OPERATION GRANGE - Independent 4/10/13 SY Review Team says there's now *41* persons of interest, and they're trying with the help of Interpol to track mobile 'phones linked to 31 countries worldwide... *PLUS* A new Crimewatch TV appeal in FOUR countries

Cheshire Cat wrote:

PeterMac wrote:It is going to be a very short programme.

They have EXACTLY ONE MINUTE AND 20 SECOND to do the reconstruction.
(That is the McCanns' own timings - not ours - Kevin)

If their version takes any longer than that - it is false - and either Gerry's statement or Tanner's statements will be shown to contain lies.
And since it is the BBC it has a duty to report honestly and impartially.


edited to add
jeanmonore-  The BBC has a DUTY to report properly, honestly and impartially.  It is part of their Charter, and if they fail, can be brought to book by OFCOM.

I wrote a detailed letter to OFCOM complaining about the CH 4 documentary after it was shown. The reply from OFCOM could have been written by Mitchell it was that biased. After that episode, I decided OFCOM were a waste of space!

ShuBob wrote:

PeterMac wrote:edited to add
jeanmonore-  The BBC has a DUTY to report properly, honestly and impartially.  It is part of their Charter, and if they fail, can be brought to book by OFCOM.

It was a BBC reporter, lest we forget, who started the fallacy that Amaral swore at the McCanns. This inaccuracy was then repeated nationally and the BBC didn't correct it for some time.

candyfloss wrote: melisande, good post

jeanmonroe wrote:gbwales wrote:

Just sent in complaint....

In your information for Crimewatch (14th Oct) you describe Madeleine McCann as having been "abducted". This cannot be considered as correct unless you have information the police should know about.
__________________________________________________

gbwales

They are not COMPLAINTS.

They are COMMENTS, at this stage.

Complaints come AFTER the programme has been broadcast, if it PORTRAYS something that is not factually true.

Just saying.

https://ssl.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006ppmq/contact

jeanmonroe wrote:

ShuBob wrote:

PeterMac wrote:edited to add
jeanmonore-  The BBC has a DUTY to report properly, honestly and impartially.  It is part of their Charter, and if they fail, can be brought to book by OFCOM.

It was a BBC reporter, lest we forget, who started the fallacy that Amaral swore at the McCanns. This inaccuracy was then repeated nationally and the BBC didn't correct it for some time.

But they DID in the end, and if i remember correctly they were extremely embarrassed and cringe-worthy apologetic!

How embarrassing for a national broadcaster to have to do that!

And all because they couldn't be bothered to check their facts!

Well people, you have NINE days to aquaint them of facts you think are pertinent!

https://ssl.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006ppmq/contact

BTW, i'm not going to apologise for posting the BBC 'contact' form, when i post.

candyfloss wrote:ECU Ruling: East Midlands Today, BBC1 (East Midlands), 12 January 2011

Publication date: 30 May 2011

Complaint
The programme included a brief exchange between a reporter and Gonçalo Amaral (a former policeman who had worked on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and had since written a book on the case). One word in the exchange was bleeped, and the report gave the impression that this was because Sr Amaral had used offensive language about the MrCanns. A viewer complained that this was inaccurate and unfair to Sr Amaral.

Outcome
The reporter's belief, reinforced by others on the programme team who viewed the recording, was that Sr Amaral had indeed used an English phrase which included an offensive term applied to the McCanns. On further examination, however, it became clear that Sr Amaral had been speaking Portuguese, and that an inoffensive phrase had been misconstrued. Upheld

Further action
The Editor of the programme has discussed the outcome with the producer and reporter involved. In future, the team plans to use interpreters if clips from interviews are unclear
.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/content/ecu/ecu_eastmidlandstoday120111

***************************************************************

No apology I see.  After all those vile articles that appeared in the papers on the front pages about Mr Amaral saying something like F*** the McCanns - this is one of those articles, but it appeared in quite a few papers I think............................


Vile cop: F***
the McCanns


From TOM WELLS and ANTONELLA LAZZERI, in Lisbon

Published: 14 Jan 2010
THE ex-cop who led the Madeleine McCann probe sparked new outrage last night after launching a four-letter tirade against the missing child's parents.
Brazen Goncalo Amaral spat, "F*** the McCanns" when asked by a BBC TV reporter if he felt his wild claims about their daughter were hurting them.


Producers bleeped out the slur when a report was broadcast in the East Midlands region where Kate and Gerry McCann live.

Amaral, axed after leading the abortive early investigation into Maddie's disappearance in 2007, flipped before entering a court in Portugal's capital, Lisbon.

Yesterday he denied making the outburst, claiming he had not even spoken to a British TV crew.

Outburst ... Amaral
But the BBC insisted he had used "inappropriate language". And a source said: "It would not have been bleeped out had there not been sufficient cause for concern."

Amaral, 50, is trying to have a ban overturned on his book The Truth of the Lie.

Provoked ... parentsIn it, he makes lurid claims that Kate and Gerry faked an abduction and hid Maddie's body after the three-year-old died in an accident at their holiday flat in Praia da Luz.

And today he vowed to appeal to Europe if he loses the legal battle — saying his case is about "fundamental rights" for all Portuguese citizens.

Maddie's parents are tonight facing the prospect of years of court hearings if Amaral takes his case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Yesterday he appeared to deliberately provoke the McCanns before the second day of the hearing began.

He sauntered into court brandishing a copy of his SECOND book on the case, The English Gag, in which he claims the parents tried to "silence" him.

He sat yards from Kate, 41, and began leafing through its pages. Upset Kate shook her head in disbelief.

But then she steeled herself and told a friend: "He's just promoting it."



Banned ... cop's bookShe and Gerry, also 41, were forced to endure more insulting evidence as former Portuguese police chief Francisco Moita Flores backed Amaral's view and branded the abduction a "fairytale".

Outside court heart specialist Gerry, who is heading back to Britain to fulfil work commitments, cracked when asked by a female Portuguese reporter if the ordeal of the hearing was "worth it".


He barked: "Do you have children? Anyone who has children would go through this."

He added: "I'd like to remind everyone it's the book that's on trial and not Kate and I."

Gerry claimed the Portuguese cops' blinkered view that Maddie was dead - for which there was NO evidence, making it "meaningless" - was damaging the search for her.

And he said they were STILL ignoring leads passed on to them by the family's private investigators.

Speaking outside the civil court in Lisbon this morning, Kate said the case was "taking its toll".

She said: "If I'm honest, our daughter's been taken and nothing's ever going to be as bad as that.


"But it's still been difficult, it's been emotive, because I know what's in the case files, I know what the conclusions are.

"So it's difficult to hear something that's incorrect and inaccurate.

"At the bottom of all this is a little girl, and I think it's important that we don't forget that."

Last night, a visibly frustrated Gerry told reporters: "Over the last two days, we've heard a lot about Mr Amaral's thesis that Madeleine is dead.

"And I also hope you've heard that there is absolutely no evidence to support that thesis. A thesis without evidence is meaningless and that is what we are challenging."


t.wells@the-sun.co.uk



Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2807324/Madeleine-McCann-probe-cop-in-new-attack-on-parents.html#ixzz1OIahG4qw

gbwales wrote:Just sent in complaint....


In your information for Crimewatch (14th Oct) you describe Madeleine McCann as having been "abducted". This cannot be considered as correct unless you have information the police should know about.


Please be aware that when you do the promised "reconstruction" that you will need to make a meaningful and reality-based reconstruction which is based on ALL the contradicting statements and evidence of the McCanns and their group of friends.
If you do not do this - if you neglect details to make something fit/work, if you use only SOME statements and avoid others - then you will be wasting taxpayers money as far as the new police investigations are concerned, and you will also be in breach of your charter regarding proper, honest and impartial reporting. You will by definition also be obstructing the police investigation by way of deliberately causing confusion and not representing the full account of the evening as given in official statements by the witnesses.


I and many others have long been concerned by press & TV reporting of the McCann case and will be watching very closely as a result.

Portia wrote:

ShuBob wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:

Detectives said "fresh and substantive" information would emerge on 14 October, when the BBC broadcasts a Crimewatch appeal.

Any chance the * fresh and substantive*  information could be the entry/exit point in the her parents statements that the Public were not told about?

Or any chance the it would be about JT going passed GM and JW but they didn't see her?

Whatever it is, it's clear the Met don't think it would lead to finding a live Maddie. Otherwise, they won't wait till the 14th to release the information.

Also, AR says he doesn't expect to find suspects, only witnesses

Châtelaine wrote:I've breathlessly been speed-reading since lunchtime. The one time I log-in late there's a flurry of news and discussion on the fora ... Still  approx. 20 pages behind. Is there a recap of the discussion possible?

BTW I cannot vote in the poll, as none of the possibilities mirrors my own idea/impression.
I would definitely not vote 2 or 3, but I cannot vote 1 either. If it would have asking if I have hope that SY [and PJ] may be able to solve this case, that would have made it easier ...

russiandoll wrote:I will send this to the BBC    :


In her Affidavit, Ms Martorell had said on oath that 'Madeleine was abducted'. She conceded that she had been told that but didn't know whether or not that was true. Her information came from her clients.



 not an established fact in a court of law and not a word used by SY in any of their press releases/ conferences.

 I doubt we will hear SY using it on 14th.

lj wrote:

Portia wrote:

ShuBob wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:

Detectives said "fresh and substantive" information would emerge on 14 October, when the BBC broadcasts a Crimewatch appeal.

Any chance the * fresh and substantive*  information could be the entry/exit point in the her parents statements that the Public were not told about?

Or any chance the it would be about JT going passed GM and JW but they didn't see her?

Whatever it is, it's clear the Met don't think it would lead to finding a live Maddie. Otherwise, they won't wait till the 14th to release the information.

Also, AR says he doesn't expect to find suspects, only witnesses

That way he can go on forever, never solving the case, just gathering information. After all everyone could be a witness: a witness about the weather, the water temperature, the food in the tapas bar etc etc.

It really is obscene how he treats the public. No wonder he is having such a strong relationship with the McCanns. They have the same lack of decency.

Penfold wrote:I have also complained to the BBC about the major factual inaccuracy of referring to missing MM case as an 'abduction'.

Ribisl wrote:This is an interesting article from 2011, still very relevant imo:


"Mr Davies, head of royal protection at the Yard and now a respected ­security consultant, said: “I believe a reconstruction should be one of the ideas on the table and it should be seriously considered, although it would obviously have to be handled very gently and diplomatically.

“Reconstructions screened on Crimewatch many, many years after serious crimes have been crucial in solving complex and difficult inquiries. If the reconstruction was screened across Europe it may inspire someone to come forward with crucial information.”

Jane Tanner, the friend of the McCanns who claimed she saw a man carrying a child near apartment 5a of the complex at Praia da Luz on Portugal’s Algarve on May 3, 2007, days before Madeleine’s fourth birthday, has already taken part in a partial reconstruction for a TV documentary.

Another crucial witness is Irishman Martin Smith, who also saw a man carrying a child in his arms later in the evening.

Mr Davies said: “As well as these important witnesses it would be useful to seek the cooperation of others who were working at the tapas bar.

“With the close involvement of the Yard and cooperation with all the important witnesses and an agreement for a filmed version to be screened on Crimewatch and its ­Portuguese equivalent, I believe a reconstruction would be very useful. I also think the Yard should conduct a ­thorough overhaul of all the forensic evidence as something may have been missed and they should trawl over the crucial witnesses to see if a line of inquiry was not pursued."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/246743/Madeleine-McCann-witnesses-asked-to-relive-night-she-disappeared