Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

by **Tony Bennett** 26.07.13 0:45

Reply received recently to a Freedom of Information Act question I asked the Met Police nearly three months ago re Operation Grange:

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

Dear Mr Bennett,

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2013050000621

I respond in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 03/05/2013. I note you seek access to the following information:

My questions relate to Operation Grange, the name of the Scotland Yard Review Team based at Belgravia Police Station under the command of Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood:

1. Please state the number of police officers, BY RANK and whether FULL-TIME or PART-TIME, employed within Operation Grange on the following dates: 1 Sep 2011, 1 Mar 2012, 1 Sep 2012, 1 Mar 2013.

2. In addition, how many officers have spent nights outside the UK as part of their work for Operation Grange and what is the total number of days officers have spent overnight abroad on Operation Grange work since 1 May 2011.

This email is to inform you that it will not be possible to respond to your request within the cost threshold.

The information requested for question 2 is not in a readily available format, it is contained within the MPS case files relating to this case.

The information would be recorded on a paper form which is countersigned by the officer requesting to travel overseas and their countersigning manager. A copy of the form is then retained within the case documentation.

To discover which officers spent how many days abroad would require us to locate, extract, collate and review each paper form. This would therefore entail a manual search through the records for each month from 1 May 2011 to locate each claim form.

We estimate that the cost of complying with this request would exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit has been specified in regulations and for agencies outside central Government; this is set at £450.00. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 18 hours [at a rate of £25 per hour] in determining whether the MPS holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting the information.

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), this email acts as a Refusal Notice.

Section 17(5) of the Act provides:

(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is relying on a claim that section 12 or 14 applies must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that fact.

Section 12 of the Act provides:

(1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the authority estimates that the cost of complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit.

Under Section 16 (duty to assist) we are required to offer you the opportunity to redefine your request within the cost limit.
It might be possible to provide you with the number of police officers, employed within Operation Grange between 1 Sep 2011 and 1 Mar 2013, subject to any exemptions which might apply.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please email or contact me on telephone number 020 7230 2372 quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

James Young
SC&O Information Manager

COMPLAINT RIGHTS:

[Rest snipped by TB]

by ProfessorPPlum 26.07.13 0:49

Disgraceful. What a get-out.

by jeanmonroe 26.07.13 0:53

How do you submit an FOI request to SY?

by Who?What?Where? 26.07.13 1:05

Have I understood this correctly?

They know it may be too costly to find out and tell you the truth , because they don't know what their cost's really are.

Why would anyone think that excuse added up? It doesn't. A modern day version of an oxymoron.

by Who?What?Where? 26.07.13 1:18

Freedom Of Information......my a**e, as Jim Royle might say.

by **Tony Bennett** 26.07.13 1:25

jeanmonroe wrote:How do you submit an FOI request to SY?

Good question, and the Met Police do not, so far as I am aware, make it easy to find out how to do so.

It took me a while to find out anything about it on the Met Police website, and eventually all I could find was a box you had to fill in online on their website.

However, try these addresses:

IN WRITING:

Head of FOI Section
Public Access Office
Metropolitan Police
PO Box 57192
LONDON
SW6 1SF

BY EMAIL

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

OR

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

I would also advise that you first read the website of the Information Commissioner for general guidance about what information can be asked for and how to go about it

by **Tony Bennett** 26.07.13 1:36

I should add that there was earlier correspondence in this matter, as previously the Met Police had suggested different grounds for a possible refusal of my request. This is how the correspondence went:

REPLY BY JAMES YOUNG (27 JUNE):

From: "james.young" [email address snipped by TB]
To: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Sent: Thursday, 27 June 2013, 16:41
Subject: MPS FOIA Request: 2013050000621

Dear Mr Bennett,

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2013050000621

I respond in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 03/05/2013. I note you seek access to the following information:

My questions relate to Operation Grange, the name of the Scotland Yard Review Team based at Belgravia Police Station under the command of Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood:

1. Please state the number of police officers, BY RANK and whether FULL-TIME or PART-TIME, employed within Operation Grange on the following dates: 1 Sep 2011, 1 Mar 2012, 1 Sep 2012, 1 Mar 2013.

2. In addition, how many officers have spent nights outside the UK as part of their work for Operation Grange and what is the total number of days officers have spent overnight on Operation Grange work since 1 May 2011.

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), we have 20 working days to respond to a request for information unless we are considering whether the information requested is covered by one of the 'qualified exemptions' (exemptions which must be tested against the public interest before deciding whether they apply to the information in question).

Where we are considering the public interest test against the application of relevant qualified exemptions, Section 17(2)(b) provides that we can extend the 20 day deadline.

Section 17(2) of the Act provides:

2) Where-
a) in relation to any request for information, a public authority is, as respects any information, relying on a claim-
i) that any provision of Part II which relates to the duty to confirm or deny and is not specified in section 2(3) is relevant to the request, or
ii) that the information is exempt information only by virtue of a provision not specified in section 2(3), and
b) at the time when the notice under subsection (1) is given to the applicant, the public authority (or, in a case falling within section 66(3) or (4), the responsible authority) has not yet reached a decision as to the application of subsection (1)(b) or (2)(b) of section 2,
the notice under subsection (1) must indicate that no decision as to the application of that provision has yet been reached and must contain an estimate of the date by which the authority expects that such a decision will have been reached.

I am sorry to inform you that we have not been able to complete our response to your request by the date originally stated, as we are currently considering whether 'qualified exemptions' apply to the information you have requested. As a result we will not be able to respond within 20 working days.

For your information we are considering the following exemptions:

Section 30 - Investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities
Section 31 - Law enforcement

I can now advise you that the amended date for a response is 25th July 2013.

May I apologise for any inconvenience caused.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to make a complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please contact me on 020 7230 2372 or via email, quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

James Young
SC&O Information Manager

MY REPLY TO HIM (2 JULY):

Dear Sir

Attn James Young

Thank you for your reply.

However, my request was made as long ago as 3 May, 55 days and 41 working days before your reply, and now you are only just giving me possible reasons for not answering my request.

I am of course aware of these two provisions:

Section 30 - Investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities
Section 31 - Law enforcement.

I wish to suggest specifc reasons why on this occasion those sections should not prevent you giving me the information sought - and these can be found on the attachment.

As the attachment makes clear [Note from TB: I don't reproduce the attachment here, but it consisted mainly of on-the-record statements by members of Operation Grange or a spokesman about the total numbers of their staff and about various trips abroad by Redwood and his staff], on many occasions, the police have either directly or indirectly been quoted in the mass print and TV media giving the actual numbers of staff employed on Operation Grange. I have only provided a handful of examples, there are many many others.

The other items in the attachment reveal that the resourcing of this Operation is being monitored and questioned at the very highest levels. One of the articles comes from the Metroplitan Police itself.

Whilst the confidentiality and integrity of a cold case review, investigation or other criminal enquiry must normally be safeguarded, on this occasion with so much public discussion and information of the actual numbers of officers employed on Grange, the balance of interest must surely lie in disclosure. All I am doing is seeking a very minor refinement of information already put into the public domain by the police itself.

As I have already made a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner, I am copying this to him as well.

Sincerely

Anthony Bennett

Copied to ICO Customer Contact Department

by stillsloppingout 27.07.13 2:47

Reply to Tony .

If the mets excuse is financial as it goes over there permitted allocation 400 odd quid . Suggest that we a third party could pay for there time . or could you ask if the amount be paid on account . so we then would have the full picture re the financial liability .

by **PeterMac** 27.07.13 8:02

This is the most abject drivel I have ever seen.
Of course they have a record of who went where and for how long. And it will be in one record.
The idea that they have to trawl through all their records is absurd.
They could just look at the expenses claims for a start.

2 portions of Fish and chips = operation in England
6 portions of Sardines and red wine = operation in Portugal

by jeanmonroe 27.07.13 11:15

And Camerons in Portugal too!
Holiday paid for from his taxpayer given 'salary'
Taxpayers pay for a lot of things don't they?

Wonder if he'll pop into PDL and try to lift those pesky shutters on apartment 5A to see how easily and quietly they can be lifted from outside as Gerry said?
Leaving no finger prints of course!
He and Sam and one of their 'minders' aka 'nasty man' and his daughter could do a mini re-construction of the 'abduction' he has spent/instructed £5million of taxpayers money be spent on to be PROVED it happened by SY!
Mr Cameron having been TOLD that Madeleine 'WAS abducted' ONLY by the parents of the 'missing' child.
So that's got to be TRUE then, hasn't it?

It's a wonder there was anywhere for the Cams to stay, what with 20,000 of SY finest detectives and 1000 CPS staff hogging all the accomodations!
Hope the Camerons booked up a Tapas restaurant, paid for in advance, for EVERY night!
Even then, i doubt they'd be sure they'd get in!

by Guest 27.07.13 11:22

Tony Bennett wrote:Reply received recently to a Freedom of Information Act question I asked the Met Police nearly three months ago re Operation Grange:

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

Dear Mr Bennett,

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2013050000621

I respond in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 03/05/2013. I note you seek access to the following information:

My questions relate to Operation Grange, the name of the Scotland Yard Review Team based at Belgravia Police Station under the command of Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood:

1. Please state the number of police officers, BY RANK and whether FULL-TIME or PART-TIME, employed within Operation Grange on the following dates: 1 Sep 2011, 1 Mar 2012, 1 Sep 2012, 1 Mar 2013.

2. In addition, how many officers have spent nights outside the UK as part of their work for Operation Grange and what is the total number of days officers have spent overnight abroad on Operation Grange work since 1 May 2011.

This email is to inform you that it will not be possible to respond to your request within the cost threshold.

The information requested for question 2 is not in a readily available format, it is contained within the MPS case files relating to this case.

The information would be recorded on a paper form which is countersigned by the officer requesting to travel overseas and their countersigning manager. A copy of the form is then retained within the case documentation.

To discover which officers spent how many days abroad would require us to locate, extract, collate and review each paper form. This would therefore entail a manual search through the records for each month from 1 May 2011 to locate each claim form.

We estimate that the cost of complying with this request would exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit has been specified in regulations and for agencies outside central Government; this is set at £450.00. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 18 hours [at a rate of £25 per hour] in determining whether the MPS holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting the information.

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), this email acts as a Refusal Notice.

Section 17(5) of the Act provides:

(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is relying on a claim that section 12 or 14 applies must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that fact.

Section 12 of the Act provides:

(1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the authority estimates that the cost of complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit.

Under Section 16 (duty to assist) we are required to offer you the opportunity to redefine your request within the cost limit.
It might be possible to provide you with the number of police officers, employed within Operation Grange between 1 Sep 2011 and 1 Mar 2013, subject to any exemptions which might apply.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please email or contact me on telephone number 020 7230 2372 quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

James Young
SC&O Information Manager

COMPLAINT RIGHTS:

[Rest snipped by TB]

Good afternoon mr Bennett,

Are we to conclude from the reply to your questions that Operation Grange started in May 2011?
That long ago?

I am a bit at a loss as to the purpose of the info you requested: surely it would uncover the trail SY has been following, places visited, maybe even people spoken to. Why would you want that information exposed at this stage of the review? Why not keep it for later, if and when the review should derail?

by **Tony Bennett** 27.07.13 11:38

Portia wrote:Good afternoon Mr Bennett,

Are we to conclude from the reply to your questions that Operation Grange started in May 2011?

That long ago?

Yes, Operation Grange was effectively set up by Prime Minister David Cemron on 12 May 2011, to conincide with the publication of Dr Kate McCann's book, 'madeleine'. It probably officially started a few days after that.

Operation Grange has now therefore been running for 807 days at a total cost of over £5 million to date (nearly 6 million euros). The cost is £6,200 a day, or over £17 every minute for the past 2 years and 3 months.

Its successes have included:

* reports of 195 new lines of enquiry

* an age-progressed picture of Madeleine aged 9 personally approved by Dr Kate McCann

* declaring that there is evidence that Madeleine may be alive

* leaks that they may be looking for some British cleaners and a couple who soothed Madeleine when she was alkone and crying

* arranging overseas trips to try to persuade the Portuguese police to open up all their files

* arranging for someone to photograph members of their squad taking boxes of files out of the offices of Metodo 3

* arranging for a trip by the nation's 2nd-in-command of the Crown Prosecution Service to Portugal

* keeping the McCasnns full u-to-date with their progress.

It has yet to disclose anything of value however.

by bobbin 27.07.13 11:44

PeterMac wrote:This is the most abject drivel I have ever seen.
Of course they have a record of who went where and for how long. And it will be in one record.
The idea that they have to trawl through all their records is absurd.
They could just look at the expenses claims for a start.

2 portions of Fish and chips = operation in England
6 portions of Sardines and red wine = operation in Portugal

It is clearly the biggest fob-off in the history of the United Kingdom.
It's breath-takingly dismissive, arrogant, insulting...
on the other hand, maybe, hopefully there is a better explanation.
The MET know we are watching every one of their moves, trying to decipher if we think they are under 'white-washing' duties or actually getting on with a very complex and delicate investigation, behind the scenes.
They know that Tony Bennett (oh Hi Kevin, still working for Farter Muck?) gets his teeth into police corruption and travesties of justice, and like a thorn in the flesh, gets things out into the open.
This 'British Bulldog' comes at the cost of 'exposing police corruption'.
So, the MET will know that Tony's questions will be picked over till the bones are dry.
I have just watched all four sections of 'Crocodile Tears'... at the same time as being 'chilling and spine tinglingly horrendous' it does show, for just a few brief seconds, that the police (the police we used to believe in, look up to and felt comfortable with) can and sometimes do, have a perceptiveness that is worthy of their former reputation.
There are two possible outcomes here, in the McCs case, which incidentally (and I would seriously recommend watching all four 'crocodile tear youtubes') bear too many, too close to the bone, similarities.
Either the police ARE watching the McCs and their entourage, coolly and calmly, deciphering the evidence and moving in on their target, or they are trying a foolish, unsupportable attempt at cover up.
If they are moving behind the scenes and want to keep the McCs (who without doubt will also be watching every emerging detail on here with a power-ten magnifying glass) then they will not want the McCs to know just how involved their visits and collaboration with Portugal are panning out.
If the MET are hoping, and that must be a very feeble hope, that they can be just 'used a tools' by the political elite (and yes, Pinky and chums...we know you've got your noses honed in on this site, almost like sniffer dogs, except you'll never ever acquire anything like the level of skill and accuracy that a trained sniffer dog will have) then the 'elite shadowy politicians' must fear their own failure and exposure that every second of every day risks the clarion call of the whistle-blower.
In the UK, save for what's been published by the Guardian, on the subject of Edward Snowden, NSA and PRISM surveillance on every private individual's communications, there is very little discussion on the fact that Edward Snowden has exposed USA and other/ government corruption at a globally-explosive level.
The MSM still natters on about mundane banality, feeding sops to the electorate whilst outside, in the wide world, the explosion is causing atom bomb-like after-shocks and global politics is having to face up to the imminent felling of the USA, the former global leader.....leaving a vacuum to be filled by an emerging Latin America and USSR, Middle East, China, up-rising in power.
RT (Russian TV) news channel in English, on Sky TV, and it's internet version on RT.com is about the only place for English speaking people to get a wide, and questioning perspective, with deeper reporting and analysis, than anything seen on UK TV.
The political elite have, through Murdoch, stifled news media as we have witnessed throughout this McCann case.
But there is no smoke without fire, and we are also owners of noses that can smell a burning smell when we are near one.
The McCs have been smelling badly, since the moment they made their first TV performance, pretending to be bereft parents.
We know it, hundreds of thousands know it, not just in the UK but globally.
So, dear MET, when you are passing off letters which are a 'seemingly arrogant' dismissal of fair questions, please bear in mind that
1. cover-ups will be exposed, along with those that played a role in said doomed attempts, and that
2. you have a former honour and glory, as once respected police-men and women, whose reputation once was the standard bearer for all other countries in the world, to uphold.
You are capable of it, and you know it.
Britain, although pulled down by the deliberate 'political elite's' design to bring this nation to its knees, is still intact enough to pull itself up by its boot-laces.
If you feel that your honour is being forced away from your conscience, and you are being asked to betray yourself, become the whistle-blower, become that hero that the world now recognises Edward Snowden to be.
He is seen by the USA Ruling Political Elite as an enemy to USA and is declared guilty of a crime against the USA.
Yet, it is the Ruling Elite that is in breech of the Constitution.
The people in USA, the actual country of USA, considers Snowden to be a hero supporting the constitutional rights of the people of the USA which have been hijacked, abused and turned against the very people of the USA.
Whitewashes can only ever be, temporary crutches, used by cowards to protect their corrupt depravity, spilling the lives of the 'tools and servants' they use and discard along the way.
Any man or woman can take their self-worth back at any time, and that means whistling to the many ears that outnumber the 'small enclave of political elite' at any time.
The very risk of this puts shudders of fear up the spines of the elite. They tell themselves, in their psychopathic minds, that they can control and organise all things.
The fools, they cannot control all men's and women's sense of self-worth.
There will always be the whistle-blower who will come out of the shadows, from any direction and at any moment in time.
Dear MET, I do hope the writing on the wall is clear.
Whitewash makes for a very good base upon which to plaster up the clarion call of graffiti, the level of expression of the discontent of a growingly angry public.
Once the message starts to spread, it's a matter of numbers, and just by simple mathematics, the populace outnumbers the elite and the populace will take note of who was on which side when it came to who was suppressing whose human rights.
Here's hoping that the 'silence' and 'shiftiness' is a sign of 'un-ravelling behind the scenes'.

by jeanmonroe 27.07.13 12:08

Mr Bennett.

Wasn't it worked out that the 38+ cops were only reading one and a half pages a day, of the files, at the cost of £95 per page?
It was some time ago but that is what had happened to that date.
Cost divided by number of cops divided by days taken divided by pages read etc
One and a half pages a DAY each!
Izzy, whizzy, let's get Bizzee!!

by jeanmonroe 27.07.13 12:18

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

Do you think that this story would make good holiday 'reading' for some of Camerons 'aides'?

And after all Kristi Abrahams 'heartfelt' appeals for 'help' to 'find' her after "she had been 'abducted' from her bedroom' according to Kristi.".

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

Well, the CLUES were all there!
The documents allege BLOOD STAINS THAT WERE NOT VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE were discovered using luminol, a chemical police use to enhance the visibility of blood.

“This product revealed larger AREAS OF BLOOD THAT APPEARED TO HAVE BEEN CLEANED,” the statement by homicide squad detectives said.
She allegedly died after being thrown against the wall and knocked unconscious, causing blood to seep out of her ears.

Poor poor Kiesha.

RIP little one.

by **Tony Bennett** 27.07.13 12:44

jeanmonroe wrote:Mr Bennett.

Wasn't it worked out that the 38+ cops were only reading one and a half pages a day, of the files, at the cost of £95 per page?...Cost divided by number of cops divided by days taken divided by pages read etc

One and a half pages a DAY each! Izzy, whizzy, let's get Bizzee!!

You're forgetting all the complex analysis they have to undertake in relation to each page.

PLUS the trips abroad that they're not keen to give out information about

by jeanmonroe 27.07.13 12:48

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

The lawyer for the defence says he WISHES the arguido, Gerry McCann, to be ASKED AGAIN if Madeleine bled.
To which he (GM) said it was common for Madeleine to have nosebleeds. He says that he doesn't know if in fact his daughter bled while on holiday in Portugal because he does not want to be influenced by the news in the Press, regarding THE DETECTION OF HUMAN BLOOD IN THE APARTMENT where his daughter disappeared.

WHY DID GERRY MCCANNS LAWYER WISH FOR HIM TO BE ASKED AGAIN ABOUT BLOOD?

by jeanmonroe 27.07.13 12:52

Tony Bennett wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:Mr Bennett.

Wasn't it worked out that the 38+ cops were only reading one and a half pages a day, of the files, at the cost of £95 per page?...Cost divided by number of cops divided by days taken divided by pages read etc

One and a half pages a DAY each! Izzy, whizzy, let's get Bizzee!!
You're forgetting all the complex analysis they have to undertake in relation to each page.

PLUS the trips abroad that they're not keen to give out information about

"You're forgetting all the complex analysis they have to undertake in relation to each page"

That's probably because some of the pages were written in 'joined-up' writing and there were no 6 years old primary school children interpretors available!.
I was going to add 'BOOM BOOM' ( Basil Brush like) to the sentence above but as i know SY are following this forum i won't.
Don't want them coming around arresting me on suspected terrorist charges.
"hello, hello, hello, what do you mean Monroe by saying 'BOOM BOOM'?
Is it safe for me to say that i have bought a new bath bomb from Lush?
Pineapple actually, it's lovely.
Oh ....bugger!.

LOL.
However, i must temporary disagree with you. I don't FORGET anything, unlike the McCanns! big grin

:biggrin

by **PeterMac** 27.07.13 13:21

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

The lawyer for the defence says he WISHES the arguido, Gerry McCann, to be ASKED AGAIN if Madeleine bled.
To which he (GM) said it was common for Madeleine to have nosebleeds. He says that he doesn't know if in fact his daughter bled while on holiday in Portugal because he does not want to be influenced by the news in the Press, regarding THE DETECTION OF HUMAN BLOOD IN THE APARTMENT where his daughter disappeared.
WHY DID GERRY MCCANNS LAWYER WISH FOR HIM TO BE ASKED AGAIN ABOUT BLOOD?

So that he could get his explanation in first.
He had to have an explanation for everything that was, or was not, found. MItchell said so.

Err, yeh, but, no, but yeh, and I didn't do that other thing either, or anythin', or somfin' or nuffin' ! And anyway I wasn't even there so shaddup "
(Pollard, V. Miss. 2012, op.cit.)

by jeanmonroe 27.07.13 14:05

Why do super duper oustanding detectives not perceive what we do?
Are we ALL 'stupid' and cannot be trusted to possibly comprehend anything we see or hear?
ONLY last year a chief constable said "i want the public to all become armchair detectives"
Yet when we do come up with 'theories' they are completely, IGNORED by the very people that have asked us for our theories on different cases!
I believe that we in this forum have come up with theories we believe that could be of use to SY.
But we are ignored out of hand.
Oh yes, i know, if we had all said Madeleine WAS 'abducted' we'd no doubt be invited to tea and biccies at our local police station.
I believe we have deducted what happened to Madeleine, and the McCanns KNOW we have, but they are determined, by hook or by crook, to only have their THEORY about what happened to her in the public domain.
WHY are no 'normal' people invited into TV studios to put forward what they think happened to Madeleine?
Maybe it could even HELP the McCanns 'find' her.
If McCann scratches his 'nuts' it's headline news!
If we scratch the surface of his daughter's 'disappearance' we are 'nutters!
And i have been under the impression these last 6 years that the McCanns wanted ALL of us to find out what happened to Madeleine.

Am i wrong about all this?

by Lance De Boils 27.07.13 14:36

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

This is (imo) the easiest way to make FOI requests to any public body.

by **PeterMac** 27.07.13 14:51

jeanmonroe wrote:Why do super duper oustanding detectives not perceive what we do ? Are you sure they don't
Are we ALL 'stupid' and cannot be trusted to possibly comprehend anything we see or hear ? No.
ONLY last year a chief constable said "i want the public to all become armchair detectives" Missed that one. Who was it, can you remember, it might be interesting.
Yet when we do come up with 'theories' they are completely, IGNORED by the very people that have asked us for our theories on different cases ! Are you sure they are ignored ?
I believe that we in this forum have come up with theories we believe that could be of use to SY.
But we are ignored out of hand. How do you know we are being ignored ?
Oh yes, i know, if we had all said Madeleine WAS 'abducted' we'd no doubt be invited to tea and biccies at our local police station. And then probably asked what evidence we had to substantiate the claim.
I believe we have deduced what happened to Madeleine, and the McCanns KNOW we have, but they are determined, by hook or by crook, to only have their THEORY about what happened to her in the public domain. That is clear by their reaction to so much of what is said and by their determination to destroy TB and Dr Amaral, and to silence them.
WHY are no 'normal' people invited into TV studios to put forward what they think happened to Madeleine ? "Normal people" don't make good TV. They say what everyone knows or has worked out.
Maybe it could even HELP the McCanns 'find' her. Mmmmmm. Now there's a thought ! !
If McCann scratches his 'nuts' it's headline news!
If we scratch the surface of his daughter's 'disappearance' we are 'nutters! Good one liner !
AndI have been under the impression these last 6 years that the McCanns wanted ALL of us to find out what happened to Madeleine. Now you are being very silly ! !
Am I wrong about all this? Certainly about the last bit.

by Guest 27.07.13 15:17

The Police are either going to do one big whitewash on the say so of the Government as we have seen in Dando case, Diana, David Kelly, Hillsborough etc.etc. and in view of officers involved who were for example on the Dando case and charging Barry George that has to be a possibility. Also taking into account the high level protection afforded to them by previous Government.

However, I would like to think this is not the case and the Police are just being very clever, they know Mccanns are not fools, are forensically aware, have friends in high places etc., and will sue anyone at the drop of a hat. The Police have watched the same interviews as we have, the Police have read the statements we have, we have seen the lies and discrepancies so would the Police have done so, things like changes in what they say and body language are not ignored by Police, they put great importance on that, No police officer would ignore the dogs findings, this is a high profile worldwide case, I cant really see Scotland Yard wanting their reputation destroyed around the world for the sake of the Mccanns, they would be a total laughing stock. The police also don't like people who are arrogant and over cocky, we have seen sometimes it can take the police years and years of watching, watching and more watching, until they nail their suspects. If any case was to be brought they know it has to be water tight so there can be no room for error.

Many cases can take years and years to build up a water tight case, any police officer I have spoken to has consistently remarked - of course, any one can see they are lying - so are SY really going to make themselves look complete idiots or are they doing their jobs painstakingly and carefully to get to the truth. If the Police are watching anyone the last thing they want people to think is that they are people of interest, they don't want people to be on the alert, they lull people into a sense of false security, that is when people make mistakes, get even more cocky, thinking they are home and dry. It will not have been lost on the police as to who the associates are, who they have used like Halligen, Metodo 3 etc., the Police would have looked into backgrounds of all those closely involved with Mccanns e.g. Kennedy. If we have seen from the accounts that only a small percentage has been spent on 'looking for Madeleine' so the Police would have seen that as well and want to know where exactly every penny of the money has gone, the Police cant possibly ignore the Gaspar statements and statements made by Yvonne Martin, so I think it is a question of are the Police going to be allowed to do their jobs properly and get to the truth and bring whoever is responsible to account, which I am sure every police officer wants to do or are they going to be directed by Government/secret services to do a whitewash.

by plebgate 27.07.13 15:28

Yes I think Portia made a good point about the police not wanting to reveal how many times they have visited Portugal etc. at the moment.

by jeanmonroe 27.07.13 16:01

PeterMac.
ONLY last year a chief constable said "i want the public to all become armchair detectives"

Missed that one. Who was it, can you remember, it might be interesting.

I might have inadvertantly implied it was a chief constable in this country but now i think it was probably the American Chief of Police in Boston that said it after the Boston bombings.

And with the public armchair detectives 'help' they did catch the bombers, pretty quick, didn't they?

by **PeterMac** 27.07.13 18:54

Thanks Jean.

by loopzdaloop 28.07.13 1:31

Tony Bennett wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:How do you submit an FOI request to SY?
Good question, and the Met Police do not, so far as I am aware, make it easy to find out how to do so.

It took me a while to find out anything about it on the Met Police website, and eventually all I could find was a box you had to fill in online on their website.

However, try these addresses:

IN WRITING:

Head of FOI Section
Public Access Office
Metropolitan Police
PO Box 57192
LONDON
SW6 1SF

BY EMAIL

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

OR

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

I would also advise that you first read the website of the Information Commissioner for general guidance about what information can be asked for and how to go about it

No, please don't send requests like that.
Use [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] it's quick and easy to use.
As it is public they will feel under more obligation to respond. Then we can all see!
Also, if you receive a nonsense response like Tony did, the website helps you To request an internal review, followed by a trip to the information comissioner.

Another great site for campaigning is [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] which can help you write to your mp, councillor and MEP in a jiffy.
I also happen to know that the more people that write to an mp on a matter the more likely they will take note.
I had a friend who was an assistant for an mp and used to tally up the 'issues".

by whmon 28.07.13 1:41

That is really, really good info Loopsdaloop!

by Who?What?Where? 28.07.13 2:47

I'm not at all convinced that the real truth will ever come out about this case, via a Court of Law.

It seems that there are too many financial obstacles', too many invested interest's, to overcome, for that to happen.

I think that there has been more effort displayed, on finding the real truth, about what happened to Madeleine, on this forum.

Some people on here, at their own expense, have shown more effort at getting to the real heart of the matter, than you will ever see from the whole legal system, as it stands', at the moment. The legal system expect's to get paid. There are, undoubtedly, a majority of people within the legal system, who try to do their job's properly, but I think that their effort's can be, easily, overwhelmed by the corruption within the system.

I try to remain thinking positively, but it's very, very, difficult, in a system as corrupt as this one is.

by Angelique 28.07.13 8:16

TB

I am utterly amazed at the response to your FOI request.

Are they trying to say Operation Grange are restricted to using "paper only" - this is 2013 after all.

Not heard about Spread Sheets or Data Bases then? They are not allowed any computers at all!

Just accepting it was/is so there must be a log book somewhere in the building.

What a way to run a Review. Maybe this is the indicator as to how they will try and get round having to ignore, what was it, 30,500 pages of evidence.

Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Re: Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"

Latest topics