Re: CRIMEWATCH RECONSTRUCTION - However, Kate and Gerry have banned the re-enactment of their daughter’s disappearance from taking place in Portugal through fear of angering the country’s police.

by Shrike 07.10.13 9:42

The Rooster wrote:Marconi I see you have come in for some criticism from some forum members. We're all entitled to a reasonable and fair opinion. I for one like some of your lateral thoughts. It helps to get out of the box and look at all possible scenarios. It makes sense to interview the T7 at the beginning of the investigation process, there are so many holes in their Portugese testimonies and the outcome could be a very welcome back to the real world for them. Also it may account for their non appearance at the libel trial. Without their assistance and in the event of things going against the McCanns the T7 are up to their necks in it big time. They all have families and responsibilities, if given the chance of baling out and telling the truth in exchange for whatever lesser outcome ask yourself the question...

What would you do?

So as Marconi says a lot of the scene may already be set. As Mr Redwood intentions the Yard knows pretty much of what happened that night 3rd May 2007. The crime watch program will need to be plausible and credible otherwise there will be a lot of questions asked by many people around the world and if the assumptions/evidence don't support the content of the program and the new SY theories then a lot of people are going to look naive. Cameron, May, Howe, Patten, the British Police, Producers and Presenters, the public and Great Britain... And thats not an option for the sake of protecting 2 child neglecters.

Great post Rooster.
Just to say I read this forum every day but am usually too much in awe of the posters here to add anything myself. I find this case intiguing and these fora amazing in terms of the passion people have to seek justice and commend everybody for that. This includes Marconi and all of those "fighting" with him/her this morning. He/she has an opinion and puts forward her/his thoughts on what could be happening behind the scenes of spin we are subjected to. Of course, he/she cannot provide evidence for these thoughts, surely if it was in the public domain then the arrests would already have been made? But maybe he/she does know what is going on, an insider perhaps? I do find Marconi intriguing, one who writes mainly in a strange broken English in the style of a person not 100% comfortable with the language, but then occassionally in a style of a person who uses fluent English. 2 persons? Interesting!
Keep up the great work and passion everybody, one day you will find justice. If anybody has doubts about this couple just show them the 2 videos covering the interview (links attached earlier in this topic), this interview says it all, the most obvious, blatant lying I have ever seen IMO.

by Hicks 07.10.13 9:42

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Me too, Bristow. There have been so many previous moments with the McCanns' behaviour in interviews and elsewhere and nobody in authority has taken any notice, so what chance is there that they will now?

A reminder of one of their finest acting moments in this clip from the day before the first anniversary; what happened at 2.40 is very telling.

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

I'm sure that anyone else caught behaving like that would have been rounded up very quickly.

In the very beginning locals in PDL were witnessing the same acting skills. How many times did we read that as soon as the cameras stopped rolling the MC'S would switch in an instant from their sad demeanour to one of laughing and joking.
The shop owner who ( a couple of days after M went missing) took down a poster when she saw KM 'laughing her head off' walking past her shop with a friend.

Perhaps they both suffer from Schizophrenia.

by Angelique 07.10.13 9:52

Hicks wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Me too, Bristow. There have been so many previous moments with the McCanns' behaviour in interviews and elsewhere and nobody in authority has taken any notice, so what chance is there that they will now?

A reminder of one of their finest acting moments in this clip from the day before the first anniversary; what happened at 2.40 is very telling.

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

I'm sure that anyone else caught behaving like that would have been rounded up very quickly.
In the very beginning locals in PDL were witnessing the same acting skills. How many times did we read that as soon as the cameras stopped rolling the MC'S would switch in an instant from their sad demeanour to one of laughing and joking.
The shop owner who ( a couple of days after M went missing) took down a poster when she saw KM 'laughing her head off' walking past her shop with a friend.

Perhaps they both suffer from Schizophrenia.

I agree that they have a great ability to change character and have done so for some time. Is this part of psychosis or not - who knows?

by russiandoll 07.10.13 9:56

I do not accept for one minute that SY would give a heads- up to anyone under suspicion that they were coming to get them.
They would never jeopardise the life of a child.

Maybe the McCanns as well as giving a statement regarding their encouragement by latest developments, might go public with a plea to the media to rein in their behaviour which will no doubt panic a person even if that person has a conscience, and then who might well behave in an irrational way.

No one really believes that this is the way the Met behave if they believe they are on their way to finding a child alive and hopefully well?

No way in the world would they do or say anything to put her in danger.
And no way in the world would they alert their " prey" that they need to be looking over their shoulder[s].

Just as I think this case has sunk to its lowest depths, it manages to become more ludicrous and degrading.

The media treatment of this little girl is shameful.

by jozi 07.10.13 9:57

Hicks wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Me too, Bristow. There have been so many previous moments with the McCanns' behaviour in interviews and elsewhere and nobody in authority has taken any notice, so what chance is there that they will now?

A reminder of one of their finest acting moments in this clip from the day before the first anniversary; what happened at 2.40 is very telling.

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

I'm sure that anyone else caught behaving like that would have been rounded up very quickly.
In the very beginning locals in PDL were witnessing the same acting skills. How many times did we read that as soon as the cameras stopped rolling the MC'S would switch in an instant from their sad demeanour to one of laughing and joking.
The shop owner who ( a couple of days after M went missing) took down a poster when she saw KM 'laughing her head off' walking past her shop with a friend.

Perhaps they both suffer from Schizophrenia.

Trouble is they are very bad actors, we can all see it.......but the authorities and media don't seem to be able to pick up on this , always gushing and fawning over them its sickening and makes me want to puke as I would want to ask them so many questions ?

by Guest 07.10.13 10:04

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Met Police say no Portuguese broadcaster has taken up option to show the Crimewatch doc [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] parents baffled why Crimewatch special about her disappearance won't be shown in Portugal [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 07.10.13 10:09

EXCLUSIVE: McCann's baffled as Portugal refuses to show Madeleine TV appeal

MADELEINE MCCANN'S parents are “baffled” why a Crimewatch appeal to help find their missing daughter will not be shown in Portugal.

By [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]/Published 7th October 2013

Broadcasters in the country where Maddie disappeared have declined to screen the TV special, which will be aired in the UK, Holland and Germany next week.

British police are at a loss to explain why no Portuguese television company has taken up the opportunity to show the BBC programme.

They say it will feature a new theory about what happened to the then three-year-old who vanished from her parents’ holiday apartment in Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007.

It will include a reconstruction of events before her disappearance and a fresh appeal from doctor parents Kate and Gerry, both 45.

UK detectives are trying to trace up to 10,000 people who were in the resort when Madeleine went missing.

They have obtained a database of every mobile phone in the area at the time and are tracing the owners across 31 countries.

Most hailed from Britain, Ireland, Germany and Holland and the Crimewatch programme, or a version of it, will be screened in all four countries.

But none of the 3,000 people who live and work in Praia da Luz will see it, leaving a giant hole in the police appeal.

Last night a source close to the McCanns told the Daily Star: “Kate and Gerry are not criticising Portugal for not running the Crimewatch show but it is rather baffling.

“The Crimewatch screening is an arrangement between the police and broadcasters.’’

Scotland Yard detectives have interviewed 442 people as part of the new £5m Operation Grange. They have identified 41 as “of interest”, including 15 Brits.

Asked why the show is not being seen in Portugal, Assistant Met Police Commissioner Mark Rowley said no broadcaster there had taken it up.

That is a matter for them,’’ he said.

Yesterday, it was revealed a barrister has told Gtr Manchester Police a man confessed to him at a party that he had met Madeleine, who would now be 10, on a Mediterranean island just “weeks ago”.

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

by Liz Eagles 07.10.13 10:09

At the very beginning of all of this tragedy the first thing the McCanns did was to get 'lawyered up'. Different lawyers with different specialties. Lawyers with experience in extradition law, lawyers with business experience etc.

The limited company was set up in less than two weeks after Madeleine's disappearance and the money flooded in.

The top notch PR people and diplomats were there in the blink of an eye.

Now why would you do all of that within days of your child disappearing? and why would that be available to you at lightning speed?

by jozi 07.10.13 10:10

candyfloss wrote:Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Met Police say no Portuguese broadcaster has taken up option to show the Crimewatch doc [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] parents baffled why Crimewatch special about her disappearance won't be shown in Portugal [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

That's because the Mcs refused to have it shown in Portugal ( will upset the police ) or words to that effect......LOL

by Sceptic 07.10.13 10:11

aquila wrote:
ufercoffy wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
bristow wrote:
maebee wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Hi Maebee, is this the front page for tomorrow?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
McCanns' TV plea to kidnapper...

Well, it's only taken them 6 years to do that.

But isn't she being held in a hellish lair in the lawless hills of PDL? Why not make a plea on Portuguese TV?
'We're ready to make arrests' but we need more information and we're broadcasting a pre-planned 'reconstruction' to be aired in 4 countries (not Portugal though) and we're giving you a week's notice and the McCanns (who are in the middle of a libel trial in Portugal - sshhhh) will be live in a studio in Cardiff to make a direct appeal to the kidnappers.

Abductors/kidnappers/burglars. Dontya just love the UK Press?

This headline is so misleading - when you read the text, not one word has come from the met, nsy, or the pj - the whole story is based around quotes from a family source.

by Smokeandmirrors 07.10.13 10:15

They cannot seriously be baffled, it pretty darn obvious!!

They have criticised the Portugese police (even referring to individuals as Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dee, F**ing To$$ers etc), have taken various legal actions challenging the free speech laws, have brought nothing but bad publicity to the country, claimed it is a hub for paedophiles and child snatchers and basically been a pain in Portugal's backside for six years. I think the Portugese want nothing more than for the McCanns to buzz off permanently. Why the hell should they put up with any more?

Oh, and when they were offered a police reconstruction they refused. Why should they make everyone dance to their tune? Good for the Portugese I say!!

by Liz Eagles 07.10.13 10:16

jozi wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Met Police say no Portuguese broadcaster has taken up option to show the Crimewatch doc [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] parents baffled why Crimewatch special about her disappearance won't be shown in Portugal [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
That's because the Mcs refused to have it shown in Portugal ( will upset the police ) or words to that effect......LOL

Perhaps Gerry will withdraw his application to speak at the libel trial now if Portugal are so hostile, making it difficult for him to even go there and expect fair treatment?

by Guest 07.10.13 10:17

BBC
Section 3: Accuracy
Introduction

The BBC is committed to achieving due accuracy. This commitment is fundamental to our reputation and the trust of audiences, which is the foundation of the BBC. It is also a requirement under the Agreement accompanying the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
The term 'due' means that the accuracy must be adequate and appropriate to the output, taking account of the subject and nature of the content, the likely audience expectation and any signposting that may influence that expectation.
Therefore, we do all we can to achieve due accuracy in all our output, though its requirements may vary. The due accuracy required of, for example, drama, entertainment and comedy, will not usually be the same as for factual content. The requirements may even vary within a genre, so the due accuracy required of factual content may differ depending on whether it is, for example, factual entertainment, historical documentary, current affairs or news.
Accuracy is not simply a matter of getting facts right. If an issue is controversial, relevant opinions as well as facts may need to be considered. When necessary, all the relevant facts and information should also be weighed to get at the truth.
Where appropriate to the output, we should:

gather material using first hand sources wherever possible
check and cross check facts
validate the authenticity of documentary evidence and digital material
corroborate claims and allegations made by contributors wherever possible.

In news and current affairs content, achieving due accuracy is more important than speed

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

This is one of a few that broke the rules:

The BBC Trust has ruled that a programme the corporation broadcast in October 2011 on welfare breached its rules on impartiality and accuracy.

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

Long but interesting artical about Crimewatch:

Is Crimewatch UK programme for entertainment or crime awareness?

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

by Guest 07.10.13 10:18

Daily Star:
MADELEINE MCCANN'S parents are “baffled” why a Crimewatch appeal to help find their missing daughter will not be shown in Portugal

Note not the usual 'furious' or 'angry' etc...............just 'baffled'

by Upsy Daisy 07.10.13 10:19

Ready to Make Arrests?? Really, I mean, cops are actually ready to arrest people??? Wow...

What a lot of crock and bull.... laughat

by Liz Eagles 07.10.13 10:22

Upsy Daisy wrote:Ready to Make Arrests?? Really, I mean, cops are actually ready to arrest people??? Wow...

What a lot of crock and bull....

Ready, steady, GO then. big grin

by jozi 07.10.13 10:39

aquila wrote:
Upsy Daisy wrote:Ready to Make Arrests?? Really, I mean, cops are actually ready to arrest people??? Wow...

What a lot of crock and bull....
Ready, steady, GO then.

special

This crimwatch special fills my heart with dread, its all wrong for so many reason but especially for the Libel trial taking place. I had so much faith that justice would be done as SY was on the case now and we could all rely on the good old British Coppers to do the right thing !!!

But alas that is not to be,the only thing I hope for now that this will not in anyway damage the Libel trial and Mr Amaral will take the Mcs for every penny they have and show the British public what a shambles the British Met are in spending their hard earned taxes.....in the name of justice !!!

by jeanmonroe 07.10.13 10:53

Can i just say that i really don't mind what people say about me.
i'm far too old.
With regard to marconi, i can agree with some posts.
I also posted about the possibiliity that one, or more of the T7 might have 'reviewed the situation' they might now find themselves in, and given 'new' evidence.Especially DP.
And that perhaps this is what AR mean't by 'new theories, new witnesses'
A 'new' witness can be an 'old' witness, they just didn't reveal information the first time round.
i posted a bit of his Rog.

DC MESSIAH..........1485.
1485 ”Is there anything that you consider pertinent or relevant to establish the material truth?”
Reply ”Err the, there are a few things but I don’t think this is the right forum for bringing those up.”
1485 ”Okay. And finally, Mr PRIOR touched on the re-enactment earlier on, I think the re-re-enactment’s likely to take place either at the end of April or sometime in the middle of May. Do you see yourself attending?”
Reply ”I will do anything in my powers that could be helpful to shed light on what happened to Madeleine or bring Madeleine back, or to change the status that Kate and Gerry find themselves in.

Well we know that, as far as we know, that he hasn't ACTUALLY done everything in his power, don't we?
re: reconstruction. and his non participation.

1485 ”Is there anything that you consider pertinent or relevant to establish the material truth?”
David Payne Reply ”Err the, there are a few things but I don’t think this is the right forum for bringing those up.”

I asked what, possibly, were the 'few things' (that he didn't think he could bring up) were?

That DP thought he had that were PERTINENT,or RELEVANT to ESTABLISH the MATERIAL TRUTH.

I don't think, although i'll check, that anybody in the forum answered.

So, what do you think are the 'few things' DP didn't bring up?

by Truthandjustice 07.10.13 10:56

I'm not 'baffled', to me it's pretty darn obvious. The PJ want a reconstruction, a real one, which the T9 have refused to do. They certainly will not air a docu drama PR fest on behalf of their previous arguidos.

by jeanmonroe 07.10.13 11:11

Truthandjustice wrote:I'm not 'baffled', to me it's pretty darn obvious. The PJ want a reconstruction, a real one, which the T9 have refused to do. They certainly will not air a docu drama PR fest on behalf of their previous arguidos.

Isn't that what the libel case is based on?

That Ga's docu drama was aired.

Unfortunately it didn't suit the McS 'version of events' so they 'were baffled' and sued.

However IF GA's drama docu HAD tallied with their account, nobody would be attending a libel trial in Portugal.

IF 'arrests' are made BEFORE the 14th October then 'McCannwatch' on the BBC cannot go ahead, can it?

Correct me if i'm wrong, but how can AR and McS make an 'appeal' if there are people already in custody?

Can one make an appeal for 'suspects' when those 'suspects' are already under lock and key?

by Cristobell 07.10.13 11:12

Can we please be a little more thoughtful to other posters, for some English is not their first language. We are all here because we are 'brave' enough to say that we do not believe the abduction theory. Obviously we are going to have different opinions and will express our views in different ways, but all are valid and all should be treated with respect. This is a great forum and we should welcome and encourage readers to contribute. There is no definitive conclusion to this case, therefore there is no right or wrong way to post.

by **tigger** 07.10.13 11:15

marconi wrote:
tigger wrote:Marconi wrote:
t does not matter,I allow you to find my posts disturbing. It is your right.
Unquote

I'm relieved that we have your permission to find them disturbing, having been given that right may we also find them supremely irritating? Or is that not allowed?

This is a forum to exchange opinions, theories and information. Says it all really.
Y es, of course, Tigger, you may find my posts supremely irritating, go ahead. No problem for me at all.
If it is a forum to also exchange theories, opinions, I have mine too.
By chance they seem to be different and even the opposit to yours and to ayoyo's, but I can not see the problem. We live in a democracy, don't we?

What is irritating in my posts, if I may ask. The fact that I believe that it is not a whitewash? I can't help it. It is my belief.
The police need a concrete proof of the death,the body, not only witnesses statements.Imo, it would not be enough. The culprits would stay 3 days in the police station and freeded because of lack of concrete evidence.

For a moment, short ago, I thought it was a whitewash. But It isn't.

The reality is that we all have to wait and find out who is right and who is wrong.

all in my opinion

Marconi, I find it irritating that you think you have to give us permission to react. I rarely read your posts so the content isn't an issue. Giving permission to people - allowing them to state their opinion on open forum is an issue.

I hope that answers your question. Your English is either very good or only just passable, this is another reason I don't often read your posts. You know words like 'culprit ' and then mistake the past tense of 'freed'.
To put it in a nutshell: I don't understand why.

by jozi 07.10.13 11:20

Cristobell wrote:Can we please be a little more thoughtful to other posters, for some English is not their first language. We are all here because we are 'brave' enough to say that we do not believe the abduction theory. Obviously we are going to have different opinions and will express our views in different ways, but all are valid and all should be treated with respect. This is a great forum and we should welcome and encourage readers to contribute. There is no definitive conclusion to this case, therefore there is no right or wrong way to post.

I second that post Cristobell thumbsup

by Guest 07.10.13 11:22

jozi wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Can we please be a little more thoughtful to other posters, for some English is not their first language. We are all here because we are 'brave' enough to say that we do not believe the abduction theory. Obviously we are going to have different opinions and will express our views in different ways, but all are valid and all should be treated with respect. This is a great forum and we should welcome and encourage readers to contribute. There is no definitive conclusion to this case, therefore there is no right or wrong way to post.
I second that post Cristobell

Yes well said Cristobell.

Everyone here is entitled to their opinion, so please respect that.

by sallypelt 07.10.13 11:39

candyfloss wrote:
jozi wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Can we please be a little more thoughtful to other posters, for some English is not their first language. We are all here because we are 'brave' enough to say that we do not believe the abduction theory. Obviously we are going to have different opinions and will express our views in different ways, but all are valid and all should be treated with respect. This is a great forum and we should welcome and encourage readers to contribute. There is no definitive conclusion to this case, therefore there is no right or wrong way to post.
I second that post Cristobell
Yes well said Cristobell.

Everyone here is entitled to their opinion, so please respect that.

I totally agree, christobell. I have had one or two nasty comments, which have had NOTHING to do with debating, but I haven't been dragged in by responding. I wouldn't brawl in the street, and I'm certainly not going to do it on the internet. I view a few tweets on this case, occasionally, and I can't believe what I read. Low-life scum comes to mind.

As for those who post here, but aren't British, and where English isn't their first language, I take my hat off to them. It's only the odd spelling mistake, or the occasional syntax error that has one thinking that they may not have English as their first language. But these little mistakes are cute.

by aiyoyo 07.10.13 11:41

candyfloss wrote:Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Met Police say no Portuguese broadcaster has taken up option to show the Crimewatch doc [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Madeleine [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] parents baffled why Crimewatch special about her disappearance won't be shown in Portugal [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

In total contradiction to report stating they banned it in Portugal.

by sallypelt 07.10.13 11:43

Again, I don't know if this info has been posted, or whether it's important, but the McCann's were seen in Carmarthen last week (heard through the grapevine) and Carmarthen is right next to Swansea, and some places there may have a Swansea code. Also, the McCann's will be giving their Crimewatch appeal from Cardiff BBC studio.

There, glad I told you that, aren't you? Mrs

by aiyoyo 07.10.13 11:45

Shrike wrote:
The Rooster wrote:Marconi I see you have come in for some criticism from some forum members. We're all entitled to a reasonable and fair opinion. I for one like some of your lateral thoughts. It helps to get out of the box and look at all possible scenarios. It makes sense to interview the T7 at the beginning of the investigation process, there are so many holes in their Portugese testimonies and the outcome could be a very welcome back to the real world for them. Also it may account for their non appearance at the libel trial. Without their assistance and in the event of things going against the McCanns the T7 are up to their necks in it big time. They all have families and responsibilities, if given the chance of baling out and telling the truth in exchange for whatever lesser outcome ask yourself the question...

What would you do?

So as Marconi says a lot of the scene may already be set. As Mr Redwood intentions the Yard knows pretty much of what happened that night 3rd May 2007. The crime watch program will need to be plausible and credible otherwise there will be a lot of questions asked by many people around the world and if the assumptions/evidence don't support the content of the program and the new SY theories then a lot of people are going to look naive. Cameron, May, Howe, Patten, the British Police, Producers and Presenters, the public and Great Britain... And thats not an option for the sake of protecting 2 child neglecters.
Great post Rooster.
Just to say I read this forum every day but am usually too much in awe of the posters here to add anything myself. I find this case intiguing and these fora amazing in terms of the passion people have to seek justice and commend everybody for that. This includes Marconi and all of those "fighting" with him/her this morning. He/she has an opinion and puts forward her/his thoughts on what could be happening behind the scenes of spin we are subjected to. Of course, he/she cannot provide evidence for these thoughts, surely if it was in the public domain then the arrests would already have been made? But maybe he/she does know what is going on, an insider perhaps? I do find Marconi intriguing, one who writes mainly in a strange broken English in the style of a person not 100% comfortable with the language, but then occassionally in a style of a person who uses fluent English. 2 persons? Interesting!
Keep up the great work and passion everybody, one day you will find justice. If anybody has doubts about this couple just show them the 2 videos covering the interview (links attached earlier in this topic), this interview says it all, the most obvious, blatant lying I have ever seen IMO.

.

You've lost me.

by jeanmonroe 07.10.13 11:46

OK enough!

COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE PUT FORWARD THEIR IDEAS, EXPLANATIONS, ABOUT WHAT DP MEANT BY 'A FEW THINGS' HE COULD NOT BRING UP THAT HE THOUGHT WERE 'PERTINENT AND RELEVANT' TO ESTABLISH THE MATERIAL TRUTH to Madeleine's 'disappearance'

He obviously witheld 'some information'

What was it in your opinion?

Thankyou.

by aiyoyo 07.10.13 11:50

PeterMac wrote:This has narrowed the search down a lot.
Tracey Kandhola has excelled herself.

The kidnapper has Madeleine safe and well - So she is NOT in a Hellish Lair - (Don't know if Edgar is going to comment on that, or give the money back)
He has BBC TV, either direct or by satellite
He watches main stream programmes
He has a conscience
This conscience will be pricked by the programme and he will then give himself up, confess and hand Madeleine back
He is within 20 minutes walk or drive of a police station, so he can be arrested whilst the programme is being shown . .

Still with me ?

Yeah, I follow. The Yard's not warning the abductor to throw away his mobile.
If the child is still alive after all this time, after this recon she won't be.
So, the recon must be for a different purpose. This much is clear.

Latest topics