Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

by jeanmonroe 10.06.13 11:23

I've always 'wondered' how the McCanns have been able to 'pre-empt' questions BEFORE they are asked.
Like the McS saying the Yard would be asking the public, 'SOON' and lo and behold the Yard duely 'obliged' just days later!
How did THEY know that the Yard would be 'going public' SOON?

Is HE, THE 'big boss', the 'mole'?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/6761027.stm
Sycophantic balloon launching, fund raising 'supporter' of possible future suspects in a case?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2338692/New-Met-chief-resign-Plebgate-media-leak.html

It is claimed Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe LEAKED DETAILS ON THE 'PROGRESS' OF AN 'INQUIRY' into the controversy
He is also accused of breaking own rules by not recording meetings with journalists
He also accused Sir Bernard of breaking his own rules on engaging with the media by not recording the meetings with two newspapers.

The MP said Sir Bernard received regular briefings on the progress of the controversial investigation from one of his most senior colleagues.

REGULAR BRIEFINGS and RECEIVING PROGRESS of a CONTROVERSIAL INVESTIGATIVE REVIEW by OPERATION GRANGE?

Friends of Mr Mitchell used Freedom of Information laws to reveal that Sir Bernard had a private meeting with journalists. The Met confirmed that the meetings took place but said no records were kept about exactly what was said

HAS HE HAD PRIVATE MEETINGS WITH JOURNOS ABOUT MCCANN CASE?

The allegations are embarrassing for Sir Bernard because he has banned his officers from holding off-the-record conversations with the media.

He has said: ‘There should be no more secret conversations with journalists and officers should make a note of all meetings with reporters.’

OH DEAR!

And former Justice Minister Crispin Blunt said Sir Bernard’s position will be ‘untenable’ if it is found he leaked information on the inquiry to the media.

Mr Davis said information on any findings of the inquiry should have been ‘restricted’, and revealing it ‘UNDERMINES the judicial process and THE PUBLIC'S CONFIDENCE in the IMPARTIALITY of the system’.

Probably why we continually question why the T9/10 don't appeared to have been 're-interviewed!

OH DEARY, DEARY ME!

by j.cam 10.06.13 11:30

this is merely relevant to the Mitchell case......but highlights the ongoing questionability of our authorities perfectly. what a sham.

by jeanmonroe 10.06.13 11:35

j.cam wrote:this is merely relevant to the Mitchell case......but highlights the ongoing questionability of our authorities perfectly. what a sham.

I know this is about Mitchell but do we know if this 'behaviour' is NOT relevant to 'other' cases?
We wouldn't know, because no notes would be kept, would they?
I must have missed BHH's 'balloon launch', for Mr Mitchell!

by ShuBob 10.06.13 12:26

What a travesty.

At least, the truth is coming out in drips and drabs. For that, I am thankful and hopeful that the truth about Maddie's disappearance will be known- at least, as far as it concerns the British authorities.

by sheila.edwards 10.06.13 15:20

fact is stranger than fiction isent it.! cant even get my head around the "non reportable Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'? 3139096799

Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'? 3139096799

briefings to the press" by the police. don't they all have to keep a record of what they tell tabloids always one would hope not just in these operations. yes Oh dear

by marconi 10.06.13 21:27

They are always giving us the impression that they are up to date with the Met work but on the other hand we can observe that Gerry said in their last interview that the Met had many more pieces of the puzzle whilsh "we are still miles and miles away".

More than obvious that the Met are silent about the review.

But it seems, yes, that the Met told them that they are about to solve the case.

by plebgate 10.06.13 21:32

I agree Shubob, drip, drip, drip, the truth will out in the end.

by aiyoyo 11.06.13 5:23

Friends of Mr Mitchell used Freedom of Information laws to reveal that Sir Bernard had a private meeting with journalists. The Met confirmed that the meetings took place but said no records were kept about exactly what was said

Uhmmm...? I dont get how that works?
Which authority would his friend have written to that gave him that kind of info under FOI?
Press Commission?

I think that is just another PINK hallmark.

by Monty Heck 11.06.13 19:38

jeanmonroe Yesterday at 11:23 am

I've always 'wondered' how the McCanns have been able to 'pre-empt' questions BEFORE they are asked.
Like the McS saying the Yard would be asking the public, 'SOON' and lo and behold the Yard duely 'obliged' just days later!
How did THEY know that the Yard would be 'going public' SOON?

Perhaps there is no mole, just spin? SY could have contacted the McCs as a matter of course to inform them there was going to be a press announcement, particularly as the media were likely to be contacting them asking for a quote on the SY release. Not the same as being given operational information, but easy to make it appear as though they really are being kept informed. There is after all a long track record of maximising the slightest piece of information the Team get hold of, to make it seem as if they've been told much more than is actually the case.

Or perhaps you are right and there is a high level mole - depressing thought.

by Liz Eagles 11.06.13 19:56

Monty Heck wrote:jeanmonroe Yesterday at 11:23 am

I've always 'wondered' how the McCanns have been able to 'pre-empt' questions BEFORE they are asked.
Like the McS saying the Yard would be asking the public, 'SOON' and lo and behold the Yard duely 'obliged' just days later!
How did THEY know that the Yard would be 'going public' SOON?

Perhaps there is no mole, just spin? SY could have contacted the McCs as a matter of course to inform them there was going to be a press announcement, particularly as the media were likely to be contacting them asking for a quote on the SY release. Not the same as being given operational information, but easy to make it appear as though they really are being kept informed. There is after all a long track record of maximising the slightest piece of information the Team get hold of, to make it seem as if they've been told much more than is actually the case.

Or perhaps you are right and there is a high level mole - depressing thought.

There hasn't been an article in the MSM for over a week now. I take that as a positive sign.

by Monty Heck 11.06.13 20:22

aquila Today at 7:56 pm

There hasn't been an article in the MSM for over a week now. I take that as a positive sign.

There is always hope, and that does seem quite positive, thanks.

Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

is this how the MCs know

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Re: Is THIS how the McS 'know' so much about supposedly INDEPENDENT 'review progress'?

Latest topics