Operation Grange Remit

by justme3 19.03.12 21:33

I don't know if this has been previously posted, but it's from the Met Police website:

Op Grange Remit

The support and expertise proffered by the Commissioner will be provided by the Homicide & Serious Crime Command - SCD1.

The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’. This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);

• The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies.
• UK Law Enforcement agencies,
• Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.

The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before.

It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the ABDUCTION had taken place in the uk) [my emphasis] what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter. Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit.

End

by Ribisl 19.03.12 22:22

There is a thread under the same title posted here on 5th Jan. Why don't you do a bit of search before you post??

by justme3 19.03.12 22:30

Thank you for that advice, Ribisl. Not to upset you further, I'll refrain from posting anything more.

by Gillyspot 19.03.12 22:32

Justme - thanks for sharing it roses

- even if it is again. big grin

by bristow 19.03.12 22:57

Ribisl wrote:There is a thread under the same title posted here on 5th Jan. Why don't you do a bit of search before you post??

I'm sure Justme did some searching beforehand, a lot of people aren't totally up with the workings of forums, it's very intimidating to jump on people like you have, it acts as a deterrent for people who are thinking of joining the site that may not be the most uber confident person but could have a lot to offer a site like this.

by Ribisl 19.03.12 23:06

Sorry I apologise. It's been a tough day at work empathy

by maebee 19.03.12 23:22

justme3 wrote:Thank you for that advice, Ribisl. Not to upset you further, I'll refrain from posting anything more.

Please don't refrain from posting jm3. I've been following the case for 5 years and your post was new to me. Keep posting.

by Guest 20.03.12 8:17

Ribisl wrote:There is a thread under the same title posted here on 5th Jan. Why don't you do a bit of search before you post??

That was a bit harsh Ribisl you must admit, although you have apologised now I see thumbsup

by Ribisl 20.03.12 9:22

Sorry again for jumping on you justme3 roses

Done my 20 mins in the sin bin

by russiandoll 20.03.12 12:39

Also elsewhere a post by me worth a read......could not find it for the Met but was an abduction workflow document for a UK police force, same for all I would expect, and it stated in capitals IF IN DOUBT THINK MURDER.
It stressed the importance of medical info esp for high risk alleged abductees, and that the last person to see the victim alive was significant, as was the person reporting the abduction....it went on to mention scenarios where the person reporting the crime of abduction was the perpetrator of a crime him/herself. It gave me hope for this case and it is I think on the original thread started earlier this year shortly after the remit was published. It is I repeat well worth a read considering the remit states review done as if abduction happened in the UK. It is clear from the policy and procedures doc that the police do not begin from a presumed abduction, taking the word of those reporting it..they work to establish IF abduction is what happened as alleged. It is at the time reported only an allegation, not an established fact. It reads as if the police work towards whether given the facts they can establish, probable, possible , implausible or even impossible abduction. And if in doubt, consider the crime of murder to be investigated.

by nomendelta 20.03.12 12:47

russiandoll wrote: Also elsewhere a post by me worth a read......could not find it for the Met but was an abduction workflow document for a UK police force, same for all I would expect, and it stated in capitals IF IN DOUBT THINK MURDER.
.

And that one little factoid completely exposes Kate for the unpleasant narcissist she appears to be - her attitude all along has been "HOW DARE THEY" with regard to accusations levelled against her, demanding to know WHY the PJ accused her yet here we see, as much of us already knew, that it's not only a natural instinct based on previous cases but is also actually part of the UK police's modus operandi in unravelling such cases.

I've said before if a child under my care had gone missing I would not be happy about being accused but I would, on some level, at least understand WHY it had happened, shrug it off and focus on doing what I could to find out what did happen. The fact that this seems to be a million miles away from Kate's thinking speaks volumes I feel.