Police and Madeleine's parents

by Asylum 25.01.18 18:00

I am aware that the McCanns have not been arrested/charged with a crime, nor even been questioned by UK police about anything other than the "abduction" scenario, which means that all other theories eg "parents did it, accidental death" lines of enquiry have not been properly investigated, essentially leaving poor Madeline to her fate. Is it possible we have underestimated the police and they have perhaps been attempting to collect evidence, secure witnesses etc with a long term plan to expose Kate and Gerry, and have kept this out of the news because it is ongoing, highly publicised case, allowing the McCanns to carry on with their truly hideous, callous behaviour, as they are essentially digging their own graves. Not only would they be confronted by new evidence, witnesses etc in court but also with every single fake lying twisted interview they gave the media, but also 'stealing' in effect from people who donated to help find an already dead child, the whole nine yards. The police will only have one chance to nail those monsters to the wall and HAVE to get it right, otherwise justice for Madeline really would vanish into the ether and be lost forever. I readily admit that the police investigation appears to be botched beyond repair, there is a tiny part of me that still has my fingers crossed (however naively) that the authorities really DO have Madeline's back, they're just not willing to explain to the public right now. I'd be very interested to know how many UK officers privately agreed 100% with Amaral (who really DID fight Maddie's corner) , but it is more than their jobs are worth to even hint at such 'slander'. Personally, the day the game is up for the McCanns, I'd reinstate Amaral just to have him be the one to arrest them in full view of the whole world. I guess I just hope justice will prevail.

by Mark Willis 25.01.18 18:21

I admire your misplaced optimism.

by **sharonl** 25.01.18 21:53

Asylum wrote:I am aware that the McCanns have not been arrested/charged with a crime, nor even been questioned by UK police about anything other than the "abduction" scenario, which means that all other theories eg "parents did it, accidental death" lines of enquiry have not been properly investigated, essentially leaving poor Madeline to her fate. Is it possible we have underestimated the police and they have perhaps been attempting to collect evidence, secure witnesses etc with a long term plan to expose Kate and Gerry, and have kept this out of the news because it is ongoing, highly publicised case, allowing the McCanns to carry on with their truly hideous, callous behaviour, as they are essentially digging their own graves. Not only would they be confronted by new evidence, witnesses etc in court but also with every single fake lying twisted interview they gave the media, but also 'stealing' in effect from people who donated to help find an already dead child, the whole nine yards. The police will only have one chance to nail those monsters to the wall and HAVE to get it right, otherwise justice for Madeline really would vanish into the ether and be lost forever. I readily admit that the police investigation appears to be botched beyond repair, there is a tiny part of me that still has my fingers crossed (however naively) that the authorities really DO have Madeline's back, they're just not willing to explain to the public right now. I'd be very interested to know how many UK officers privately agreed 100% with Amaral (who really DID fight Maddie's corner) , but it is more than their jobs are worth to even hint at such 'slander'. Personally, the day the game is up for the McCanns, I'd reinstate Amaral just to have him be the one to arrest them in full view of the whole world. I guess I just hope justice will prevail.

That's my dream too, and probably many others but sadly its nothing more than wishful thinking.

The big red flag here is the fact that Operation Grange was only set up because Leveson suspect Rebekah Brooks blackmailed David Cameron and Theresa May with a week of bad headlines if the didn't agree this. And just look at what she has got out this, a few years of front page stories about how the Met have uncovered new leads. OK, the story are crazy and lack credibility but she still sells them. Has anyone else benefitted from Op Grange?

Brooks has also been know in the past to have bribed Met officers for information. There is also corruption at the Met. We also have it from Colin Sutton, that they were not allowed to investigate the McCanns. They were told that they had to carry out the review as if the "ABDUCTION" took place in the UK. Even the government said that the review was set up to assist the McCanns.

Sorry to disappoint you but we have to face the reality here, its a government cover up and has been since the beginning.

by Verdi 26.01.18 0:40

Asylum wrote: Is it possible we have underestimated the police and they have perhaps been attempting to collect evidence, secure witnesses etc with a long term plan to expose Kate and Gerry, and have kept this out of the news because it is ongoing, highly publicised case, allowing the McCanns to carry on with their truly hideous, callous behaviour, as they are essentially digging their own graves.

How long does it take to investigate suppressed evidence and intelligence? How long is a piece of string?

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

Despite continued funding by the UK government, Operation Grange has reduced it's manpower from forty'ish strong to three - the tea trolley, the shredder and the broom cupboard.

Speaks for itself.

by Mark Willis 26.01.18 8:58

"Despite continued funding by the UK government, Operation Grange has reduced it's manpower from forty'ish strong to three - the tea trolley, the shredder and the broom cupboard."

LOL! Sadly, spot on, Mr Verdi.
Btw, there's a lot of whitewash in that broom cupboard...

by polyenne 26.01.18 10:05

....and there's some bitter pills to swallow with the tea and the shredder can't sort the wheat from the chaff.

by Equity 26.01.18 12:11

Operation Grange...

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

by ChippyM 26.01.18 13:28

"Is it possible we have underestimated the police and they have perhaps been attempting to collect evidence, secure witnesses etc with a long term plan to expose Kate and Gerry, and have kept this out of the news......
........
I readily admit that the police investigation appears to be botched beyond repair, there is a tiny part of me that still has my fingers crossed (however naively) that the authorities really DO have Madeline's back, they're just not willing to explain to the public right now.''

Mi5 knew about Cyril Smith in the 70s but chose to remain silent. They knew about on-going systemic child abuse at the Kincora Boy's home in Ireland but chose to let it carry on because revealing it would 'mess with their intelligence gathering'. Or, as they have been accused, probably used it to blackmail and control people.

Margaret Thatcher was told by Mi5 and the police that aide Peter Morrison was a child abuser, she continued to work with him and eventually recommended him for a Knighthood.

Jimmy Savile hung around with the royal family and their security ( a branch of specialist officers from the Met police) - apparently they knew nothing about him. The BBC's own branch of Mi5 apparently knew nothing about him or his wide scale abuse. He hung around with Thatcher and again, apparently her security knew nothing about what he got up to. Which if you think about it, is highly suspicious and unlikely.

Those are just a few examples in public where the 'national interest' is worth more than protecting large numbers of children, so it's probably the tip of the iceberg. On that basis it's probably fair to surmise the people that run our country couldn't give a toss about one 3 year old girl.

Op. Grange is more than likely a front for the real exercise of covering up contacts the McCanns or one of their party may have and an exercise in dragging things out so the public demand an end to the farce of an investigation.

Goncalo Amaral said British police were made to sign non-disclosure agreements at the start of the investigation, something only done where the security services are involved in a case. If an explanation for the 'abduction' can be found that stops at the very basic level of what really happened I'm sure Grange will do that but the focus is not to bring the right people to justice but to stop it going any higher up, in my opinion.

Good look with getting information on serving police officers that agree with Amaral, for the reasons mentioned above, none of them will be publicising it.

by polyenne 26.01.18 13:45

Further to the last post......back in the 90s, I knew quite a few officers in the Met. One of them lived in a small village (I won't name it) but refused to drink in the local pub because it was frequented by a number of known Class A drug dealers. I asked him why it wasn't ever raided. His reply was along the lines of, why remove them when we know where they are when we need them (for info to catch the bigger fish up the line).

To add, my mother lives in The Midlands and knows a couple of Leicestershire police officers. They are unconvinced by the McCann story but can't possibly speak freely.

by Verdi 26.01.18 15:39

ChippyM wrote:Goncalo Amaral said British police were made to sign non-disclosure agreements at the start of the investigation, something only done where the security services are involved in a case.

I thought there was an ethical code in UK policing as regards confidentiality. Like a legal requirement not to disclose information regarding any investigation to unauthorized persons.

Doesn't affect the overall point of your observations - just thought I'd mention it smilie

.

by Asylum 26.01.18 15:42

Corruption in the Met is the part I understand least in this case. I can't work out which theory makes the most sense... Is it bribery for cash, a paedophile ring/other criminal activities by officers, not wanting the negative publicity of Brits committing child murder on foreign soil, or some bizarre perceived threat to national security, or a combination of all? It's head-pickling, somewhat complicated by the fact that I am not English, therefore have less understanding of the inner workings of their police force generally. What could be so damaging that a childs life is worth less than their careers and reputations? Why spend all that money and time and effort on what is essentially a fake investigation that clearly isn't going to yield the result of finding Madeleine alive or dead. As for investigating as though it happened in the UK - nonsensical, full stop. Reading other peoples opinions has mostly strengthened my own beliefs - Kate and Gerry are as guilty as sin, dogs don't lie etc, the rest really has given me food for thought.

by NickE 26.01.18 20:48

I wish I was optimistic about this but I'am not.
I'am sure that there are Police officers who are very sceptical to the McCs but unfortunately Police Officers take orders, and in the end this case is political.
I've seen theories that there could be blackmail involved like, "Support and protect us, if not we will expose this"
Not a completely impossible theory, Imo

by nglfi 27.01.18 11:03

I feel that the McCanns or someone in the tapas 7 were privy to some very sensitive information and used this as leverage and protection. I'm not saying it's directly connected but it reminds me of that famous image of Blair with Savile in the field. I don't know how anyone could meet Jimmy Savile and not see a ghoul, a pervert and a paedophile, not to mention a very nasty person.
There's clearly a proven track history of covering up paedophilia in the higher political ranks, as mentioned above. I feel that it (paedophilia generally) is clearly an element in this case, as the McCanns themselves have told us so. Also the connection with Clement Freud shouldn't be overlooked.
I used to feel operation Grange was genuine but there's only so many times your faith can be tested. Add to that the number of cover ups which have recently come to light and the truth is rather depressing. I even mentioned on here years ago, I had a connection who was friends with a copper who worked on operation Grange. He wasn't senior, just seconded into the role temporarily and he said that Operation Grange were well aware of what the facts of the case were. I suppose this ties into Colin Sutton's admission. Surely any number of trained officers will look at the facts of that case and come to the same conclusion, through following the available evidence, comparing it with known cases and using their brains. Unfortunately political influence makes it impossible to follow through on those logical conclusions.

by ChippyM 27.01.18 11:41

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] "There's clearly a proven track history of covering up paedophilia in the higher political ranks, as mentioned above. I feel that it (paedophilia generally) is clearly an element in this case, as the McCanns themselves have told us so."

That's where I always end up too. I think Savile was never exposed completely because he was a 'fixer', something to do with blackmailing public figures. We are led to believe he was a lone perv. even though he knew Lord Mountbatten and the royals and prime ministers, had access to high profile inmates at Broadmoor and private rooms in hospitals.

What if Gerry, Kate or one of the other Tapas people had some kind of connection to the security services and were also 'fixers' or at least knew of those operations? The objective for the government would be to cover up at all costs the fact that child abuse was being used for political gain, it can never be admitted to - hence the coverup and great cost. Just my speculative musings, obviously.

by **Jill Havern** 27.01.18 12:01

nglfi wrote:I feel that the McCanns or someone in the tapas 7 were privy to some very sensitive information and used this as leverage and protection. I'm not saying it's directly connected but it reminds me of that famous image of Blair with Savile in the field. I don't know how anyone could meet Jimmy Savile and not see a ghoul, a pervert and a paedophile, not to mention a very nasty person.
There's clearly a proven track history of covering up paedophilia in the higher political ranks, as mentioned above. I feel that it (paedophilia generally) is clearly an element in this case, as the McCanns themselves have told us so. Also the connection with Clement Freud shouldn't be overlooked.
I used to feel operation Grange was genuine but there's only so many times your faith can be tested. Add to that the number of cover ups which have recently come to light and the truth is rather depressing. I even mentioned on here years ago, I had a connection who was friends with a copper who worked on operation Grange. He wasn't senior, just seconded into the role temporarily and he said that Operation Grange were well aware of what the facts of the case were. I suppose this ties into Colin Sutton's admission. Surely any number of trained officers will look at the facts of that case and come to the same conclusion, through following the available evidence, comparing it with known cases and using their brains. Unfortunately political influence makes it impossible to follow through on those logical conclusions.

I once met Jimmy Saville many years ago at Lympstone Training Centre during a Royal Marines parade that my father took part in.
Whilst I never liked the bloke (Saville, that is, not my father! big grin

) I had no idea at the time he was a paedophile amongst other vile things.

by nglfi 27.01.18 12:02

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the idea of a fixer makes sense, there's clearly more to the McCanns and friends than meets the eye. They are just too well connected for a group of GPs, consultants etc.

Just to add to the above, one reason I would never ever vote Labour is their connection to PIE IN the 1970s. To think they actively campaigned to legalise paedophilia, well it also puts things into perspective .

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

by nglfi 27.01.18 12:08

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
nglfi wrote:I feel that the McCanns or someone in the tapas 7 were privy to some very sensitive information and used this as leverage and protection. I'm not saying it's directly connected but it reminds me of that famous image of Blair with Savile in the field. I don't know how anyone could meet Jimmy Savile and not see a ghoul, a pervert and a paedophile, not to mention a very nasty person.
There's clearly a proven track history of covering up paedophilia in the higher political ranks, as mentioned above. I feel that it (paedophilia generally) is clearly an element in this case, as the McCanns themselves have told us so. Also the connection with Clement Freud shouldn't be overlooked.
I used to feel operation Grange was genuine but there's only so many times your faith can be tested. Add to that the number of cover ups which have recently come to light and the truth is rather depressing. I even mentioned on here years ago, I had a connection who was friends with a copper who worked on operation Grange. He wasn't senior, just seconded into the role temporarily and he said that Operation Grange were well aware of what the facts of the case were. I suppose this ties into Colin Sutton's admission. Surely any number of trained officers will look at the facts of that case and come to the same conclusion, through following the available evidence, comparing it with known cases and using their brains. Unfortunately political influence makes it impossible to follow through on those logical conclusions.

I once met Jimmy Saville many years ago at Lympstone Training Centre during a Royal Marines parade that my father took part in.
Whilst I never liked the bloke (Saville, that is, not my father! ) I had no idea at the time he was a paedophile amongst other vile things.

That's interesting, GeG, and I'm glad you had a harmless interaction with him!
Obviously it's easier to say with hindsight and 'knowing' what he got up to...just personally speaking, he always made my flesh crawl when I saw him on TV. Also the culture of the BBC at the time was to cover it up, several people knew what was going on. I would hope Blair had advisers whose job it was to protect him from such associations, perhaps not!!

by ChippyM 27.01.18 13:13

I had a harmless interaction with Savile too. I was having a drink at the cafe in Roundhay Park where he lived. I whispered to my O.H., 'who's that weird bloke who's dressed like Jimmy Savile?'. It's as if my brain couldn't process him being in a sunny park and not on TV. ( and I didn't have my glasses on!) He said hello to us and I didn't think much about it really.

My grandma always turned off the TV when he was on, said he gave her the creeps, so her weirdo-radar was fully operational.
I just think it goes to show, the auru of TV personality / 'celebrity' was a brilliant cover for nefarious purposes. Hidden in plain sight.

by ChippyM 27.01.18 13:35

nglfi wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the idea of a fixer makes sense, there's clearly more to the McCanns and friends than meets the eye. They are just too well connected for a group of GPs, consultants etc.

Just to add to the above, one reason I would never ever vote Labour is their connection to PIE IN the 1970s. To think they actively campaigned to legalise paedophilia, well it also puts things into perspective .

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

I remember reading about it. To be honest I don't think you can blame one party for that. Corruption and child abuse will be happening in all parties at some point and PIE was a group affiliated with some Labour MPs.

I think Tony Blair is a war criminal responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths but it doesn't mean I wouldn't vote for Labour ever again.

by **Jill Havern** 27.01.18 13:47

When I met Saville there was none of that "Now then, now then" yodeling nonsense like he did on the tv. He just acted normally, like the rest of us. We just felt we were in the presence of a celebrity, which obviously we were.

He was also an honorary Royal Marine Commando, which is why he was at the parade. He'd completed a training course on Dartmoor in the 60's, so was awarded a Green Beret (which he was buried with). There was even a function room named after him on the camp, and Royal Marine pallbearers carried his coffin. Goodness knows how those blokes must have felt when they found out what they'd been carrying.

Fortunately when the Royal Marines discovered Saville's very murky personality they removed all mention of him.

by sandancer 27.01.18 16:08

I have a video taken in the late 1980's at the gymnastics club my daughter trained at and where I was a coach , this video is of a visit made by Saville to a public display by the gymnasts . For some reason I've kept it even though I know I can never ever watch it again the thought that he was surrounded by young girls in leotards and I with other parents sat and watched makes me feel sick .
I also acted as a marshal at the finish of The Great North Run for several years when Saville took part , I recall being told by several fun runners , Saville is behind us don't bother waiting for him to finish or speak to him he's an a...hole !

by ChippyM 28.01.18 13:47

This is going off topic again... but about Savile being one of only 2 civilians to get a green beret. He must have been very tough, quite unusual really, almost like he's done that kind of thing before. I believe he knew Lord Mountbatten because he was a S.O.E agent in the war, Mountbatten was the head of the S.O.E. They trained in Inverailot Castle not far from where Saville bought a house in Glencoe.

Prince Charles gave Savile gold cufflinks with a message that read 'No-one will know what you did for this country'. Which implies he did something secretive and significant that at least one Royal did know about. It would explain why he was left alone all those years.

"“He did all the component parts: a 30-mile cross country run across Dartmoor; a 12-mile load carrying march; and a nine mile speed march. Even the tunnels, except the underwater one as it reminded him of his mining accident.

“My boss said at the end ‘what do you think?’ I said if you rounded somebody off the street they wouldn’t have done the half of it. Jimmy Savile was 42 and did 90 per cent. So he got his beret. ''

Read more at: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Asylum 28.01.18 14:42

Does anyone remember Jim'll Fix It? My entire class wrote to him to appear on the programme, circa 1989 when we were 8/9 years old. We spent a whole afternoon working on our wishes, the staff sent them off. We were all on tenterhooks for months but heard nothing, the head rang the BBC to find out, then told us our school hadn't been chosen. We were all gutted and decided to boycott the proghen the school picked over us was on, then crossed our fingers they might pull out etc. Eventually we forgot all about it... For 15 years or so till he was exposed, when I realised we'd all had a lucky escape. Really creeped me out, and I know lots of other kids hadn't been so lucky.

by Guest 28.01.18 15:05

Eventually, the people at the top of the manure pile get put out to grass one way or another, retire, die, or occasionally get sacked for one too many inappropriate events. Eventually, those "compromised" people hindering truth get replaced by younger hungrier versions. Those who are being blackmailed do their "duty" until they must be pensioned off.
Eventually there will be new blood who might just lift the lid . The McCanns must be petrified of the future.

by Copodenieve 28.01.18 16:27

Two of my school friends went on Jim'l fix it when we were about 11 or 12 years old. One of the girls was known for being a bit eccentric at school, so when she came back and said that Jim had taken her in to his caravan and fondled her, nobody believed her, not even her mum.