Re: THE SMETHURST FILES - 2. An attempt to extract money from an unrepresented litigant

by Guest 01.11.12 13:10

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

by Bob Southgate 01.11.12 13:17

Thanks for the welcome Jean. I am using my real name as I have nothing to hide and now that I have retired from the Met Police (March this year) I have more freedom to express myself without worrying about the (un)professional standards department putting me under the microscope for having the audacity to voice my views and opinions.[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Bob Southgate 01.11.12 13:19

candyfloss wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Bob

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

by **Nina** 01.11.12 16:23

I too wish to say welcome Bob Southgate and look forward to reading your posts.

by Bob Southgate 01.11.12 16:38

Nina wrote:I too wish to say welcome Bob Southgate and look forward to reading your posts.

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

by jay2001 01.11.12 20:16

Hi Bob! It would be great if you could point some of your Met colleagues towards the wealth of info on this forum.

I just cannot believe how long this review is taking. I realise the wheels of justice grind slowly and there may be plenty of painstaking action behind the scenes that, obviously and quite rightly, we're not privy to. What does amaze me is that the t7 + 2 have not been taken in for questioning. (Unless they have and it's been leaked or spun in any way.) There doesn't seem to be any point in a paper exercise supposedly looking at leads missed or false when the people involved could barely remember what they had done and when they'd done it. Never read such a load of inconsistencies and errs and ums from educated people.

There are more and more Tweeters questioning the actions of the parents and their friends. Sue-ing non believers has made a lot of people search the net for info and are now aware of the discrepancies in the story.

by Bob Southgate 02.11.12 0:48

Hello Jay,

It does seem to me that the actions of team McCann and some of their supporters are counter productive and are making people who may previously have been sympathetic question their version of events and start to do their own research. Some of what I have seen today (thanks to a good friend giving me some very interesting links) has astounded me and the use of CR to sue anyone who expresses themselves in such a way which is not to the satisfaction of the McCanns is utterly disgraceful. It seems to me that their approach is bullying and it reminds me of good old Captain Bob Maxwell and how he used threats of suing for libel, slander, defamation etc to prevent the truth about him and his dodgy practices being revealed. The truth about him did eventually come out, but only after he died.

I would dearly like the truth to be revealed, especially as it seems many have forgotten that at the heart of this is the disappearance of a 4 year old girl, a fellow human being.

by Ribisl 02.11.12 6:53

Bob Southgate wrote:

I would dearly like the truth to be revealed, especially as it seems many have forgotten that at the heart of this is the disappearance of a 4 year old girl, a fellow human being.

I hope the truth will come out one day but I am not convinced the Met Police investigation will be deep enough to ask the searching questions that need to be asked and it will end up as a monumental waste of public money at a time when police resources are stretched tight.

Yes, Madeleine is at the heart of this saga and most of us believe her parents and T7, possibly to a lesser extent, know exactly what happened to her. So why have they not been interviewed by the Met? People have been posting various theories as to the true purpose of Operation Grange but I would be very interested to find out why you think the Met's investigation won't be deep enough.

by Bob Southgate 02.11.12 17:32

Ribisl wrote:
Bob Southgate wrote:

I would dearly like the truth to be revealed, especially as it seems many have forgotten that at the heart of this is the disappearance of a 4 year old girl, a fellow human being.

I hope the truth will come out one day but I am not convinced the Met Police investigation will be deep enough to ask the searching questions that need to be asked and it will end up as a monumental waste of public money at a time when police resources are stretched tight.

Yes, Madeleine is at the heart of this saga and most of us believe her parents and T7, possibly to a lesser extent, know exactly what happened to her. So why have they not been interviewed by the Met? People have been posting various theories as to the true purpose of Operation Grange but I would be very interested to find out why you think the Met's investigation won't be deep enough.

I believe it will hinge on the terms of reference they have been given to conduct their own investigation and I would be very surprised if the investigation team have been given carte blanche to carry out a full investigation. Section 9 of the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 does allow for a UK citizen to be dealt with in the UK for offences of murder or manslaughter so if there was evidence that the McCanns did kill Maddie then they could be prosecuted in the UK.

But given who ordered the Mets investigation (Cameron) I think there will be huge amounts of egg on face if the investigation did reveal any evidence that the McCanns are culpable for Maddies death, assuming that she is dead of course. Knowing how the Met operates and protects its senior managers I am not hopeful. Do a google search on Detective Sergeant Howard Shaw for a good example of offences of misconduct in public office by his so called superior officers when he blew the whistle on dishonest practices within his own unit.

by Ribisl 02.11.12 22:02

Tribunal rules that police colluded at top level to destroy the career of junior detective who reported one of them for cheating

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

Thanks Bob thumbup

by Smokeandmirrors 03.11.12 8:28

Hello Bob, welcome!! I will be most interested to follow your posts, any perspective from a police point of view enhances the discussion IMO.

by Bob Southgate 03.11.12 14:15

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Hello Bob, welcome!! I will be most interested to follow your posts, any perspective from a police point of view enhances the discussion IMO.

Thanks for the welcome and I look forward to being able to freely express my opinions, now that I am retired, without having to worry about the Department of (Un)Professional Standards pursuing me for daring to express myself. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

THE SMETHURST FILES - 2. An attempt to extract money from an unrepresented litigant