion of candyfloss, who left CMOMM in 2014 to found another forum. She did this, in no small measure, because she objected to the continued insistence here by some of us that Operation Grange was a corrupt investigation from the get-go. She stridently accused us of 'negativity' and was utterly convinced that Operation Grange was a genuine, wholehearted search for the truth.

Now that Colin Sutton has said exactly the same things as we were saying six years ago, she has changed her mind.

Good! And as the saying goes: "Better late than never".

by dartinghero 15.05.17 18:07

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
ChippyM wrote:Usually a 'whistle-blower' is someone that is employed somewhere and draws attention to something within that organisation. They risk losing their job, reputation etc.

Imagine if he'd said all this when he'd been warned off Op.Grange, before it started and 11 million was wasted. When he was still employed by the MET. That would have been closer to whistle blowing, an employee attempting to stop a biased investigation, officers standing up in protest and saying they were not willing to go along with a farce. But what we have is a commentary on a remit that was available for people to read anyway. It's an opinion, not an act of whistle blowing.

Colin was asked last year if he would take part in the 10th Anniversary documentary so he must have known then what he was going to say.

So why didn't he just make an official Misconduct in Public Office complaint last year instead of waiting for the 10th Anniversary?

At the moment it's his word against his anonymous friend, who could just deny the call ever took place.

I disagree. We only have his word that he was advised to steer clear of the case because he wouldn't be able to investigate where he wanted. The wording of the remit essentially says the same to anyone who wanted to look at anything that isn't "abduction" which may well have been in plain sight but was clearly missed/not noticed/not looked at by many. Now it is in a wider domain.

by **Jill Havern** 15.05.17 18:21

aquila wrote:How many Brits read Australian newspapers?

I think quite a lot of Brits are reading his articles now, thanks to twitter, facebook, forums and blogs.

The main thing, for me anyway, is that Mark Saunokonoko's articles are professional and do not resort to derogatory name calling like UK 'journalists'.

We now have Natasha Donn and Mark Saunokonoko raising awareness with factual articles - both of these journalists have been in contact with Colin Sutton.

It's early days yet but hopefully other journalists in other countries will do the same. All we can do is support these people.

by Liz Eagles 15.05.17 18:28

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
aquila wrote:How many Brits read Australian newspapers?
I think quite a lot of Brits are reading his articles now, thanks to twitter, facebook, forums and blogs.

The main thing, for me anyway, is that Mark Saunokonoko's articles are professional and do not resort to derogatory name calling like UK 'journalists'.

We now have Natasha Donn and Mark Saunokonoko raising awareness with factual articles - both of these journalists have been in contact with Colin Sutton.

It's early days yet but hopefully other journalists in other countries will do the same. All we can do is support these people.

How many UK newspapers will use Mark Saunokonoko's articles?

I happen to think his articles fair and decent.

by Cheshire Cat 15.05.17 18:40

There have been some other comments sourced from within SY that chime with what Colin Sutton has been saying. Remember the interesting articles in Sunday World a few years ago? They appear to have been removed from the internet, however, we have saved the most important parts:

The search, part of a €10m investigation launched in 2011 by the Metropolitan Police Force at the instigation of the British Prime Minister has yielded no significant evidence that could lead to an arrest or charges or done anything to help reveal exactly what happened to Maddie seven years ago when she mysteriously disappeared without trace from apartment 5a in Praia da Luz.[/size]

The investigation was started as the Metropolitan Police Force faced a growing wave of public discontent over corruption allegations and cover-ups, and face even more damaging revelations in the months to come, over the continuing fall out from the Stephen Lawrence murder inquiry.

Sources in the Met have told the Sunday World that the investigation is a desperate attempt to reclaim the reputation of the force with a trophy case and a result which, the force hopes, will put its troubles behind it.

“It is a distraction. There are hundreds of missing children in London who have not been found and why we should be spending millions on searching for a child who went missing in another country I don’t know. Why isn’t this money being spent on the other missing children?”, the anonymous detective told the Sunday World.

The investigation led by Detective Inspector Andy Redwood is now nearly two years old and will have to deliver results soon before the public and critics ask questions about a seemingly open ended investigation with a blank cheque for one missing child, while so many other missing person cases in the UK are given a fraction of the resources to help find them.» LINK DOES NOT WORK

in full here http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/crime-desk/donal-macintyre-s-crime-cafe/maddie-search-expanded-as-effort-branded-pr-exercise-to-distract-from-corruption-troubles

The Met asked the Portuguese authorities for permission to search three sites and its original search was due to be completed on Friday.
Cold Case specialist, Alan Bailey, claims that the three sites over many acres, with 12 locations for specific ground penetration radar searches, is simply shooting in the dark because it is impossible to search the areas fully and forensically in such a short time, even with the extra seven days.
“The search lacks focus and direction. There is clearly no specific leads or intelligence beyond a traditional geographic profiler’s suggestion of possible locations where a preferential paedophile may have dumped a body or possible evidence”, he told the Sunday World.
The sites were all checked previously in the immediate days after the disappearance of Maddie and any chance of discovering buried material or disturbed soil were much greater then than seven years later, he said.
The search areas totaling up to 15 acres according to one source, simply does not inspire confidence that the investigation is on the brink of a break through.
Every time the Met promises a major breakthrough it risks damaging its position.
“Cold case investigators should dampen expectations and only promise to do all it can to bring a fresh set of eyes to a case. It is dangerous and upsetting to raise people’s expectations’, the former head of the Irish Cold Case unit told the Sunday World.
The force will face considerable difficulty if it fails to deliver after this last ditch attempt to solve this very difficult case with these new searches.
There are some concerns that if there is no significant movement in the investigation it may be forced to push for arrests which may not be merited.
The Met will look for a face saving exercise and by pushing for arrests that the Portuguese authorities may not support, could give them a neutral way out.
By promising to solve the case in a fire engine fashion, overtaking and by implication deriding the work of other investigators on the case, then it has perhaps, set itself up to fail and to fall from a great height.

by **Jill Havern** 15.05.17 18:47

aquila wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:
aquila wrote:How many Brits read Australian newspapers?
I think quite a lot of Brits are reading his articles now, thanks to twitter, facebook, forums and blogs.

The main thing, for me anyway, is that Mark Saunokonoko's articles are professional and do not resort to derogatory name calling like UK 'journalists'.

We now have Natasha Donn and Mark Saunokonoko raising awareness with factual articles - both of these journalists have been in contact with Colin Sutton.

It's early days yet but hopefully other journalists in other countries will do the same. All we can do is support these people.
How many UK newspapers will use Mark Saunokonoko's articles?

I happen to think his articles fair and decent.

Probably none.

But surely the main thing is that Colin Sutton's claims are starting to be heard in other countries, by at least two very decent journalists....so far! Who knows where this is going?

I don't know how, or if, Colin intends to get the truth out there, but I am very interested anyway.

He tweeted this earlier: "Motivation is the truth; nobody agreed to use my story before & so I was reluctant to put it out on my own & be labelled another crank/troll"

You can't blame him for exercising caution and not wanting to be labelled a troll, or worse.

Keep going, Colin!

by Liz Eagles 15.05.17 18:56

The main thing to me is the total absence of UK media doing anything.

It's becoming very clear that the Murdoch press rules UK and can hold any government to ransom.

by **Jill Havern** 15.05.17 18:59

aquila wrote:The main thing to me is the total absence of UK media doing anything.

There may come a time when they have to.

Maybe. Hopefully.

by Cheshire Cat 15.05.17 19:07

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
aquila wrote:The main thing to me is the total absence of UK media doing anything.
There may come a time when they have to.

Maybe. Hopefully.

Colins original interview was on Sky and his comments were certainly reproduced in The Mail.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467832/Met-interested-proving-McCann-parents-innocent.html

by coati mundi 15.05.17 21:41

I agree with Tony, GeG and others who have given qualified approval to what Colin Sutton has done.

Of course it is not in the UK MSM. Who of them would touch it? They are either suborned or in fear of retribution in the form of legal action.

It is important that this is out there and it does help to undermine the official narrative. Distances are now no longer what they were because of the internet, and this article could just as well have been published on our doorstep as half a world away. if people choose to look.

We shouldn't carp about what he hasn't done, but give a guarded welcome to what he has, and see what develops as a result. He may not have let the cat quite out of the bag, but perhaps we can now see it wriggling inside.

All IMO, still hoping for justice

by Guest 16.05.17 0:53

No wonder Colin wisely chose not to return back to this forum

Why did 'Colin' wisely chose not to return back [sic] to this forum - because some members are sceptics and are looking for answers?

A former Metropolitan Police officer shouldn't be intimidated by a little confrontation, surely that's par for the course for one of her majesty's esteemed servants?

He made a claim, he needs to defend his position rather than hiding behind an alleged telephone call that will never be verified and his own blogspot. Put yer money where yer mouth is Sutton - this is all about a little three year old child that disappeared off the face of the earth ten years ago, not your ego or pension supplement. If you can't put-up you shouldn't have ever put yourself forward in the first place.

by skyrocket 16.05.17 8:37

What is all this haranguing of Colin Sutton hoping to achieve? Why on earth should/would he come back here and get involved in some pointless discussion which, inevitably, will end up as a one-sided slanging match?

Regardless of his personal motivation etc, the fact remains that Colin is a retired senior Met detective, with years of experience of serious crime investigation, who has spoken out and slated Operation Grange. Whichever way I think this through I can't come up with a scenario whereby the position he has taken is going to be turned around to discredit the anti-abduction stance - am I missing something; is that the fear here amongst some members? If not, then why not just take his official confirmation of irregularity with thanks and good humour?

by Doug D 16.05.17 8:47

Mirage:

Bottom line, evidence was needed to voice his suspicions.

That came in the form of....

A. The Supreme Court ruling that clearly stated the McCanns had not been cleared.

And....

B. Mark Rowley's admission they had not investigated the McCanns because all that had been done by the Portuguese investigation.

At a stroke, the two ends of the Gordian knot were revealed and the McCann bandwagon unleashed.

Sutton’s article damning OG in the Mirror supplement was dated 22^nd April, a couple of days before Rowley’s statement was released, which seemed to make Rowley’s ‘confession’ all the more amazing.

It may have been pre-recorded though and Sutton may have already seen it.

......................

Yes, it might be nice for Sutton to give a name to this senior officer in order to apply more pressure, but Rowley has confirmed that the OG remit was effectively corrupt, so another senior officer confirming the same thing isn't going to advance matters, even if it would open up another corridor.

Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

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

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

maddie-search-expanded-as-effort-branded-pr-exercise-sunday-world

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Re: Mark Saunokonoko: UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says

Latest topics