Scotland Yard takes over the inquiry into Maddie's disappearance from Portuguese plus *UPDATE* CPS lawyers fly to Portugal

Me wrote:

kitkat wrote:

roy rovers wrote:SY / CPS may be aiming to get ALL their ducks in a row before re-interviewing T9 as one confession is worth so much more than any amount of circumstantial evidence. I agree that it is mega significant that it was the CPS not SY in Portugal and that it was their head honcho.

Do you honestly believe that the Portuguese would have refused to re-open the case and NOT leaked info about it to the media if SY had found ANY kind of proof that implicated the family?   Or that, Alison Saunders, who once headed up the CPS Organised Crime Division/specialises in trafficking, is the lead on this case all because SY hope to get "their ducks in a row before re-interviewing T9"?  

No i don't think they would have leaked anything, on the basis that they haven't leaked anything about the team set up that have been liasing with SY over the last few months.

On the reopening of the case it's more likely at this stage that SY have the ability to complete the investigation more easily in the Uk given the location of the last people to see Madeleine alive.

It is i guess also a possibility that SY could do more groundwork and develop more evidence and then Portuguese can reopen the case. Or failing that and given Alison Saunders is now the head of complex cases (if they were going down the route of trafficking why didn't the current head of trafficking go rather than the former one?) SY may be of the opinion they can move forward with what they have got or need issues clarifying before they do so.

Let's not forget the CPS's MO:

As the principal prosecuting authority in England and Wales the CPS is responsible for criminal cases beyond the police investigatory stage. The CPS will advise the police on cases for possible prosecution, review cases submitted by the police, determine any charges in all but minor cases, prepare cases for court and present cases at court. Primarily, the CPS will review the evidence gathered by the police and provide guidance. During pre-charge procedures and throughout the investigative and prosecuting process the CPS may assist the police by explaining what additional work or evidence could raise the case to a viable charging standard thereby rectifying any evidential deficiencies. Once the evidence is gathered the CPS will then decide, on the basis of this evidence, whether a case should be pursued or dropped."

The one thing they won't be doing is going to Portugal to discuss any of the ludicrous inventions of child rings and dead paedos, as Portugal knows nothing about those and has gathered no evidence to support any of those theories.

Why would the CPS go to Portugal to disucss evidence that the PJ and Portuguese Prosecutors haven't gathered?

Think it's a safe bet they have have gone over there to discuss the evidence they have gathered.

Cristobell wrote:I see that opinions are varied on whether or not this will be a whitewash, I however remain optimistic for a number of reasons.
.

Cheshire Cat wrote:£5 million was spent by Hamish Campbell on investigating the Jill Dando Murder. 30 Policemen spent over 12 months sifting through evidence and leads. They got the wrong man.

Cristobell wrote:

Cheshire Cat wrote:£5 million was spent by Hamish Campbell on investigating the Jill Dando Murder. 30 Policemen spent over 12 months sifting through evidence and leads. They got the wrong man.

Ahhh, but on the plus side, they are working with the Portuguese. 

Tony Bennett wrote:

marconi wrote:Tony Bennett, what is the function of a prosecutor lawyer now, whilst there [is neither] trial nor charges going on - and what can we expect of such a person?
 
Who sent her to Portugal, in your opinion, and is it a sign that soon charges could be brought to suspects?
 
Did such a prosecutor lawyer appear on the horizon because probably the Yard has already an answer?

I am going to answer your question about the role of CPS lawyers by giving you an insight into the actions of CPS lawyers in the case of the death of Lee Balkwell, in which I have been involved for the past 6 years.

Early on the morning of 18 July 2002, Lee was reported dead or dying, trapped in a concrete mixer. Ever since then, argument has raged over whether this was a genuine accident, or 'tragic accident' as Essex Police maintained from the off, or a murder disguised as an accident.

After a cursory 5-week investigation, DCSupt Graeme Bull closed his investiagtion and out up a file to the CPS, recommending that no criminal charges should be laid against anyone.


He then, in accordance with normal practice, passed his thin file to the chief CPS lawyer for Essex, Christopher McCann (no relation, so far as I am aware).

McCann basically rubber-stamped Bull's recommendation of no criminal charges. In an interim report dated 29 June 2009 and a final report dated 30 Januayr 2012, the IPCC branded Bull's investigation as 'seriously flawed', upheld 13 separate allegations of misconduct against him, and 13 more allegations of msiconduct against other senior police officers in the case were also upheld.

A lengthy review of evidence took place. The subsequent reviewing officer, Simon Coxall, on at least two further occasions, consulted the CPS (Christopher McCann) again. Once again, the verdict from McCann was 'no crime has been committed'.  

From 22 January to 9 February, there was an Inquest. Essex Police approached this by continuing to maintain that it was 'a tragic accident'. A verdict of 'accidental death' was being sought.

Lee Balkwell's father was represented by a barrister, Tony Ventham, at the Inquest. In his closing speech to the Coroner, he said, and I quote, that "there is overwhelming evidence that Lee Balkwell was murdered".

The Coroner, however told the jury that she would not allow them to bring in a verdict of homicide as there was 'insufficient evidence'.

The 10-person jury returned this unanimous verdict: 'Unlawfully killed due to gross negligence/manslaughter'.

That verdict clearly required Essex Police to reconsider the case. The jury had said that there was an unlawful killing. That meant that someone must be responsible for that unlawful killing.

After several weeks, it appeared to us that Essex Police were once again trying to close their file without prosecuting anyone. They told us that they were, quote, 'preparing a file for the CPS'.

At that stage, we wrote to the then head of the East of England CPS service, Ken Caley, suggesting that up to now the CPS (i.e. Christopher McCann) had acted unprofessionally - i.e. he had never addressed the possibility that Lee Balkwell had been murdered, and had merely rubber-stamped the clearly flawed reports from Essex Police.  

Mr Caley agreed that the matter should be reviewed by an independent CPS lawyer, and so that matter was passed to Nick Staite, the chief CPS lawyer for Cambridgeshire. We were told that he was entirely independent of Essex CPS.

He has had the file for over 4 years. During that time, he has had at least two major meetings with the police and other professionals to discuss the evidence in the case. He has also met separately with myself and Les Balkwell on one occasion, and with Les Balkwell and members of his family on two other occasions.  

On the last occasion, 4 February, Nick Staite met with Les Balkwell and his daughter. There, Mr Balkwell learnt what to him was devastating news that Nick Staite's line manager was now Christopher McCann, who had been promoted to Head of the CPS for the whole of the East of England.

At around the same time, we learnt that Essex Police had arrested members of the Bromley family not for a deliberate act against Lee Balkwell but for 'gross negligence', a charge which we say is not supported at all by the evidence. We say unequivocally, as Les balkwell's barrister did over 5 years ago, that he was unlawfully, deliberately, killed.

Thus Christopher McCann is now managing the very person who, 11 years ago, rubber-stamped Essex Police's 'seriously flawed' investigation. The 'independnece' we were promised back in 2008 by Ken Caley has clearly been lost.

We have complained, back in April, against Nick Staite's obvious lack of independence. We took our complaint to Keir Starmer Q.C., Director of Public Prosecutions.

It is causing the CPS a headache in how to deal with the case. This letter arrived yesterday from Mr Frank Ferguson, Acting Deputy Chief Crown Prosecuter, CPS East of England:

"Dear Mr Bennett

In my letter of 24 May 2013 I indicated that I would update you as to the position by 18 June 2013. I apologise for the slight delay in responding to you.

Work has been carried out since receipt of your correspondence to enable me to consider the most appropriate way forward but this is going to take a little longer. I will write to you again within 14 days to confirm the position.

Yours sincerely..."

It remains the view of Les Balkwell and myself that this case continues to be handled corruptly with a view to hiding the true circumstances of Lee's death and a multitude of other sins committed by Essex Police senior officers.

+++++++++++++++

That background will perhaps be an insight into how the CPS get involved in what would certainly be called another 'complex' case.

They receive evidence about an event, about a possible crime.

They advise on whether there is sufficient evidence to charge any individual.

They advise on what legal charges it is appropriate to bring.

They advise on what more evidence might be needed in order to achieve a successful prosecution.

To answer your questions about what the CPS senior lawyers might be doing in Portugal in April:

1. They had no business being there at all unless it was on the basis that there was a reasonable amount of evidence to consider a prosecution of one or more individuals for their part in the disaappearance of Madeleinde McCann

2. The fact that it was the CPS No. 1 and No. 2 lawyers going to Portugal probbaly indicates the complexity or seriousness of the possible charges, and/or the importance of this case to the British government

3. It suggests that a prosecution of someone in England and Wales is being considered

4. They might have gone to try to extract more evidence from the PJ files (presumably to strengthen the case against someone)

5. They might have gone to discuss the practicalities of a prosecution in England e.g. what witnesses, police or otherwise, might be required, how they are going to get to an English court, what will be needed in the way of translation services, who will pay for them etc. etc.  

6. You asked: "Who sent the CPS lawyers to Portugal?" It must have been done, at least in part, at the request of the Senior Investigating Officer in the case, DCI Andy Redwood. Unless he already has significant evidence against one or more individuals, then the CPS lawyers travelling to Portugal would be just a sham, a performance for public consumption. No doubt Keir Starmer Q.C. was himself involved in ordering his top two lawyers over to Portugal. Whether someone else leant on Keir Starmer Q.C. to send his two top CPS lawyers to Portugal, I have no way of knowing.

Cheshire Cat wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Cheshire Cat wrote:£5 million was spent by Hamish Campbell on investigating the Jill Dando Murder. 30 Policemen spent over 12 months sifting through evidence and leads. They got the wrong man.

Ahhh, but on the plus side, they are working with the Portuguese. 

From 2001...Jill Dando and Barry George :

Alison Saunders, a crown prosecution service lawyer who led the work of the prosecution team, said the conviction showed that circumstantial evidence taken together could, despite common misconceptions, be used to build a strong case.
"Many people believe that circumstantial evidence is not as valuable as direct evidence, such as forensic evidence.
"But in this case, each bit of circumstantial evidence was like a piece of a jigsaw, which fitted together to build up the complete and compelling picture."
The Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir John Stevens, said: "This was a protracted and complex investigation and the team worked exceptionally hard to present compelling evidence to the jury.
"Indeed, the judge has commented on just how meticulous an investigation superintendent Hamish Campbell and his officers carried out."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/jul/02/jilldando

roy rovers wrote:It would do Theresa May's political ambitions no harm to see this case 'solved' on her watch. Probably Cameron's as well whilst at the same time expose Gordon Broon as a bigger buffoon than we already know him to be.

Casey5 wrote:I wonder if the McCanns' are regretting not taking a leaf out of the book of their Tapas mates after the lifting of their arguido status and keeping quiet and getting on with their lives?

We never hear anything from or about their friends - apart from an odd charity race appearance. They have, seemingly, returned to their old lives, gone back to work and are bringing up their kids.

If the McCanns' had some input in or knowledge of the disappearance of Madeleine then if they had done the same, told their friends and families that they had to bring some form of normality into their lives for the sake of the twins maybe then I believe they would have been home and dry - albeit without their daughter.

I sincerely believe they know what happened to Madeleine McCann, they are probably living in great fear now and I'm desperately sorry for the twins.

They should have taken Pat Brown's advice when she told them to  "shut the f-ck up".

lj wrote:

Me wrote:

kitkat wrote:

roy rovers wrote:SY / CPS may be aiming to get ALL their ducks in a row before re-interviewing T9 as one confession is worth so much more than any amount of circumstantial evidence. I agree that it is mega significant that it was the CPS not SY in Portugal and that it was their head honcho.

Do you honestly believe that the Portuguese would have refused to re-open the case and NOT leaked info about it to the media if SY had found ANY kind of proof that implicated the family?   Or that, Alison Saunders, who once headed up the CPS Organised Crime Division/specialises in trafficking, is the lead on this case all because SY hope to get "their ducks in a row before re-interviewing T9"?  

No i don't think they would have leaked anything, on the basis that they haven't leaked anything about the team set up that have been liasing with SY over the last few months.

On the reopening of the case it's more likely at this stage that SY have the ability to complete the investigation more easily in the Uk given the location of the last people to see Madeleine alive.

It is i guess also a possibility that SY could do more groundwork and develop more evidence and then Portuguese can reopen the case. Or failing that and given Alison Saunders is now the head of complex cases (if they were going down the route of trafficking why didn't the current head of trafficking go rather than the former one?) SY may be of the opinion they can move forward with what they have got or need issues clarifying before they do so.

Let's not forget the CPS's MO:

As the principal prosecuting authority in England and Wales the CPS is responsible for criminal cases beyond the police investigatory stage. The CPS will advise the police on cases for possible prosecution, review cases submitted by the police, determine any charges in all but minor cases, prepare cases for court and present cases at court. Primarily, the CPS will review the evidence gathered by the police and provide guidance. During pre-charge procedures and throughout the investigative and prosecuting process the CPS may assist the police by explaining what additional work or evidence could raise the case to a viable charging standard thereby rectifying any evidential deficiencies. Once the evidence is gathered the CPS will then decide, on the basis of this evidence, whether a case should be pursued or dropped."

The one thing they won't be doing is going to Portugal to discuss any of the ludicrous inventions of child rings and dead paedos, as Portugal knows nothing about those and has gathered no evidence to support any of those theories.

Why would the CPS go to Portugal to disucss evidence that the PJ and Portuguese Prosecutors haven't gathered?

Think it's a safe bet they have have gone over there to discuss the evidence they have gathered.

I tried to say the same, just not so well-spoken.
I do think in this high-profile case, that even a conclusion with a dead suspect, would be worth discussing. The work of CPS is not only prosecuting a suspect, it's also "closing" a case, isn't it?

Cristobell wrote:

Cheshire Cat wrote:£5 million was spent by Hamish Campbell on investigating the Jill Dando Murder. 30 Policemen spent over 12 months sifting through evidence and leads. They got the wrong man.

Ahhh, but on the plus side, they are working with the Portuguese. 

marconi wrote:Dear Tony,
thank you very much indeed for answering my questions and for trusting me. Eerything is new for me and I am not familiar with the UK laws.
I believe that the PJ would not have accepted the Yard getting involved in the case if they would not have had its guarantee of a fair colaboration. Maybe the PJ asked that prosecutor lawyer to come to Portugal, in order to personnally meet her. I would have done it and you can not forget that the Yard investigation is happening very far away from Portugal and the PJ is not British, they work on a different way.

I don't believe that the UK is burning 5 million only for a cover up. A cover up was not necessary because England is primary uninformed and the arguido status of the McCanns was lifted 5 years ago.
My opinion is that the British government wants  to get rid of the McCanns, searching for justice and peace. You can read it on Cameron's words to the parents: ..."and don't give up, speak volumes". If the British government would not do something about it, the McCanns would continue being a pain in their ...!
It is of their interest to solve this case, for Madeleine's sake and for themselves.

The parents' silence speaks volumes too.

It seems that Theresa May is about to give a statement about he case. I don't know if it is true.

Dear Tony, thank you for everything. You are an angel!

stillsloppingout wrote:

Casey5 wrote:I wonder if the McCanns' are regretting not taking a leaf out of the book of their Tapas mates after the lifting of their arguido status and keeping quiet and getting on with their lives?

We never hear anything from or about their friends - apart from an odd charity race appearance. They have, seemingly, returned to their old lives, gone back to work and are bringing up their kids.

If the McCanns' had some input in or knowledge of the disappearance of Madeleine then if they had done the same, told their friends and families that they had to bring some form of normality into their lives for the sake of the twins maybe then I believe they would have been home and dry - albeit without their daughter.

I sincerely believe they know what happened to Madeleine McCann, they are probably living in great fear now and I'm desperately sorry for the twins.

They should have taken Pat Brown's advice when she told them to  "shut the f-ck up".

They have had no choice other than stay in the public eye , they chose the hide in plain sight , huddle in with politicians etc ,line of defence  ' employed  to perfection by Jimmy Saville.

  There possible undoing has being  Gerry's trying to get into politics [ that was the / his  ultimate objective , [ hence Leverson , Hacked off etc . ] if that had been achieved , say standing for parliament , or being a minister of some kind they would have been home and dry . 
Hacked off i repeat is what will ultimately be his undoing , biting ,both the hands of his loyal subjects, "the press" and pi@@ing off a lot of ministers etc at the same time .

 To quote somebody ? Hubris always gets you in the end .

Tony Bennett wrote:

marconi wrote:Dear Tony,
thank you very much indeed for answering my questions and for trusting me. Eerything is new for me and I am not familiar with the UK laws.
I believe that the PJ would not have accepted the Yard getting involved in the case if they would not have had its guarantee of a fair colaboration. Maybe the PJ asked that prosecutor lawyer to come to Portugal, in order to personnally meet her. I would have done it and you can not forget that the Yard investigation is happening very far away from Portugal and the PJ is not British, they work on a different way.

I don't believe that the UK is burning 5 million only for a cover up. A cover up was not necessary because England is primary uninformed and the arguido status of the McCanns was lifted 5 years ago.
My opinion is that the British government wants  to get rid of the McCanns, searching for justice and peace. You can read it on Cameron's words to the parents: ..."and don't give up, speak volumes". If the British government would not do something about it, the McCanns would continue being a pain in their ...!
It is of their interest to solve this case, for Madeleine's sake and for themselves.

The parents' silence speaks volumes too.

It seems that Theresa May is about to give a statement about he case. I don't know if it is true.

Dear Tony, thank you for everything. You are an angel!

Your comments noted, by the way rainbow-fairy has been on this forum for long enough to know that there is more than one person around trying to lay traps for me. I see she has apologised to you for her reaction. I will always try to answer reasonable questions put to me - but as you must know there are quite a few questions that I can no longer give an honest answer to, or indeed any answer to

Tony Bennett wrote:

marconi wrote:Dear Tony,
thank you very much indeed for answering my questions and for trusting me. Eerything is new for me and I am not familiar with the UK laws.
I believe that the PJ would not have accepted the Yard getting involved in the case if they would not have had its guarantee of a fair colaboration. Maybe the PJ asked that prosecutor lawyer to come to Portugal, in order to personnally meet her. I would have done it and you can not forget that the Yard investigation is happening very far away from Portugal and the PJ is not British, they work on a different way.

I don't believe that the UK is burning 5 million only for a cover up. A cover up was not necessary because England is primary uninformed and the arguido status of the McCanns was lifted 5 years ago.
My opinion is that the British government wants  to get rid of the McCanns, searching for justice and peace. You can read it on Cameron's words to the parents: ..."and don't give up, speak volumes". If the British government would not do something about it, the McCanns would continue being a pain in their ...!
It is of their interest to solve this case, for Madeleine's sake and for themselves.

The parents' silence speaks volumes too.

It seems that Theresa May is about to give a statement about he case. I don't know if it is true.

Dear Tony, thank you for everything. You are an angel!

Your comments noted, by the way rainbow-fairy has been on this forum for long enough to know that there is more than one person around trying to lay traps for me. I see she has apologised to you for her reaction. I will always try to answer reasonable questions put to me - but as you must know there are quite a few questions that I can no longer give an honest answer to, or indeed any answer to