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

by jd 15.06.13 14:31

[quote="candyfloss". The review has further identified both investigative and forensic opportunities to support the Portuguese[/i]

Will this be the unidentified DNA sample that pins it on someone like hewlett?

by Liz Eagles 15.06.13 14:34

Tony Bennett wrote:
aquila wrote:It seems to me that it's not so much about Portugal refusing to re-open the case but more about SY being better placed to investigate.

Tony Bennett "REPLY: We don't actually know for certain whether or not the Portuguese Police have actually handed over to the SY Review Team the 20% or so of the thousands of documents that they have withheld. If the SY Review Team have got them, they've never said so.

What would be the case if they haven't? The SY Review Team would be without potentially vital information. Maybe the Portuguese Police are keeping it to themselves?"

REPLY
Perhaps they have, perhaps they haven't Tony. The review status has certainly been weird with spoutings of the McCanns being consulted and kept informed - so the Portuguese Police may have not disclosed all documents. In the light of SY actually carrying out a formal investigation one would think that there is no longer any consultation going on with the McCanns.

I'm not seeing this as a political hot potato. Both police services will have already agreed the terms on which they operate before the announcement imo.

I can only see a win-win situation between UK and Portugal if arrests are made and are pivotal to the initial work done by the Portuguese.

by Woofer 15.06.13 14:42

sonic72 wrote:I can't believe they still haven't solved this case, what do they do with their time?! Are they really that incompetent?!

Chop, chop!

I second that. As someone has said already, a child could have solved this case in a quarter of the time. And when we get statements from SY that they are keeping the prime suspects informed of progress, I think the whole of SY must have lost their brains. aaagh

Tony said, in another thread on this subject, that SY have been presented with many lines of enquiry and queries regarding the abduction story. And they have to follow these up. If they don`t, they could be in trouble for doing a Yates and purposely neglecting to follow up vital leads. One hopes, that if SY are not doing their job properly, they will be investigated themselves.

by sonic72 15.06.13 14:46

I think everyone should bombard Scotland Yard with information about the case.

The phone calls the day before she went missing need a re-visit.

They need to look at Martin Grime's findings again, and all the inconsistencies in their stories.

If it's easy to prove there could not have been an abduction, then there's no reason why SY cannot work this out either. After all, it is their job, and they have all the resources available to them. Columbo would have cracked this case by now.

So yeah, I'm sure this has been done by others before, but I think people should send an email/letter to SY and remind them of the important facts that point to no abduction, and maddy dying in that apartment.

The general public consensus is they are guilty, how can the police not even see this themselves?

Maybe the penny might finally drop this time around.

First thing they need to do is arrest them all and interview them vigorously. Then this case needs to be put to bed, once and for all...

by Woofer 15.06.13 14:47

ShuBob wrote:I hope this news will bring Joana Morais out of hibernation. I'd like to hear the view from Portugal. A comment from Amaral will be very welcome too

I keep going to Joana`s site but either she`s indisposed at the moment, has lost interest in the case or has been scared off. Does anyone have any contact with Joana? She was the only one that seemed to get news from the Amaral and the Portuguese authorities.

by jd 15.06.13 14:49

Scotland Yard is launching a full investigation into the British girl's disappearance following a two-year review.

....It revealed last month that detectives have identified a number of "people of interest" they wanted to speak to about the disappearance.

Known paedophiles, holidaymakers and staff working at the resort are thought to be among the dozen suspects identified.

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

This is what I think is the real agenda going on & we have prepped for

by loopzdaloop 15.06.13 14:49

jd wrote:
[quote="candyfloss". The review has further identified both investigative and forensic opportunities to support the Portuguese[/i]

Will this be the unidentified DNA sample that pins it on someone like hewlett?

I wonder if it will be something more along the following lines....

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

The first drawback led to obtaining profile incomplete, partially wrong and not reproducible. This little reliability goes against the spirit as advocated notably by the ISO 17025 standards in force in our country.
The second requires necessarily work in special conditions to avoid contamination inherent in the environmental conditions and in particular from human DNA present in the dust of the atmosphere or on the surfaces of objects. Seen the limitations of this technique, the conclusions could be easily attacked and cancelled during a trial. This technique is not used routinely in DNA laboratories in Belgium.

AEK: If on an analysis of DNA, 15 markers out of 19 belong to a person "x", can we conclude that this is this person?
SA: If the profile is complete and quality, and that the markers are analyzed information then no doubt! The result is discriminatory. This result is very reliable. The order of error is 1 for 1 billion! It is almost impossible it otherwise. For a conclusive DNA profile, it takes a minimum of 7 markers. In case you are presenting, 15 markers on 19 leave no doubt. This result is quite reliable and usable in court. The error rate for a one billion is so unlikely that the result is recognized by judges without lawyers can not bring them into doubt.

We open a parenthesis. We understand even better the attitude of the PJ. In the face of inconsistencies we are talking about earlier, the police have doubts. Can dogs detect traces of blood and the smell of a corpse. The doubts turn into belief. But it lacks something. All these elements are not sufficient to face charges in a court. It lacks a confirmation. A scientific confirmation. This confirmation comes with the first analysis report which said that 15 DNA markers on 19 belong to Madeleine. It does not need more police. The proof is there. Self-explanatory. The first report analyses prove the guilt of parents in the eyes of investigators. This report should be considered as a proof by, I believe, all police forces. Once parents have been placed, logically, in the particular status "arguidos." Of course, an error rate of 1 to 1 billion is not a profile of 100%, it Clarence Mitchell rightly so. Where, then, there is a huge surprise. A second report by the FSS comes and totally contradicts the first. Distroying evidence that the police have thought. According to the report, the samples have been contaminated finally making them very unreliable. Several DNA have been mixed to create the DNA of anyone!

3) If the forensic technicians were able to extract 15 markers from the material in the Scenic that were a match for the known sample of Madeleine's DNA and the other four markers could not be tested because they were degraded, there would be a high probability mathematically that the questioned sample of DNA came from Madeleine.

Just to give you an example, at the time the forensic examiner in Arizona found the 9:13 match on DNA markers, the FBI said that the chances of that happening would be 1 in 113 billion. Well, that obviously isn't right, because there WAS, in fact, a 9:13 match, and there are nowhere near 113 billion people in the world. There is something called the "prosecutor's fallacy," which is an example of mathematical analysis called "binary classification" which shows that even 10:10 or 13:13 DNA matches are subject to error rates much higher than prosecutors sometimes attribute to them. However, whilst saying that the chance of an incorrect finding is 1 in 113 billion is clearly ridiculous, my opinion would be that the chance of two DNA samples belonging to different people if the results of the forensic analysis shows a 15:19 match would be miniscule - at least 1 out of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. It would not, however, be a smoking gun. Any DNA scientist will tell you that DNA is only one piece of the puzzle in any case and should be viewed in the context of all the other evidence. However, if FSS got a 15:19 match between Madeleine's known DNA and the questioned sample from the hire car, and 4 other markers were too degraded to be tested, in my opinion, that would be a powerful piece of circumstantial evidence.

If Scotland Yard now have control of the criminal investigation as opposed to Portugal, the standard of 'proof' changes!

In Portugal you may need 19 markers as the judicial standard, yet in the USA its 13, but to be conclusive you only need 5.
The dna found matched Maddie to 15 markers.... where the USA goes... we generally follow!
SY should be able to say legally within this country that the DNA in the scenic was from Maddie!
In which case... how did it get there...

by Guest 15.06.13 14:56

SY have also had info on the phone records, crèche records and HideHo's videos - I would have thought it would not be easy to ignore all of that along with the dogs findings.

by Peneda Geres 15.06.13 14:57

loopzdaloop wrote:
jd wrote:
[quote="candyfloss". The review has further identified both investigative and forensic opportunities to support the Portuguese[/i]

Will this be the unidentified DNA sample that pins it on someone like hewlett?

I wonder if it will be something more along the following lines....

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

The first drawback led to obtaining profile incomplete, partially wrong and not reproducible. This little reliability goes against the spirit as advocated notably by the ISO 17025 standards in force in our country.
The second requires necessarily work in special conditions to avoid contamination inherent in the environmental conditions and in particular from human DNA present in the dust of the atmosphere or on the surfaces of objects. Seen the limitations of this technique, the conclusions could be easily attacked and cancelled during a trial. This technique is not used routinely in DNA laboratories in Belgium.

AEK: If on an analysis of DNA, 15 markers out of 19 belong to a person "x", can we conclude that this is this person?
SA: If the profile is complete and quality, and that the markers are analyzed information then no doubt! The result is discriminatory. This result is very reliable. The order of error is 1 for 1 billion! It is almost impossible it otherwise. For a conclusive DNA profile, it takes a minimum of 7 markers. In case you are presenting, 15 markers on 19 leave no doubt. This result is quite reliable and usable in court. The error rate for a one billion is so unlikely that the result is recognized by judges without lawyers can not bring them into doubt.

We open a parenthesis. We understand even better the attitude of the PJ. In the face of inconsistencies we are talking about earlier, the police have doubts. Can dogs detect traces of blood and the smell of a corpse. The doubts turn into belief. But it lacks something. All these elements are not sufficient to face charges in a court. It lacks a confirmation. A scientific confirmation. This confirmation comes with the first analysis report which said that 15 DNA markers on 19 belong to Madeleine. It does not need more police. The proof is there. Self-explanatory. The first report analyses prove the guilt of parents in the eyes of investigators. This report should be considered as a proof by, I believe, all police forces. Once parents have been placed, logically, in the particular status "arguidos." Of course, an error rate of 1 to 1 billion is not a profile of 100%, it Clarence Mitchell rightly so. Where, then, there is a huge surprise. A second report by the FSS comes and totally contradicts the first. Distroying evidence that the police have thought. According to the report, the samples have been contaminated finally making them very unreliable. Several DNA have been mixed to create the DNA of anyone!

3) If the forensic technicians were able to extract 15 markers from the material in the Scenic that were a match for the known sample of Madeleine's DNA and the other four markers could not be tested because they were degraded, there would be a high probability mathematically that the questioned sample of DNA came from Madeleine.

Just to give you an example, at the time the forensic examiner in Arizona found the 9:13 match on DNA markers, the FBI said that the chances of that happening would be 1 in 113 billion. Well, that obviously isn't right, because there WAS, in fact, a 9:13 match, and there are nowhere near 113 billion people in the world. There is something called the "prosecutor's fallacy," which is an example of mathematical analysis called "binary classification" which shows that even 10:10 or 13:13 DNA matches are subject to error rates much higher than prosecutors sometimes attribute to them. However, whilst saying that the chance of an incorrect finding is 1 in 113 billion is clearly ridiculous, my opinion would be that the chance of two DNA samples belonging to different people if the results of the forensic analysis shows a 15:19 match would be miniscule - at least 1 out of hundreds of thousands, if not millions. It would not, however, be a smoking gun. Any DNA scientist will tell you that DNA is only one piece of the puzzle in any case and should be viewed in the context of all the other evidence. However, if FSS got a 15:19 match between Madeleine's known DNA and the questioned sample from the hire car, and 4 other markers were too degraded to be tested, in my opinion, that would be a powerful piece of circumstantial evidence.

If Scotland Yard now have control of the criminal investigation as opposed to Portugal, the standard of 'proof' changes!

In Portugal you may need 19 markers as the judicial standard, yet in the USA its 13, but to be conclusive you only need 5.
The dna found matched Maddie to 15 markers.... where the USA goes... we generally follow!
SY should be able to say legally within this country that the DNA in the scenic was from Maddie!
In which case... how did it get there...

There will be no need to find a body now either.

by Woofer 15.06.13 15:03

"If Scotland Yard now have control of the criminal investigation as opposed to Portugal, the standard of 'proof' changes!

In Portugal you may need 19 markers as the judicial standard, yet in the USA its 13, but to be conclusive you only need 5.
The dna found matched Maddie to 15 markers.... where the USA goes... we generally follow!
SY should be able to say legally within this country that the DNA in the scenic was from Maddie!
In which case... how did it get there... "

You`ve cheered me up no end Loopzdaloop !.

by Woofer 15.06.13 15:06

From Wiki :-

Validity of circumstantial evidence[edit]A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct evidence.[citation needed] This is only partly true: direct evidence is popularly, but mistakenly, considered more powerful. Many successful criminal prosecutions rely largely or entirely on circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence. Much of the evidence against convicted American bomber Timothy McVeigh was circumstantial, for example. Speaking about McVeigh's trial, University of Michigan law professor Robert Precht said, "Circumstantial evidence can be, and often is much more powerful than direct evidence". [2] The 2004 murder trial of Scott Peterson was another high-profile conviction based heavily on circumstantial evidence.

Indeed, the common metaphor for the strongest possible evidence in any case—the "smoking gun"—is an example of proof based on circumstantial evidence. Similarly, fingerprint evidence, videotapes, sound recordings, photographs, and many other examples of physical evidence that support the drawing of an inference, i.e., circumstantial evidence, are considered very strong possible evidence.

In practice, circumstantial evidence can have an advantage over direct evidence in that it can come from multiple sources that check and reinforce each other.[3] Eyewitness testimony can be inaccurate at times,[4] and many persons have been convicted on the basis of perjured or otherwise mistaken testimony.[5] Thus strong circumstantial evidence can be a more reliable basis on which to determine a verdict. Circumstantial evidence normally requires a witness, such as the police officer who found the evidence, or an expert who examined it, to lay the foundation for its admission. This witness, sometimes known as the sponsor or the authenticating witness, is giving direct (eye-witness) testimony, and could present credibility problems in the same way that any eye witness does.

However, there is sometimes more than one logical conclusion inferable from the same set of circumstances. In cases where one conclusion implies a defendant's guilt and another his innocence, the "benefit of the doubt" principle would apply. Indeed, if the circumstantial evidence suggests a possibility of innocence, the prosecution has the burden of disproving that possibility.

by Liz Eagles 15.06.13 15:14

Snipped from todays' Telegraph

'DCS Campbell said it was “perfectly probable” that information which could identify the suspect responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance was already within the Portuguese files.
He added: “We have to ask ourselves why are cases unsolved and, on many occasions, we find we passed the suspects by already and the suspect sits within our system.'

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

by sonic72 15.06.13 15:19

aiyoyo wrote:Can anyone tell me how to reply outside the quote box perimeter?

This new format is not user

Just Switch to 'Editor Mode'

Editor Mode is the 4th icon to the right of the smiley face.

thumbsup

by **tigger** 15.06.13 15:22

jd wrote:
sonic72 wrote:I can't believe they still haven't solved this case, what do they do with their time?! Are they really that incompetent?!

Chop, chop!

They are not incompetent, they are trying to make a whitewash plausible explanation in the face of the facts that the whole world knows. Its been a step by step process, slowly over the past few months/year trying to put into our minds the thoughts of other paedos who could have taken her with media reports etc. Now they seem to be starting on the final road to implementing their real goal now that the foundation has been set up

That's what' I think, but I SO want to be wrong!!

by lj 15.06.13 15:27

So if in those months the case was shambolic? What about the 2 years THEY THEMSELVES are taking?
I think they're trying to explain why £5m has been spent, lets blame the Portuguese!

It has always been about blaming the Portuguese.

by sonic72 15.06.13 15:27

jd wrote:
sonic72 wrote:I can't believe they still haven't solved this case, what do they do with their time?! Are they really that incompetent?!

Chop, chop!

They are not incompetent, they are trying to make a whitewash plausible explanation in the face of the facts that the whole world knows. Its been a step by step process, slowly over the past few months/year trying to put into our minds the thoughts of other paedos who could have taken her with media reports etc. Now they seem to be starting on the final road to implementing their real goal now that the foundation has been set up

Ha, I know they are not incompetent, I was being Sarcastic! Well, they actually are incompetent, but only when it suits them.

It would have been better for the UK police to just not get involved, brush it under the carpet. If all this cost is for a whitewash, then it's certainly an elaborate plan, and if true, exposes the level of corruption in the UK.

by Guest 15.06.13 15:30

Don't we normally get a comment from a 'source', or spokesman or the McCanns in these articles saying they are very pleased blah blah. Not a word from anyone, I would have thought they would be delighted SY are taking over.

by Liz Eagles 15.06.13 15:34

candyfloss wrote:Don't we normally get a comment from a 'source', or spokesman or the McCanns in these articles saying they are very pleased blah blah. Not a word from anyone, I would have thought they would be delighted SY are taking over.

Hi Candyfloss (I've switched to editor mode but it's not working)

I've posted something along your lines in the press overview topic

by Ayniia 15.06.13 15:37

sallypelt wrote:The Blacksmith Bureau

Saturday, 15 June 2013

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

"Under the plan, Yard detectives will seek the assistance of the Portuguese to carry out some inquiries on their behalf. British police do not have jurisdiction in Portugal but they have the right to investigate and prosecute any British suspects who might be linked to Madeleine’s disappearance."
As Goncalo Amaral has said repeatedly, the original investigation was "incomplete". The Attorney-General's department in the archiving summary detailed the ways in which it was incomplete. The common factor was that the British persons of interest were beyond reach. If the review, which we remind readers is a joint review, had led to the re-opening of the case in Portugal then the authorities there would be faced with exactly the same problem that they had then: no way of forcing those people back and insufficient evidence to seek European arrest warrants. That will not be the case if the Yard take over the inquiry. The only "persons of interest" to the investigation are the holiday group: the others are now dead.
Forget the forthcoming rumours that the Portuguese will be upset by the decision – that is a Scotland Yard steer and untrue. The fact is that the two countries have finally found a way to cut the Gordian knot. Everyone who wants the truth to come out, such as the parents of the child and their supporters, will welcome the news. Hooray!

Thank you

by Guest 15.06.13 15:43

aquila wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Don't we normally get a comment from a 'source', or spokesman or the McCanns in these articles saying they are very pleased blah blah. Not a word from anyone, I would have thought they would be delighted SY are taking over.

Hi Candyfloss (I've switched to editor mode but it's not working)

I've posted something along your lines in the press overview topic

Does the yellow box disappear when you click on the end box aquila? There should be no yellow box when you switch modes.

by Guest 15.06.13 15:54

candyfloss wrote:Don't we normally get a comment from a 'source', or spokesman or the McCanns in these articles saying they are very pleased blah blah. Not a word from anyone, I would have thought they would be delighted SY are taking over.

***
I sincerely hope that the "persons of interest" are not jumping on a plane for an extended holiday in - say - Argentina ... SY taking lead in a full investigation only works, if the persons of interest remain on British soil.

by lj 15.06.13 15:56

PeterMac wrote:
sallypelt wrote:
The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said they and their friends would do everything to assist attempts to discover what happened to Madeleine.

"To assist ATTEMPTS". Something desperate about that statement IMO
It is obviously a mis-print,
They meant to say "Resist attempts"

I still can't figure out how to think out of the box , but this is lj:

the clue

We are in regular contact with Kate and Gerry McCann and they are kept fully updated on the progress of our work.

says enough.

What a joke

by Liz Eagles 15.06.13 15:59

candyfloss wrote:
aquila wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Don't we normally get a comment from a 'source', or spokesman or the McCanns in these articles saying they are very pleased blah blah. Not a word from anyone, I would have thought they would be delighted SY are taking over.

Hi Candyfloss (I've switched to editor mode but it's not working)

I've posted something along your lines in the press overview topic

Does the yellow box disappear when you click on the end box aquila? There should be no yellow box when you switch modes.

It does now thanks.

by Guest 15.06.13 16:00

still can't figure out how to think out of the box , but this is lj:

the clue

We are in regular contact with Kate and Gerry McCann and they are kept fully updated on the progress of our work.

says enough.

What a joke[/quote]
[/quote]
***
A white lie instead of a whitewash?
If I were a detective, I would try and make each and everyone I suspect to feel "safe" ...

ETA
Hm ... I thought I'd meanwhile worked out how the "box" works, but this time failed miserably.

by Guest 15.06.13 16:09

When you lull people into a false sense of security they may be more likely to make mistakes.

Also speaking in general terms when Police have people they may view as suspects they may encourage the media to interview them, gives them more info they can compare against other interviews, also if the interviewers lull a potential suspect into a false sense of security, e.g.. perhaps by making it clear they are sympathetic to them, suspects more likely to be off guard and slip up.

by jd 15.06.13 16:14

tigger wrote:
jd wrote:
sonic72 wrote:I can't believe they still haven't solved this case, what do they do with their time?! Are they really that incompetent?!

Chop, chop!

They are not incompetent, they are trying to make a whitewash plausible explanation in the face of the facts that the whole world knows. Its been a step by step process, slowly over the past few months/year trying to put into our minds the thoughts of other paedos who could have taken her with media reports etc. Now they seem to be starting on the final road to implementing their real goal now that the foundation has been set up

That's what' I think, but I SO want to be wrong!!

Me too, I would love to be SO wrong and justice is served. I'm just being realistic from experience. I totally can see the positive thoughts that SY could mean the mccanns etc but history tells me from other cases this will never happen. If it does then I will be totally gobsmacked and feel very happy for everyone to say how wrong I was. My faith in SY would rise enormously and give me great hope for our future and that a corner has been turned which is going in the right direction....I do hope that this will be it

by jd 15.06.13 16:19

sonic72 wrote:
jd wrote:
sonic72 wrote:I can't believe they still haven't solved this case, what do they do with their time?! Are they really that incompetent?!

Chop, chop!

They are not incompetent, they are trying to make a whitewash plausible explanation in the face of the facts that the whole world knows. Its been a step by step process, slowly over the past few months/year trying to put into our minds the thoughts of other paedos who could have taken her with media reports etc. Now they seem to be starting on the final road to implementing their real goal now that the foundation has been set up

Ha, I know they are not incompetent, I was being Sarcastic! Well, they actually are incompetent, but only when it suits them.

It would have been better for the UK police to just not get involved, brush it under the carpet. If all this cost is for a whitewash, then it's certainly an elaborate plan, and if true, exposes the level of corruption in the UK.

Just had a thought......If this SY investigation starts, does anyone know if this 'could' mean that the Amaral v mccann trial cannot take place while there is an ongoing live police investigation? I'm not sure the legalities of this possible situation

by Guest 15.06.13 16:34

I too have a bad feeling, the same one when there's a rumor of a sighting when you know it isn't but would love to be wrong.

IMO all SY ever had to do was speak to T7 and families and lean ever so gently. It wouldn't take months and months of digging and might have saved the taxpayer £5M.

I can see the case and fund being wound down and then in time the Movie.

by bobbin 15.06.13 16:39

jd wrote:
sonic72 wrote:
jd wrote:
sonic72 wrote:I can't believe they still haven't solved this case, what do they do with their time?! Are they really that incompetent?!

Chop, chop!

They are not incompetent, they are trying to make a whitewash plausible explanation in the face of the facts that the whole world knows. Its been a step by step process, slowly over the past few months/year trying to put into our minds the thoughts of other paedos who could have taken her with media reports etc. Now they seem to be starting on the final road to implementing their real goal now that the foundation has been set up

Ha, I know they are not incompetent, I was being Sarcastic! Well, they actually are incompetent, but only when it suits them.

It would have been better for the UK police to just not get involved, brush it under the carpet. If all this cost is for a whitewash, then it's certainly an elaborate plan, and if true, exposes the level of corruption in the UK.

Just had a thought......If this SY investigation starts, does anyone know if this 'could' mean that the Amaral v mccann trial cannot take place while there is an ongoing live police investigation? I'm not sure the legalities of this possible situation

I wondered that, but if the Amaral/McCann case is not a criminal case but one of private litigation, does that make a difference. The Met/PJ case would be 'criminal' not 'civil'.

The only other thought I've had is, 'if the Met investigation finally gets the McCs to court, will the McCs try and argue that they won't get a fair trial in the UK because the press and public have made so much comment.
We were looking to the Portuguese judiciary to bring the case because it was an incident happening on Portuguese soil.....the argument being used that, if the case was heard in Portugal, it's a judge there who judges and it does not involve a jury, (opinions possibly swayed by reporting?) as it does in UK.
I'm not too clear if what I have said makes sense..... It's been a long humid day, huge thunderstorm imminent...time for a cuppa tetl*ys, I think, to refresh the parts that no other T can reach. spin

by Guest 15.06.13 16:40

@Finn
Followed by yet another book! sad

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You don`t need concrete evidence for a conviction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Latest topics