Brits launch Maddie probe

Oh dear


Brits launch Maddie probe


10/04/2010

BRITISH police are to launch a new probe into missing Madeleine McCann after massive failures were found in the Portuguese investigation.

Our top child protection cop Jim Gamble has completed a fresh look at the three-year-old investigation for the Home Office.


He told ministers there were huge holes in the original inquiry that need to be revisited if they want to "come close" to reaching UK standards.


It will come as a bitter pill for Portuguese investigators who have fended off criticism since Maddie disappeared in 2007.



Portugese police left 'gaping' holes
But parents Kate and Gerry McCann, both 41 and both doctors, are "delighted" at the move.


Failures in the original investigation are said to be "so gaping" that British authorities feel it is their duty to look at it again.


This time police will review all the leads using technology and standards expected in a homicide or kidnap case in the UK.


Mr Gamble, head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, found a basic failure to collate information and join up links that should have been made.


Telephone records were not properly analysed, missing early opportunities for leads.


And Kate and Gerry McCann were named as Arguidos, or formal suspects, by Portuguese police - something that the review says would not have happened if the probe had been carried out in the UK.


Mr Gamble found no evidence sufficient to make them suspects. His findings have now been formally submitted to the Home Office with recommendations to re-investigate.


The damning review has now set the Association of Chief Police Officers the difficult task of trying to decide who takes on the mammoth task. It is already predicted to be "an extremely costly" investigation that, even if done properly, will probably never be solved.



Damning: Jim Gamble
A source said: "It is something that has to be reviewed. It is only right that the McCanns are given the satisfaction that everything that could be done has been done. It now comes down to who is up to the job."


The Home Secretary Alan Johnson is expected to announce that the new probe will NOT be carried out by Leicestershire police, the McCanns' local force. The review has highlighted failures within their handling of the case and ruled them out of the review.


Instead ACPO are now asking around their top cops to see who could take on the very difficult and complex investigation.


The source added: "It will be extremely costly and sadly is unlikely to result in a positive outcome.


"As much as we would all like this to end with good news for the McCanns, the fact is there have been a lot of missed opportunities and no-one will ever be able to reclaim the time and evidence lost."


Two thousand pages of evidence released earlier claimed Portuguese detectives failed to follow up leads.


Home Secretary Alan Johnson ordered officials to examine the "feasibility" of British detectives having a fresh look at all the evidence back in March.


Kate and Gerry McCann, of Rothley, met Mr Johnson to plead for help in their search for their daughter who vanished aged three from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.


GOT a story for the News of the World? Email newsdesk@notw.co.uk or call 020 7782 1001

Announced of course in one of Rupert Murdoch's newspapers.

Murdoch's son-in-law Matthew Freud employs Clarence Mitchell, though he's given him 6 weeks' leave of absence to try to get David Cameron elected as Prime Minister:

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/778905/Portugese-cops-slammed-for-gaping-holes-in-investigation.html

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

I think The Madeleine Foundation might well want to raise some form of protest about Jim Gamble's recommendation.

Anyone else?

Tony have you seen the thread I just started, Jim's Gamble's recommendation on Maddie case?

Sorry all I can say at present is aaaaargh!

Mr Gamble, head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, found a basic failure to collate information and join up links that should have been made.


Telephone records were not properly analysed, missing early opportunities for leads.

And Kate and Gerry McCann were named as Arguidos, or formal suspects, by Portuguese police - something that the review says would not have happened if the probe had been carried out in the UK.

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

I bet it wouldn't have.

Meanwhile, I think we have mentioned over and over again that the telephone records need scrutinising. All of the telephone records.

The medical records and bank records need to be released as requested by the Portuguese from the beginning.

Whilst collecting these records, it should be pointed out that Leicester police should have sent statements over to Portugal.

candyfloss wrote:Tony have you seen the thread I just started, Jim's Gamble's recommendation on Maddie case?

Seen it now...we both had our Google Alerts flashing at the same time.

I'm more glad then ever now that The Madeleine Foundation on 19 March asked these Freedom of Information Act questions of the Home Office:


1. On what date or dates has the Home Secretary Alan Johnson had meetings with one or both of the McCanns?

2. Who else was present at these meetings: in particular, was any lawyer or other adviser for the McCanns present?

3. On what dates did meetings take place between one or both of the McCanns and staff of the Home Office?

4. Please identify all the staff who met with the McCanns and again identify whether the McCanns had legal or other representatives with them.

5. On what date did the McCanns first approach the Home Office asking for a review or re-investigation by a British police force into Madeleine’s disappearance?

6. Is the Home Office carrying out what the Daily Telegraph called ‘a scoping exercise’ to evaluate what form any review or re-investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance may take’ and, if so, on what date did that scooping exercise
commence?

7. Why, according to the press, was Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, Mr Jim Gamble, given the role of advising the Home Office as to which police force should carry out any review or re-investigation?

8. On what date did the Home Secretary ask Mr Gamble to perform this role?

9. On what date did Mr Gamble make his recommendation?

10. Did he, as reported, recommend West Yorkshire Police to carry out a review or re-investigation?

11. Has West Yorkshire Police, as reported, been asked to carry out a review or re-investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

12. If so, what is the brief or remit that the Home Office has given to West Yorkshire Police?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1264960/QUENTIN-LETTS-Why-Hoeys-huff-Squeaker.html

Despite the army of Whitehall press officers, the Government has been spooning public relations work to outsiders.

Nick Hurd, one of the Tories' more inquisitive MPs, has been asking why Ed Balls hired Freud Communications to promote a scheme called 'Tune In - Year of Music'.


Diana Johnson, one of Mr Balls's ministerial colleagues, gave a marvellously foggy reply.

I quote it at length so you can savour the art of the modern Sir Humphrey. 'Year of Music was conceived as a branded campaign aimed at making a significant and high-profile communications impact and intended to interest and engage young people in music.

The challenge to unite the music sector under a common brand, with the aim of maximising the reach and impact of existing and future music opportunities for young people, as well as developing and implementing the Tune In programme of activity, and securing effective media coverage at national and local level, required a specialist integrated communications agency'.
Phew. And there was naughty me thinking Mr Balls only threw the work to Freud because its founder is married to Elisabeth Murdoch, whose family's media outlets might be useful to Mr Balls if he stands for Labour's leadership after the election

Jim Gamble: Judgement or Agenda?

http://goodqualitywristbands.blogspot.com/2010/04/jim-gamble-judgement-or-agenda.html

Too big an article to post here.

News of the Screws, though.

They'll print any old bollocks.

Don't beat around the bush Ruby, just tell us what you really think!

Quote//
Telephone records were not properly analysed, missing early opportunities for leads


OOOhhhh whose telephone records ??

At this point I feel I really must publish part of a chapter of Goncalo Amaral's book: 'The Truth About A Lie', as transalted by AnnaEsse.

You'll see why from the parts I have highlighted in red:

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

I am about to make enquiries of the police officer on duty when an individual comes back from his walk and greets him as he passes.

‘You know that man?’

‘Yes, he presented himself to the GNR on Friday morning and offered his services as an interpreter. He is of English origin but speaks good Portuguese. He's called Robert Murat’.

As the law demands, all foreign people interviewed by the police must have the benefit of an interpreter. In this investigation, the considerable number of interviews we had to conduct in record time forced us to call on the services of volunteers.

‘And this guy, you checked him out? No criminal record or trouble with the law?’

‘No, no, it's all OK, but I didn't know he lived here. It's true that his house is on the route taken by the abductor’.

‘Stay here, carry on being friendly with him; I'm going to Portimão to see what we've got on him: we've got to find out more about this guy’.

I immediately telephone the team to alert them. The Director of the Department of Criminal Investigation in Faro has to take part in a meeting the same morning, where we will discuss the case of Robert Murat. We decide to request the latter's help again in order not to lose sight of him. We must act with the utmost speed, because Madeleine could be in one of the houses he has access to. The investigators continue to check the information we have about him. He is English, aged 33 and is separated from his wife.

The latter lives in Great Britain with their daughter; the latter is nearly the same age as Madeleine and looks like her. The English journalist to whom he gave this information during an interview was immediately distrusting of him and the reasons that motivated him to help the police. Murat has lived with his mother in Vila da Luz for several years, but he goes to England regularly. Back from his last stay in Exeter on May 1st, he has to return there on the 9th. He is ready to postpone his departure, desirous above all, he states, of helping the police to find Madeleine.

His behaviour starts to seriously intrigue us. He often makes reference to similar cases that happened in the United Kingdom and which he seems to know in detail. He displays suspicious curiosity and seeks to know more. He offers to help us identify possible suspects. He knows the workings of the Ocean Club and the habits of the holiday-makers very well. He even, allegedly, tried secretly to access the investigation files. It is also known that he visits web sites of a pornographic nature.

His mother has set up a desk near the Tapas restaurant in order to gather and give out information about Madeleine. We don't know if this woman's actions are philanthropic in nature, or if she is hoping to keep up-to-date with all the information circulating about the case. Members of the British agency, CEOP [Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre], take a close interest in Murat and work to develop his psychological profile.

If it's him that's holding Madeleine, we must monitor all his contacts and places he has access to. His house is therefore being closely watched. Technicians arrive from Great Britain with sophisticated equipment, capable of detecting the presence of people inside a building. Unfortunately, the characteristics of the building make this computer display impossible.

So, we stick to routine investigations and conventional tailing. This is how we discover his relationship with a married woman of German origin, Michaela Walczuch. She is 32 and works as an estate agent. She is the wife of Luis Antonia; a Portuguese man aged 33, a technician responsible for the maintenance of swimming pools. The couple have an 8 year-old daughter and live in Faro. The relationship is strange. Michaela is still living with her spouse, and Robert visits them as if it's no big deal. All of them seem happy with this situation. And the little girl? What does she think about it?

On May 12th, Robert Murat rented a car, driving it for miles over rough tracks for basic essentials. He explained later to us: that day, his mother had needed his car for her information desk. We are assuming that he noticed he was being followed.

We then decide to search his residence and the vehicles he uses. During the night of May 13th, the Prosecutor of the Republic and the judge go to the court in Portimão, where, in view of the growing suspicion and the urgency of the situation, a search warrant is issued to them.

Before searching his house, we wanted to assure ourselves that Jane Tanner recognises him as the individual she saw on the night of the disappearance. She is sitting inside an unmarked police car, whose tinted windows allow her to see out without being spotted. The vehicle is parked at the exact spot where she says she was on the night of May 3rd.

Robert Murat, anonymous amongst plain clothes police officers, goes up the road in the same way as the alleged abductor. Jane Tanner is adamant: it certainly is Robert Murat that she saw that night. She definitely recognises his way of walking. But does he resemble the description she painted previously?

The investigator, with whom Murat is on friendly terms, is with him in a bar until 2 o'clock in the morning. We are not about to relax surveillance. As soon as he gets home, police officers are stationed around his house in order to monitor all entrances. The crisis unit is buzzing; the teams are preparing for the search. It will be carried out at 7am - the legally designated time - when the journalists are not yet on the streets. The operation is kept secret. We request reinforcements from the GNR. For the moment, we have no evidence against Murat, only suspicions. If we had been certain that Madeleine was in the house, we wouldn't have had to wait for daylight to intervene. Scenes of crime specialists accompany us in the search for evidence.

Outside, two rainwater recovery tanks are explored with the help of divers. We pack up a few items of clothing to send to a laboratory that will carry out the search for fibres, hair, traces of blood that possibly came from Maddie. The cars are also gone over with a fine tooth comb. Laptops are seized and their contents examined by specialists. We find a cutting from a British newspaper, dated 23rd September 2006, that refers to a case of paedophilia.

All Murat's statements are immediately checked. We check the places he says he went to with Michaela, looking for CCTV cameras or witnesses able to describe the clothes he was wearing that day. We would like to compare them with the description provided by Jane Tanner.

We ask him about a telephone call intercepted after the announcement of the disappearance. His response is very vague. We know that towards 11.30pm, Michaela ’phoned Murat. Then, he called a certain Sergei Malinka, and straightaway afterwards, Michaela. We will never know the content of these conversations; no one will give us plausible explanations.
The answers are evasive: ‘I no longer remember’, or ‘that was about the website for the estate agency’.

Sergei Malinka is Russian, aged 23. He works in computers and lives with his parents in Vila da Luz, 300 metres from the Ocean Club. His mother, a housewife, is employed by a cleaning company that does certain apartments for the club.

He is seeing a young Portuguese woman, aged 33, mother of a teenager. The wife of one of his associates, of British origin, states that in 2006, he boasted about having had sexual relations with a minor, aged 14, and related how the father had surprised them; he allegedly stated that currently he maintains a relationship with an older woman and her daughter at the same time. Interviewed, he refuted these allegations: he claims that it's vengeance on the part of his associate, unhappy with the way their shared company worked out.

Murat and Michaela say they intend to open an estate agency together. They were looking for a computer engineer to build a web site and had thus met Sergei. It was to discuss this that they arranged a get-together near the Ocean Club on May 2nd. Luis Antonio was seen in the area. Was he watching his wife? That speculation is hardly credible, since he seemed to accept his wife's relationship with Murat.

On May 14th, the home and vehicles belonging to Michaela and Luis Antonio are searched. The couple are interviewed in the afternoon. Michaela hints that she suspects her husband. Luis Antonio, as a person responsible for maintaining swimming pools, has access to a great number of hotel or private residences, spread throughout the Vila da Luz and Lagos area. Certain buildings are closed for a good part of the year, but in spring, the pools are prepared before the summer season. Searches are ordered of all the residences concerned, without success. No trace, anywhere, of Madeleine. We're back to square one.

Robert Murat is placed under investigation and interviewed at the offices of the police in Portimão from 10am. He does not wish for the presence of a lawyer. He is the first suspect who will be declared ‘arguido’. As such, he benefits from certain rights, one of them being to remain silent. But he does not assert that right, and responds to all questions put to him. Despite obvious nervousness, his statements are clear and precise.

We ask about the reasons for his arrival in Vila da Luz on May 1st, four days after the McCanns' - the hypothesis of planned abduction is considered. Murat could have entrusted the observation to an accomplice, who would have chosen Madeleine and observed the parents' habits as well as their pattern of monitoring the children.

We want to know more about his circle of friends and the places they frequent. During the evening of the disappearance, he remembers having heard a siren shortly after 10.30pm. He was then in the kitchen with his mother. The next morning, at around 9 o'clock, he asked a passer-by what had happened, and that was how he learned about Madeleine's disappearance. He then decided to go and offer his help.

The discovery of a key at Murat's house revives the hope of finally getting a lead. He tells us that it belongs to Michaela, and that it must have been dropped accidentally. Where was that key before it was found at his house? In Michaela's pocket? In her bag? We learn that it opens the door of a garage where Luis Antonio stores his maintenance products. A team is sent immediately to the part of Lagos where this garage is situated. The search proves as disappointing as the others. Nothing is found. Once again, no evidence of Madeleine's presence.

For the profilers, Murat is the guilty party. Since Murat's first interview, which they attended, the specialists have continued to refine the profile of the suspect. They have heard about the statement from one of his so-called childhood friends, put on file by the police department: according to him, Murat had an affirmed penchant for bestiality. He recounted his attempts at sexual relations with a cat and a dog, subsequently killed, he states, with cruelty. Moreover, he allegedly attempted to rape his 16 year-old cousin. This individual describes Murat as someone violent with behavioural problems, a sexual pervert, sadist, and misanthropist. We are somewhat sceptical. All the same, according to the English profilers, there is a 90% chance that he is the guilty party. That seems to us to be a bit too easy. We think that drawing conclusions based essentially on the statement of an ex-convict is rather dangerous.

As if the memory of the McCann family's friends suddenly came back to them, all - Rachael Oldfield/Mampilly, wife of Matthew Oldfield, Fiona Payne, wife of David Payne, and Russell O'Brien Jane Tanner's partner - now recalled having seen Murat on the night of May 3rd, shortly after the announcement of the disappearance, in the immediate vicinity apartment 5A. Meanwhile, of course, Murat's picture has been shown on television and in certain newspapers.

They themselves were in direct contact with him during the previous days. However, it is only on May 16th that they deliver this information to us. As for the officers of the National Guard who were on the spot, they didn't see him that night, only the next morning, when he came to offer his services as interpreter.

On July 11th at 10am, a confrontation is organised between the witnesses, Rachael Oldfield/Mampilly, Fiona Payne and Russell O'Brien, and Robert Murat. Nothing new comes out of it. The former persist in stating that the suspect was definitely in the area on the night of the disappearance. Murat denies the whole thing and even accuses them of lying. Each side stands its ground. The only positive aspect of this meeting: the McCanns' friends undertake to return to Portugal for the purpose of the investigation. That will not happen.

Quote/
And Kate and Gerry McCann were named as Arguidos, or formal suspects, by Portuguese police - something that the review says would not have happened if the probe had been carried out in the UK.

If dead body scent and blood are found in your apartment, car and on your clothes are the Police not expected to consider you a suspect - - WTF!!

jkh wrote:Don't beat around the bush Ruby, just tell us what you really think!

don't mind me; I've come over all Roy Walker, just saying what I see

littlepixie wrote:Quote/
And Kate and Gerry McCann were named as Arguidos, or formal suspects, by Portuguese police - something that the review says would not have happened if the probe had been carried out in the UK.

If dead body scent and blood are found in your apartment, car and on your clothes are the Police not expected to consider you a suspect - - WTF!!

Not if you're best mates with Stu 'hope you are well' Prior - and Jim apparently.

This really does seem to be getting more like a paedophile ring cover up every day doesn't it?

littlepixie wrote:Quote//
Telephone records were not properly analysed, missing early opportunities for leads


OOOhhhh whose telephone records ??

They nearly drove me "Insane"

Some statements were mysteriously withheld for reasons known only to the Leicester police.

Does Gamble not find it odd that it was also beyond LP to get Madeleine's medical records together, along with her parents bank statements?

''Two thousand pages of evidence released earlier claimed Portuguese detectives failed to follow up leads.''

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

Are they pretending to be unaware of a couple of pages of evidence which were deliberately withheld for five months? Because the consequences of this have meant that those leads could not be followed up by the Portuguese police.

It would be interesting to know what Jim Gamble, being a top Child Protection Officer, made of the Gaspar Statements.

Autumn wrote:It would be interesting to know what Jim Gamble, being a top Child Protection Officer, made of the Gaspar Statements.

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

It is to be hoped he has not adopted Edgar's methods of policing. Edgar does not appear to have considered them at all. Nor did Metodo 3. Nor did Halligen.

Come to think of it, nobody in any police force has taken it seriously apart from Amaral. And this is the most probable reason for his book being currently unavailable in bookshops.

Autumn wrote:It would be interesting to know what Jim Gamble, being a top Child Protection Officer, made of the Gaspar Statements.

Or any of the statements given to the police, by the McCanns and their friends.

My favourites are Matthew Oldfield perusing the book titles on a non existent bookshelf in an apartment he both entered, or never went into, rather he listened at the bedroom window, and Jane Tanners pinky aspect pyjamas with a white pattern which she saw under street lights, the same lights which prevented her from being sure about the colour of the abductors trousers.

This could be interesting.

Have merged the two threads started by Tony and Candyfloss as they are covering the same subject. :flower:

Extract
"As much as we would all like this to end with good news for the McCanns, .... the fact is there have been a lot of missed opportunities and no-one will ever be able to reclaim the time and evidence lost."


Not objective at all, looks like more than Maddie is covered up!

They've underestimate the PJ...........let's see, how they are going to whitewash this?

Strange we have just had the Hewlett news? Now this. Looks like it is cut and dried.

The News of the World article makes one wonder what would be the point of an investigation ? Jim Gamble seems to have got the whole thing sewn up. The McCanns are innocent and Madeleine is still missing due to the incompetent Portuguese police.

Could this be yet another attempt to reinforce the abduction scenario in the mind of the public, prior to an official investigation?

candyfloss wrote:Strange we have just had the Hewlett news? Now this. Looks like it is cut and dried.

Murdoch, two newsaper editors and Mitchell at work.

They divide the spoils.

The Sun gets the Hewlett story.

The News of the World gets the Gamble/Re-investigation story.

justagrannynow 1 wrote:The News of the World article makes one wonder what would be the point of an investigation? Jim Gamble seems to have got the whole thing sewn up. The McCanns are innocent and Madeleine is still missing due to the incompetent Portuguese police.

Could this be yet another attempt to reinforce the abduction scenario in the mind of the public, prior to an official investigation?

Cui bono?

Who benefits?

The McCanns.

The Tapas 9.

The government.

Jim Gamble and CEOP.

This will generate a welter of stories about how the incompetent Portuguese police failed to follow vital leads.

It will also give Gamble a chance to recommend new missing children/abduction procedures and keep his name in the limelight.

The McCanns and Gamble are joined at the hip.

The main casualty in all this?

The truth.

I have just re-read this article again, and this stands out


Mr Gamble found no evidence sufficient to make them suspects. His findings have now been formally submitted to the Home Office



Now he hasn't said they were not involved, to that there was not sufficient evidence. Which is what we know anyway. Also if I remember correctly, weren't they made arguidos for their own protection, i.e. so that they could refuse to answer questions, which as arguidos gives them that protection., whilst as witnesses they would have had to answer each question. Didn't their lawyer advise them it would be in their best interests?

I thought it was on the advice of the British Police that they were made suspects in the first place?