Re: Scotland Yard are in Portugal - Martin Brunt

by **PeterMac** 10.09.11 8:03

Whilst being a professional sceptic, I do not share the outright pessimism of some contributors.
SY "So, could you just run through in your own words how the investigation went."
PJ "Certainly. First they told us the shutters had been broken open. But they hadn't. That was a lie.
Then they said the window had been opened, but the only prints were from Kate.
Then they said the children had been checked every half hour, but we could show that that was also not true. One of the men admitted he did not even look.
Then they mucked up the scene, even through they are professional people and would know how important it was to preserve it.
Then they ..."
SY "Yes, OK. You don't need to go on. I see what you mean. What about later. "
PJ "Well, you sent your top dogs over and they alerted for cadaver scent and blood in precisely the places we might all expect...
And then ..."
SY "Yes, OK. I think we all get the picture. Can you recommend a good tapas bar. Lots to mull over.
As Sherlock Holmes probably did not say, this is a 'A two sardine problem.'

by Guest 10.09.11 8:45

At the point Goncalo Amaral left and the investigation was shelved, by his own admission there were still things that needed to be examined. For a start there was this apartment the McCann's were seen going into. Now we have the dubious creche sheets that appear to have been overlooked. Yes, SY must have the evidence that GA suggests they have, but if the picture was not complete when he left, SY still have much to do.

I thoroughly believe they will turn this one over. They have other guests to track down and interview. They need to identify who exactly was involved in the hiring, firing and relocation of various key people. There are even more bank accounts that will need looking into and even more requests to numerous countries for other sources of information. Every single guest on those guest lists, need examining in this way. Now that there is a direct link between one of the guests and the top layer of the Labour Government, this will need the most amount of time to identify if there was any interference and if so, by who?

I can easily see the Conservative Government saving all this up for when a political bombshell will be the most effective to drop. That's what I would do.

by **PeterMac** 10.09.11 9:10

Stella wrote: ...
I can easily see the Conservative Government saving all this up for when a political bombshell will be the most effective to drop. That's what I would do.

Which gives us till 7 May 2015. Or some months before for the report and the full horror to sink in.

by Guest 10.09.11 10:52

Madeleine McCann: Three Metropolitan Police In Portugal

MADELEINE McCann: Anorak’s at-a-glance look at Our Maddie in the media:

The BBC:

The Met launched a review of the original investigation in May after a request from Home Secretary Theresa May supported by Prime Minister David Cameron.

Daily Express (front page): “MADELINE – 30 Police In New Hunt”

David Pilditch and Tracey Kandohla report:

A NEW investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann was under way last night after senior Scotland Yard detectives flew to Portugal. Officers from a 30-strong squad specially set up to revive the search for Madeleine McCann, who vanished four years ago, met Portuguese authorities for the first time…

Correio de Manha (Portual) says three Met police officers went to Portugal. The meeting was chaired by Pedro do Carmo, head of the PJ.

The Express adds:

The McCanns, of Rothley, Leicestershire, believe vital clues were missed and leads never followed up during the shambolic investigation.

And it was botched. A “family source” says:

“Kate and Gerry believe potentially vital clues were missed in the botched Portuguese investigation and their private eyes are hoping the Met will bring a new perspective to the case, which is being conducted in tandem with Portuguese police. The review is still in its very early stages. Officers are busy going through everything from scratch and analysing it.”

The Correio de Manha features a few words of Goncalo Amaral. He comes across as bitter – although his words are translated by Google and meaning might have been affected:

Gonçalo Amaral – The British can always present the conclusions to which they themselves arrived in 2007. Because they know they have evidence of what happened – no longer need to investigate anything. All this is now a mere ‘show off’.

- How do you justify these meetings now?
- Just in terms of political image of the British prime minister. Do not come here certainly ask to see a process that, since the first time, they have in England and all translated in English …
- It’s a media maneuver the McCanns?
- I do not know, but now it is the Scotland Yard investigating and no longer pay the detectives, they can return the money of the book.

The McCann’s private detectives are still investigating.

Good news, indeed, that the Metropolitan police and Lee Rainbow are on the case.

The story might yet have a conclusion…

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

And this...............

Madeleine McCann: Facing Facts With Lee Rainbow

[snipped]

Skilful

It would seem to be a logical and very good place for any British detective to now begin. Call in the very top man for a chat and seek his opinion on the way the investigation should proceed.

Why? Because that is why Mr Rainbow was paid (by the Home Office which has complied with the Prime Minister’s bidding and requested/ordered/suggested/asked? for the inquiry). Lee Rainbow is recognised as the most skilful and adept adviser the UK has in its armoury.

There’s more: the use of Behavioural Investigative Advisers in serious cases is recommended at all senior detective training courses. Guess who is considered at the very top of the list of advisers? One Lee Rainbow; he wrote the paper.

No PR campaign can ever diminish or cloud that fact. His opinion and views have to be faced and dealt with

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

by Big Vern 10.09.11 11:38

Hold on, hold on.
This is a Portuguese case and it's in the hands of the PJ....What makes you all think that our plod are doing anything more than looking through the files?....They have no jurisdiction whatsoever to start fresh investigations and carry on as if they were here in the UK surely!

by Guest 10.09.11 12:24

Big Vern wrote:Hold on, hold on.
This is a Portuguese case and it's in the hands of the PJ

As far as the disappearence of a child on Portuguese soil is concerned, then yes.

What makes you all think that our plod are doing anything more than looking through the files?....They have no jurisdiction whatsoever to start fresh investigations and carry on as if they were here in the UK surely!

The fund was set up and formerly registered under British laws. The Portuguese have no jurisdiction over a registered British company. If SY are in possession of any material, which according to Goncalo Amaral they are, which suggests that they have received monies under false pretences, then they are duty bound to investigate this and proscute them for major fraud outside of the original Portuguese investigation, I would have thought.

by Daisy 10.09.11 14:29

Reported in todays Daily Mail: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The readers comments make for interesting reading. Just check out the highest rated, seems the pessimism (or should that be realism?) is spreading.

by lj 10.09.11 16:08

Still a lot of posts from the bleeding heart squad.

by Hilary 10.09.11 18:32

Big Vern wrote:
Hilary wrote:

A bit less negativity, a bit more belief in the integrity of the majority of British police, please.

Scotland Yard chief Paul Stephenson stepped down and was then followed out the door 24 hours later by Assistant Commissioner John Yates over corruption and hacking.
The top two cops in the entire force have both had to resign in the last couple of months and you use the word 'integrity'!
Corrupt and bent from top to bottom in my opinion. The days of Dixon of Dock Green are long gone.

_______

Selective news reading - you seem to have missed the rest of that story, in which they were both cleared of misconduct by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (no doubt the response would be that the IPPC is only into whitewash and conspiracy to shield child-harmers, too ) :

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

by **Jill Havern** 10.09.11 18:37

Hilary wrote:
Big Vern wrote:
Hilary wrote:

A bit less negativity, a bit more belief in the integrity of the majority of British police, please.

Scotland Yard chief Paul Stephenson stepped down and was then followed out the door 24 hours later by Assistant Commissioner John Yates over corruption and hacking.
The top two cops in the entire force have both had to resign in the last couple of months and you use the word 'integrity'!
Corrupt and bent from top to bottom in my opinion. The days of Dixon of Dock Green are long gone.

_______

Selective news reading - you seem to have missed the rest of that story, in which they were both cleared of misconduct by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (no doubt the response would be that the IPPC is only into whitewash and conspiracy to shield child-harmers, too ) :

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

I wonder why the two top cops didn't just wait it out then if they knew they would be cleared of misconduct?

by Big Vern 10.09.11 19:58

Hilary wrote:"They were both cleared of misconduct by the Independent Police Complaints Commission"

by Daisy 10.09.11 20:06

Big Vern wrote:
Hilary wrote:"They were both cleared of misconduct by the Independent Police Complaints Commission"

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

Touche.

by Hilary 10.09.11 20:11

Well, let's just wait and see what happens - personally see no need to prejudge events, tar everyone with the same brush, and to think the very worst of people...but carry on if that pleases you. :)

by Daisy 10.09.11 21:53

lj wrote:Still a lot of posts from the bleeding heart squad.

Very much in the minority though eh?

I like this exchange, good question.

"Some comments seem to have some sort of vested
interest in this case being buried and ignored. They seek to blame the
parents but never a word against the criminals who did this. Very
strange."

- Marie, Lancs, 9/9/2011 13:27

"There was never any proof that "crimimals" were involved. What if she
simply wandered out of the apartment and lost her life through accident?
Who would you blame then?"

- Rob, Epsom, 9/9/2011 15:44
Click to rate [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Rating 182

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

by Guest 11.09.11 10:21

PeterMac wrote:
Stella wrote: ...
I can easily see the Conservative Government saving all this up for when a political bombshell will be the most effective to drop. That's what I would do.
Which gives us till 7 May 2015. Or some months before for the report and the full horror to sink in.

I would make sure that the whole court case and sentencing happened under my watch, to ensure justice was done, but finished around the time the votes counted.

2013, might just be an unlucky year for some..

by notdeadfred 12.09.11 16:37

Daisy wrote:
lj wrote:Still a lot of posts from the bleeding heart squad.

Very much in the minority though eh?

I like this exchange, good question.

"Some comments seem to have some sort of vested
interest in this case being buried and ignored. They seek to blame the
parents but never a word against the criminals who did this. Very
strange."

- Marie, Lancs, 9/9/2011 13:27

"There was never any proof that "crimimals" were involved. What if she
simply wandered out of the apartment and lost her life through accident?
Who would you blame then?"

- Rob, Epsom, 9/9/2011 15:44
Click to rate [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]Rating 182

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

Then it would have been the fault of the hotel complex, a child shouldn't be able to wander out of a small hotel room, whilst their British parents dine in the garden, we Brits expect an all inclusive to be just that, safe, free , childcare included and lot's of booze, bloody Jonny Foreigners moving the goal posts!"

~

Ok. That as you know isn't my opinion! That was an ironic response to the Daily Mail comments, but really that is the type of reporting that has been on full blast since May 3rd. Blame, blame and more blame. "We made a mistake" Of course you bloody didn't! A mistake is posting a letter and forgetting to put on a stamp, it isn't leaving three children alone in an unlocked apartment in a small village in a foreign country while you go on the piss, then blaming everyone because you lost one. (Sorry irony again, with the 'lost one') Did they go off to the local pub, and leave the kids alone in Rothley? No of course not, so a small (well not that small TBH) village in southern Europe, is safer than home. Oh. o.k then i believe you, yeah, we all do it!! I'm convinced. The Mccanns are innocent. I'll be right back, just off to buy my copy of the Daily Mail.

by Gillyspot 12.09.11 17:04

notdeadfred wrote:
Ok. That as you know isn't my opinion! That was an ironic response to the Daily Mail comments, but really that is the type of reporting that has been on full blast since May 3rd. Blame, blame and more blame. "We made a mistake" Of course you bloody didn't! A mistake is posting a letter and forgetting to put on a stamp, it isn't leaving three children alone in an unlocked apartment in a small village in a foreign country while you go on the piss, then blaming everyone because you lost one. (Sorry irony again, with the 'lost one') Did they go off to the local pub, and leave the kids alone in Rothley? No of course not, so a small (well not that small TBH) village in southern Europe, is safer than home. Oh. o.k then i believe you, yeah, we all do it!! I'm convinced. The Mccanns are innocent. I'll be right back, just off to buy my copy of the Daily Mail.

Excellent post notdeadfred. Really made me smile (fancy anyone BUYING the Daily Mail)?

by notdeadfred 12.09.11 18:13

[quote="Gillyspot"]

notdeadfred wrote:
Ok. That as you know isn't my opinion! That was an ironic response to the Daily Mail comments, but really that is the type of reporting that has been on full blast since May 3rd. Blame, blame and more blame. "We made a mistake" Of course you bloody didn't! A mistake is posting a letter and forgetting to put on a stamp, it isn't leaving three children alone in an unlocked apartment in a small village in a foreign country while you go on the piss, then blaming everyone because you lost one. (Sorry irony again, with the 'lost one') Did they go off to the local pub, and leave the kids alone in Rothley? No of course not, so a small (well not that small TBH) village in southern Europe, is safer than home. Oh. o.k then i believe you, yeah, we all do it!! I'm convinced. The Mccanns are innocent. I'll be right back, just off to buy my copy of the Daily Mail.

Excellent post notdeadfred. Really made me smile (fancy anyone BUYING the Daily Mail)?[/quote]

Shhhhh! I read it on-line, but, don't tell anyone.[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] I only buy it if I am on a train and I don't want anyone to sit next to me, I mean hey would you sit next to a Daily Mail reader by choice?

by **tigger** 12.09.11 18:36

I'm just wondering. When the bewk was serialised in DM (I too, read online) I took the trouble to go through a lot of the comments. I would say that well over half, perhaps even 75% was anti - fed up with her moaning and requesting less info on her sex life, which doesn't bear imagining.

Perhaps that put them off the book signing and put Gerry of a sponsored bike ride from Portugal to UK. They think it's too risky? We wouldn't hurt a fly, just hold up the odd banner with one of their unique quotes.
The translation deals must have been done at the same time as the contract. The publishers usually want the author to do some publicity and signing.
Transworld might just about break even I think and it will be a very long time before royalties are paid, if ever.