Jim Gamble: Connecting the dots

Posted by Himself on Good Quality Wristbands

Most everything we look at has, at one time or another, a connection with the North of Ireland, and it is here we must start.

Firstly let us look the status quo of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, later to be renamed Police Service Northern Ireland (RUC/PSNI) under the command of Jim Gamble's boss, Ronnie Flanagan. and prior to that, under Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde.

Much that we learn is directly due to the damning report of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Nuala O'Loan.

Breaks represent different sources.

~

The North's Police Ombudsman has published a damning report concluding that senior police officers protected loyalist paramilitaries involved in up to 15 murders between 1991 and 2003.

~

Police Ombudsman Nuala O'Loan's investigators revealed that three retired assistant chief constables, seven detective chief superintendents and two detective superintendents were among those who did not cooperate with their inquiry into how an Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) unit based in north Belfast was protected by its Special Branch handlers, but the destruction of files has thwarted attempts to bring anyone to account.

~

Belfast police covered up Protestant outlaws' role in 10 killings ...
... The published report did not identify by name any of the retired Special Branch officers involved in collusion. A secret version of the report that includes these names was delivered over the weekend to Orde, Hain and a handful of other British officials ...

~

O'Loan said Special Branch officers suppressed forensic evidence and didn't follow up leads that pointed to involvement of their Ulster Volunteer Force informers in at least 82 crimes.

~

Jim Gamble has a strong background in counter terrorism and was Head of Special Branch Intelligence in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Here he was in charge of all counter terrorism and operations relating to Irish terrorism in the UK and overseas. Having joined the Police Service of Northern Ireland in 1982 (formerly the Royal Ulster Constabulary) he set about securing a wide range of command experience serving as both a uniform and detective officer in what was one of the most challenging policing environments in the UK.

~

Jim Gamble from County Down made the switch from Northern Ireland to England last year.
He was a detective superintendent with the PSNI and now works in London as an assistant chief constable with National Crime Squad.

~

Jim Gamble, the assistant chief constable in charge of the paedophile unit, joins in. "My last job was in Special Branch in Belfast.

Understandably there were many calls for Flanagan's resignation.

Former RUC chief constable Sir Ronnie Flanagan tonight resisted demands for his resignation over revelations that police in Northern Ireland protected a loyalist murder gang. ...

...SDLP leader Mark Durkan said he has written to Prime Minister Tony Blair urging him to sack Sir Ronnie if he does not stand down.

And despite all the denials he eventually went.

In a statement this week, Sir Ronnie said: "With respect to the specific matters dealt with in the Ombudsman's report, at no time did I have any knowledge, or evidence, of officers at any level behaving in the ways that have been described."

Anyway, if you have no desire to do so, you don't have to take my word for any of this, but perhaps you might take that of Flanagan's mother.

But that just Ronnie's way, Mrs Flanagan said: "Oh, he's always been stubborn when it comes to admitting he's wrong. It was the same when Amnesty International and the Bennett Report reported that he had been in charge of torture and illegal beatings in the Castlereagh interrogation centre back in the late 70s."

Mrs Flanagan also wishes he'd just owned up to the illegal shoot-to-kill policy of the specialist SAS-trained anti-terrorist Special Branch team he led in the 80s. "Oh, there was a lot of fuss about that. I remember Ronnie being all riled up. I told him just to tell them he did what he had to do, but he told me that they'd put him in jail if he told the truth." - The Rockall Times (satire)

Such was the situation in the North of Ireland, and so damning of Ronnie Flanagan was the ombudsman's report that; and this is my only use of an opinion piece throughout:

Jim Gamble and Sir Ronnie Flanagan fled Northern Ireland as the dark practices were exposed in the media following relentless campaigning for justice by people risking their lives against the threats posed by the administrators of torture and death. Not all survived, but the exposure of truth created real prospects for peace and reconciliation.

And what did the future hold for Ronnie Flanagan? Why a Knighthood of course and a nice cosy little number as Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary, you can have a link for this little gem, perhaps you might be able to spot a reference to the darker side of Ronnie's goings on and subsequent investigation by Nuala O'Loan, because I think I must have missed it somewhere. Home Office Press.

~

Sir Ronnie Flanagan (HMIC) was on the Queen's New Year's honours list and was responsible for appointing the Metropolitan Police to handle the allegations of criminal activity with respect to Mr Gamble and Mr Pearce (SOCA).

And they say, Only in America!


Perhaps I should mention at this point, I do hope you're not expecting some startling revelation out of all this, because there ain't one. Well I'm sure there is, but I'm not privy to it, all this is, apart from perhaps showing a few people in a proper light, is just to show how they are feeding from the same trough.

Not forgetting of course the main reason for all this, a better insight into "Trust me I'm a police Officer, Jim Gamble. and his suitability to be involved in anything, let alone a whitewash of the McCanns.



It is the murder of Rosemary Nelson that plays a role in "the dots."

The life and death of a human rights defender

Before publication of the final UN report, RUC Chief Constable Ronnie Flanagan is given a draft copy which contains the names of defence lawyers making the complaints about death threats, intimidation and harassment. Rosemary Nelson is one of the main complainants.

Ronnie Flanagan is quoted in the UN report as saying that allegations concerning RUC intimidation and harassment of solicitors is part and parcel of a political agenda to portray the RUC as part of the unionist tradition. He also says that paramilitary organisations wanted to ensure that detainees remained silent during interrogation and accuses defence solicitors of conveying this message to their clients (Paragraph 21). Initially, Ronnie Flanagan denies making these claims.

When notes taken by a UN assistant verify the comments, the Chief Constable then says he can not guarantee the safety of the lawyers who have already given evidence. The names of all the defence lawyers are removed from the final UN report.

Late 1997 After complaints laid by Rosemary Nelson, an Independent Commission for Police Complaints (ICPC) investigation begins into claims that RUC officers made death threats against Mrs Nelson. As with all ICPC investigations however it is RUC officers who are tasked to investigate other RUC officers. ...

... Vigils and protests are held throughout the North and in London. Martin Finucane, brother of murdered Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane, describes as "pathetic and inept" the appointment of a senior English police officer to oversee the inquiry and states that only a full, international, independent inquiry into Rosemary Nelson's murder would be satisfactory.

~

When Cumaraswamy refused to omit this remark from the final draft of his report, Flanagan told the Special Rapporteur that if the comments attributed to him weren’t removed then he could not guarantee the safety of those lawyers named in the report.
“Rosemary Nelson was one of the lawyers to instigate the UN investigation and to whom Flanagan referred. On 15 March 1999 Rosemary Nelson was killed when a bomb was attached to her car,” said Mark Thompson of Relatives for Justice.

“Rosemary had received threats directly from RUC officers and threats were made to Rosemary via her clients whilst in RUC custody. Collusion has been evidenced in her killing by Judge Cory and her killing is the subject of an on-going if limited inquiry,” said Thompson.

Good Quality Wristbands: http://goodqualitywristbands.blogspot.com/2010/04/connecting-dots.html

Oh dear! Baggott has definitely drawn the short straw by being shovelled off to Northern Ireland from Leicester police. Gamble was apparently short-listed for the job, but Baggott got it. Somebody knows what they are doing.

Both men are now placed right where they are needed, are they not?

I have just noticed that Gamble hasn't gone after Myspace with the same fervour as Facebook. Why? Does he not have as many people to protect on Myspace?

Gamble could almost be regarded as the 'star' of a remarkable programme on child sexual abuse on the internet transmitted by Radio Telefis Eirann (Irish TV station) on 31 May.

The programme was titled simply: "Crimes against children", and was produced for the 'Prime Time' slot. Running for 51 minutes, it can be viewed on this link - but only until 21 June I think:

http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1073931

WARNING: Some of the content is quite explicit, although graphic images are not used. There is a warning at the beginning of the broadcast that the content is 'adult'.

Gamble is quoted in several places, at the following time slots:

6min30 - 7 min10
11min30 - 12min
16min to 16.30min
34min30 to 35 min
47min25 - 47min35
48min - 48min 25.

I would recommend the programme for viewing if only because the vast scale of child abuse on the internet is recorded in plain terms.

During a 6-month period, a U.S. computer-team tracked 1.2 million people in a six-month period who were using P2P (person-to-person) methods of exchanging the most vile film material of child rapes and molestations, including of infants. The programme explicitly quotes those who say infants are used in some films because they can't talk.

In a one-month period in March/April in Ireland alone, 1,034 people were tracked as having used P2P sites to exchange shocking images of children being horrifically sexually abused. Some had visited these sites several dozen times during this period and one person well over 200 times.

The type of person who uses these sites and exchanges images tends to be 'white, Western, middle-class and male', according to various research projects.

I noted these verbatim comments made within the programme:

"Most sexual abuse of children is by a relative"

"Most sexual offfences against children is perpetrated by someone the child can trust"

"Child abuse is perpetrated by people nown to the children who are abused".

These comments were by three different people.

Another observation which has plenty of research material to support it was expressed by one contributor as follows:

"A typical pattern begins with the perpetrator viewing adult porn, then moving on to teenage porn, the on to infant porn. Between 30% and 90% of those who view internet porn commit actual sexual contact offences against young children.

One contributor, I think it was Gamble, actually, said: "Once they have acquired this habit, it remains in them for the rest of their life". Nevertheless, Gamble and others spoke of 'rehabilitating' these sexual offenders in the community.

I realise some will turn away from even reading about such despicable acts. But children are being horrifically abused and it seems many offiicial agencies are turning a blind eye.

One contributor spoke movingly of how internet companies had the technology to track folk who illegally download music from their computers and could simply cut off their access to the internet. The same technology can detect who is downloading internet child sexual abuse, but no-one is automatically cut off for doing so.

Why?

Well, watch the programme - albeit after reading my WARNING above.

"One contributor spoke movingly of how internet companies had the technology to track folk who illegally download music from their computers and could simply cut off their access to the internet. The same technology can detect who is downloading internet child sexual abuse, but no-one is automatically cut off for doing so.

Why?"

A very good question!

Sorry, can't bring myself to click on your link right now.

I origonally thought of replying to your post by comparing my non-comprehension of the actions of child
-abusers with my SIMILAR non-comprehension of Derrick Birds' actions last week.

But I have realised that although I do not understand what drives one to commit either scenario, there is a huge difference between the two. It is clear that in Birds' case he 'flipped', committed his terrible and unforgivable crimes, then took his own life. But a child molester has no such 'short-term fuse'!. He repeats his henious crime. Next week - Next month - Next year. Plenty of time to reflect upon what he has just done, but he never feels enough guilt in the abhorance of his actions to do 'what needs to be done'.
Some of these disgusting offenders of normality probably don't feel too much guilt at all (if any).

So, two very different types of the worst kind of crimes against society. One, thankfully is very rare - but the number of practicing peodophiles, according to the media reports on the internet, should be of enormous concern to all of us.

I know that we are in this recession, but funds should be made available to employ enough of the bright, young I.T. 'gurus' that it takes to collect the evidence for convictions. As well as jail-time, assets should be stripped which should be used to pay for the 'gurus' - (right now they come cheap as they are sitting at home - unemployed!).

So, I too ask - why is it allowed? I don't reccognise the lack of ability to catch them!!!

I need to learn more about who controls the supply and content of the internet

Hi I have just viewed an article from the Daily Mail online and decided to join it to this post.
The article states how the police force Service were notified "anonymously" about child abuse by an adult.  This adult who then went on to foster at least 30 children and perpetrated acts against some of the children put into his care by the local Authority, who seemingly had no knowledge or the Police force that had received forwarded the original complaint to them?
Jim Gamble, former CEOP boss, has now uncovered the actions that were perpetrated on these young vulnerable children after becoming involved in his new capacity as Child Care officer for the Borough of Hackney, London.  The person who committed these acts was incarcerated to Prison in 2013, but his acts went back to when the Police Authority received the original complaint, that they failed to investigate and had now destroyed files of evidence pertaining to the complaint from 1999-2008?

Yeah what good is he doing popping up at this stage?

roy rovers wrote:Yeah what good is he doing popping up at this stage?

Hi Royrovers, maybe big Jim trying to distance himself from favoured persons he had an extremely close relationship with at Leicestershire Police Force awards ceremony in 2007/8,eh big Jim?

Big Jim Gamble flip flopping on viewing child abuse images,according to News Night 28 Feb 2017?
Big Jim has previously stated the viewing of these images were not"Criminal Behaviour"but now they are,wonder why Even didn't point out his previous views on"Viewing these images" of child abuse?

willowthewisp wrote:Big Jim Gamble flip flopping on viewing child abuse images,according to News Night 28 Feb 2017?
Big Jim has previously stated the viewing of these images were not"Criminal Behaviour"but now they are,wonder why Even didn't point out his previous views on"Viewing these images" of child abuse?

He was also on Sky late last night doing the same, willowthewisp. Oooh, that's a bit of a turnaround, I thought.

Joining the dots - I've looked at some old threads so I know this has been covered a lot but there really is a big Irish connection here. Gerry seems to have a lot of Irish connections. I've been trying to find out more about  Neil 'Paddy'  Patterson who rushed out to Portugal to help with the search. He seemed very keen to emphasise his wife's friendship with Kate whilst almost suggesting he and Gerry were barely on speaking  terms. Sorry if this is a digression but it's got me thinking - so many Irish names and still a big hangover from sectarianism in both Ireland and Scotland...

The 'same' Jim G who will NOT say 'Madeleine WAS abducted'?

JG: "May have been", "MIGHT of been", "a child who may well have been abducted", "this is about searching for a child who may well have been abducted and who may well have suffered, you know, harm including murder. And I really don't like to speculate about what may, or may not have happened "

or NOT!

The excellent Mr Roberts 'piece' on 'our Jim'!

Taking a Gamble

Jim Gamble

EXCLUSIVE to mccannfiles.com

By Dr Martin Roberts
25 May 2014

TAKING A GAMBLE

Nowadays, for the McCanns and their public champions, appearances before the camera or on radio are fraught with more risks than ever before. Former head of CEOP, Jim Gamble, illustrates the point only too clearly. Interviewed recently for the Belfast Telegraph (19 May) he concludes with:
"I think Gerry and Kate McCann will get closure in my lifetime. My heart goes out to them. I never cease to be appalled by some of the things people say.
"A woman on the radio earlier was more fixated that Kate and Gerry left the kids and went for a meal.
"You know what? Lots of people make mistakes. Few people pay this price. Sometimes people should just think before they speak.
It must surely be a comfort to know that 'closure' for the McCanns will come within a lifetime. Can we afford to sustain Operation Grange for quite that long? But you're right Jim. People really should think before they speak. The world would be a happier place if we all did so, including your good self if I may make so bold.
That 'woman on the radio earlier' was followed by none other than our Jim, interviewed on the same programme no less (The JVS Show phone-in on BBC Three Counties Radio, 15 May). But before we take a closer look at the thoughts of career copper 'Cap'n Jim', let's just adjust the starting blocks with another of his explanations to the Belfast Telegraph:
Q. "You invested a lot in CEOP, you built it up but then you walk away in 2010. Do you regret it?
A. "I came to the point it was a matter of principle. For me it was the right thing. My fear was that it would be subsumed into a larger organisation. The Home Secretary said it would retain its identity, its profile and they would build on the success it had. Well, arrests have dropped in the last three years, the sign outside CEOP no longer says CEOP. It says National Crime Agency. Its profile has dropped. In NCA the C stands for crime. In CEOP the C always stood for children".
Never mind the beguiling Home Secretary and Gamble's paternal concern for children, the answer to the question is writ large in sentences 1 – 3. 'Subsumed into a larger organization' would mean, inevitably, that he would no longer be 'top banana', and since 'wherever egos Jim goes', Jim went.
The sheer arrogance of Jim Gamble is reflected in his conspicuous lack of professionalism toward fellow police officers and sardonic ungraciousness toward others. He and Gerry McCann no doubt got on very well together. After listening to what 'that woman on the radio' said earlier, Gamble expresses his considered opinion with respect to the proposed excavation of Praia da Luz requested by the Metropolitan Police:
"'Why now?' that's a question perhaps for the Portuguese police. These issues are being addressed because they weren't done at the time. The... the British authorities and the Metropolitan Police, who have brought a real professional focus to bear on this..."
Implying, of course, that the Portuguese police brought something other than 'a real professional focus' to bear. Gamble's insinuation is not only tactless, it is unwarranted, disrespectful and quite disgraceful. But no more so than his comment upon 'that woman's' (Sarah's) earlier point of view:
"I think it's misplaced and she's given us a lot of her opinions, so let me just give you my opinion of her call.
"I think it's spiteful, I think it's small-minded, I think she's a condescending individual that needs to reflect on the hurt that parents feel - not the issues in the margins". He later adds:
"So, I think she needs... she really needs to look in the mirror, and if I was her this morning, after listening to my interview be broadcast, I wouldn't want to look in the mirror, and, quite frankly, I wouldn't want to meet ordinary mums and dads in the street after what she just said, whether it's in Praia da Luz or where she lives".
Well, Jim, we are each of us entitled to hold an opinion about things, but is a concentrated character-assassination really worthy of a former Police supremo with residual ambitions? I think not. The true worth of Jim Gamble's advocacy of the McCanns soon emerges, as he continues:
"but the fact that a child was, you know, has... was... did go missing... is still missing, and that those parents are tortured..."
Let's get one thing out of the way shall we? The parents have been 'tortured', as Gamble puts it, for seven years. Their daughter Madeleine is dead for eternity.
Now, what was it he twice had to duck out of saying? 'has been abducted'?, 'was abducted, perhaps?' What makes him so uncertain? Let's allow 'big Jim' to tell us himself:
"These are the parents of a child who is suspected to have been abducted".
(The boot's on back-to-front here isn't it? 'She was the child of parents who were suspected of hiding her body').
"The initial inquiry had led, you know, to... to no... no one being arrested, no one being held to account for this".
(Standing a bit too near the edge again here are we? The initial inquiry had led, you know, to... to the McCanns. That’s in the evidence the 'professionals' engaged in Operation Grange will have reviewed)
"I mean, this is about searching for a child who may well have been abducted and who may well have suffered, you know, harm including murder. And I really don't like to speculate about what may, or may not have happened, but had the investigation covered all these bases in the beginning we wouldn't be here now".
Ah Jim... Jim... No sooner do you attempt to feed the world bullshit than you give yourself the impossible task of polishing a turd.
"I mean, this is about searching for a child who may well have been abducted"
The child may have been abducted. On the other hand she may not. Small wonder then that Gamble declines to 'speculate about what may or may not have happened'.
You see, as Jim Gamble so eloquently explains, this is all about a child who may have been abducted OR...
Our Jim, for glaringly obvious reasons, refrains from articulating the alternative. The same alternative that was expressly 'shut out' from the (published) remit for Operation Grange. But since he has introduced the element of doubt, there can be nothing illegitimate about our clarifying the situation on his behalf.
Madeleine McCann may have been abducted, or something else must have happened to cause her disappearance. Now what could that be? There's no way she could have left the family's apartment on her own (we've been told that often enough) and yet she has not been seen in her parents' company, or anyone else's for that matter, for seven years. Someone must have taken her from 5A. But that's abduction isn't it? And she may not have been abducted (the admissible alternative to Jim Gamble's 'may well have been').
Notwithstanding his understandable reluctance to speculate, Jim Gamble nevertheless gives us, in the same breath:
"...but had the investigation covered all these bases in the beginning we wouldn't be here now".
All what bases? The ones pertaining to the search for a child who 'may have been abducted'. Which makes the question of abduction itself a base to be covered, then as now.
So you're thinking of pruning a tree in your garden which happens to overhang the fence with your neighbour (who is entitled to engage in deforestation on his own account), and considering which side of the fence to work on yourself. No contest. Especially when you weigh up the number of branches involved. No one makes unnecessary work for themselves do they? No. So the first base either the Portuguese or the Met Police should have covered, Jim, is whether Madeleine McCann was abducted or not – not who might have abducted her in the event that she 'may have been'.
Well the seemingly less professional Portuguese acted sensibly. The Met, on the other hand, are lumbered with pruning all those extra branches. Which means, Jim, that you, the McCanns, and the rest of us, will probably have to wait a lifetime after all for the 'closure' to which you refer, unless or until someone in authority decides to lift the taboo on the blindingly obvious, and permit examination of the forbidden alternative, the existence of which you yourself have admitted.
Care to take a gamble on how long that might take, Jim? It would make a change from taking the Michael for the past seven years.
--------------------------------------------
"These issues are being addressed because they weren't done at the time. The... the British authorities and the Metropolitan Police, who have brought a real professional focus to bear on this..."

How WELL has that 'gone', to date, Jim?

Here's a 'clue' Jim,

Detective Chief Superintendent Mick Duthie, the head of the Yard’s homicide squad, and who is in overall charge of the investigation, Operation Grange, admitted that after a almost 5 years, full time investigation,...... 'detectives did not have a “full understanding” of what happened to Madeleine.'

FFS!, Mick, 'Madeleine WAS abducted'!

"ask the McCan'ts, Mick"

Jean - he really does appear to be a propagandist - I read quite a bit about him on the link provided by Get'em. Do you think, now he's off the case, there is any hope at all? I get the impression that the majority of people on this forum think it is a lost cause and nothing will change. To be honest, I started to look into this case because I wanted to know more but also I hoped that with enough public pressure, the message would get through and it would be impossible to ignore the groundswell of opinion. But if there's no hope, what is the point?  I genuinely don't understand why people would put so much effort into influencing public opinion - successfully it seems - if nothing changes. I'd really appreciate a reply because I really do not get it!

@What's_up_doc?

"I genuinely don't understand why people would put so much effort into influencing public opinion - successfully it seems - if nothing changes. I'd really appreciate a reply because I really do not get it!"
----------------------------------

'EGGS on FACES', I guess!

'It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.' ('they didn't DUPE ME!' said 'our Jim', 'not for a single second'!)

Sorry Jean I didn't express myself clearly. I meant, why do so many people on this forum seem to think this case is a lost cause, a giant cover up that can never be reversed and yet they keep banging the drum. As I said before, I want to make a difference and I want justice for Maddie - if I thought it was a lost cause I'd find another cause. So my question is, why carry on if it's futile?

What's_up_doc? wrote:Sorry Jean I didn't express myself clearly. I meant, why do so many people on this forum seem to think this case is a lost cause, a giant cover up that can never be reversed and yet they keep banging the drum. As I said before, I want to make a difference and I want justice for Maddie - if I thought it was a lost cause I'd find another cause. So my question is, why carry on if it's futile?

Hi Whats-up-doc,the choice is yours if you think there has been a"Cover up"?
If you think there has been a cover up,doesn't this then lead to,why does it need to be covered up and who is being protected?
MSM,Crime Watch x 2,Prime Ministers x4,,Government Officials,top legal firms used by the Queen,at least Two UK Police Forces,yet supposedly back to the "Paedophile Trafficking Gang" leaving No visible signs of evidence,but there was at least one of them?

Going again to my last post . The reason I have found that interesting ,It had seemed very difficult to find out which was maddies  dna.well they must have had the parents dna ,so could have worked out from that  info, that the 3 childrens dna  had to comply ,so the twins were notthe ones ,so there eems only to be maddie ,so would have been hers,no guesswork .joyc1938e

willowthewisp wrote:

What's_up_doc? wrote:Sorry Jean I didn't express myself clearly. I meant, why do so many people on this forum seem to think this case is a lost cause, a giant cover up that can never be reversed and yet they keep banging the drum. As I said before, I want to make a difference and I want justice for Maddie - if I thought it was a lost cause I'd find another cause. So my question is, why carry on if it's futile?

Hi Whats-up-doc,the choice is yours if you think there has been a"Cover up"?
If you think there has been a cover up,doesn't this then lead to,why does it need to be covered up and who is being protected?
MSM,Crime Watch x 2,Prime Ministers x4,,Government Officials,top legal firms used by the Queen,at least Two UK Police Forces,yet supposedly back to the "Paedophile Trafficking Gang" leaving No visible signs of evidence,but there was at least one of them?

I understand what you're saying and I'm learning things about this case all the time. Today I learnt that the police awarded Gerry Mccann an award for bravery. Can anyone confirm this is true? If it is true, I find that deeply troubling. I am also interested in the Irish connection but at the moment I really need to get my head around the scale of this. What is clear is that Gerry Mccann is continuing to receive support from people who should know better. An award for bravery beggars belief.

@What's_up_doc?

I understand what you're saying and I'm learning things about this case all the time. Today I learnt that the police awarded Gerry Mccann an award for bravery. Can anyone confirm this is true? If it is true, I find that deeply troubling. I am also interested in the Irish connection but at the moment I really need to get my head around the scale of this. What is clear is that Gerry Mccann is continuing to receive support from people who should know better. An award for bravery beggars belief.
--------------------------------------------------
"Today I learnt that the police awarded Gerry Mccann an award for bravery. Can anyone confirm this is true?"

No actual 'award' but............

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3061-the-sun-police-bravery-awards-2007

Madeleine's Father Cheered By Police

2:18pm UK, Friday July 13, 2007

The father of missing Madeleine McCann has received a standing ovation at an awards ceremony for Britain's bravest police officers. “He wiped away tears after a poignant video of his daughter was shown at the Police Bravery Awards at the Dorchester Hotel in London”.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Madeleine/Madeleines-Father-Cheered-By-Police/Article/20070721275024?lid=ARTICLE_1275024_Madeleine's%20Father%20Cheered%20By%20Police&lpos=Madeleine_0

"Mirage' said, 'at the time':

"Here, on the above thread, we learn that, UNBELIEVABLY,  someone conceived the idea that a suspect in a child's disappearance would make Gerry McCann the ideal guest speaker at a police bravery award ceremony. He duly  comes, hotfoot from Portugal on 12 JULY 2007, while under investigation by Portuguese police, to speak as HONORARY GUEST at the POLICE BRAVERY AWARDS in his capacity as ARGUIDO in the disappearance of his daughter."

"Not only this,  but he receives a standing ovation!!!"

jeanmonroe wrote:@What's_up_doc?

I understand what you're saying and I'm learning things about this case all the time. Today I learnt that the police awarded Gerry Mccann an award for bravery. Can anyone confirm this is true? If it is true, I find that deeply troubling. I am also interested in the Irish connection but at the moment I really need to get my head around the scale of this. What is clear is that Gerry Mccann is continuing to receive support from people who should know better. An award for bravery beggars belief.
--------------------------------------------------
"Today I learnt that the police awarded Gerry Mccann an award for bravery. Can anyone confirm this is true?"

No actual 'award' but............

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3061-the-sun-police-bravery-awards-2007

Madeleine's Father Cheered By Police

2:18pm UK, Friday July 13, 2007

The father of missing Madeleine McCann has received a standing ovation at an awards ceremony for Britain's bravest police officers. “He wiped away tears after a poignant video of his daughter was shown at the Police Bravery Awards at the Dorchester Hotel in London”.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Madeleine/Madeleines-Father-Cheered-By-Police/Article/20070721275024?lid=ARTICLE_1275024_Madeleine's%20Father%20Cheered%20By%20Police&lpos=Madeleine_0

"Mirage' said, 'at the time':

"Here, on the above thread, we learn that, UNBELIEVABLY,  someone conceived the idea that a suspect in a child's disappearance would make Gerry McCann the ideal guest speaker at a police bravery award ceremony. He duly  comes, hotfoot from Portugal on 12 JULY 2007, while under investigation by Portuguese police, to speak as HONORARY GUEST at the POLICE BRAVERY AWARDS in his capacity as ARGUIDO in the disappearance of his daughter."

"Not only this,  but he receives a standing ovation!!!"

Thank you Jean - this is a new low for me. Watching the media fawn over a petulant man - child is one thing but for this man - child to receive a standing ovation at an awards ceremony celebrating police bravery -  whist still an arguido  in Portugal is downright sinister. I feel like I'm entering the twilight zone.

Jim Gamble would be shocked if it ever came out that the McCann's were complicit in her disappearance... Has anyone told him, the McCann's were and are NOT CLEARED?