Scope of SY investigation

by mysterion 24.01.14 13:49

Would SY be in any kind of legal trouble if they failed to investigate every aspect of MBM`s disappearance? I don`t mean something which could not reasonably be seen, but by deliberate action. I think I remember TB say that evidence presented by the public must be investigated but I`m not sure about evidence uncovered by SY.

by rainbow-fairy 24.01.14 19:45

I would certainly think they should be... 'As if the abduction happened in the UK' - family, close friends and the last to see the 'abducted' would be thoroughly investigated, making David Payne and K+G first ports of call.Certainly it would seem sensible to investigate family finances and medical records. I would'nt expect any dog alerts to be dismissed either. IMO it would be incomplete to miss these angles

by **tigger** 24.01.14 20:17

rainbow-fairy wrote:I would certainly think they should be... 'As if the abduction happened in the UK' - family, close friends and the last to see the 'abducted' would be thoroughly investigated, making David Payne and K+G first ports of call.Certainly it would seem sensible to investigate family finances and medical records. I would'nt expect any dog alerts to be dismissed either. IMO it would be incomplete to miss these angles

It should have been the starting point, working from the inside out as it were. I have little hope, what with the likes of us doing the pantomine thing 'Look behind you!' And SY scanning the far horizon. sad

by **Tony Bennett** 24.01.14 21:02

mysterion wrote:Would SY be in any kind of legal trouble if they failed to investigate every aspect of MBM`s disappearance? I don`t mean something which could not reasonably be seen, but by deliberate action. I think I remember TB say that evidence presented by the public must be investigated but I`m not sure about evidence uncovered by SY.

No, that's incorrect.

What I have said is that under police procedures and policies, especially in such a serious case as this, the police are duty bound to follow all reasonable lines of enquiry and all credible evidence. They are obliged to listen to the 'evidence presented by the public' but only of course if it is credible and material evidence.

What I have also said is that if the senior detectives in the case (Operation Grange) are ever shown to have deliberately or recklessly ignored clear leads and lines of evidence, they could ultimately be disciplined, possibly even lose their entitlement to their police pensions, or on a worst case scenario for them, be charged with perverting the course of justice - maximum term: life imprisonment.

by rainbow-fairy 24.01.14 21:22

tigger wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:I would certainly think they should be... 'As if the abduction happened in the UK' - family, close friends and the last to see the 'abducted' would be thoroughly investigated, making David Payne and K+G first ports of call.Certainly it would seem sensible to investigate family finances and medical records. I would'nt expect any dog alerts to be dismissed either. IMO it would be incomplete to miss these angles

It should have been the starting point, working from the inside out as it were. I have little hope, what with the likes of us doing the pantomine thing 'Look behind you!' And SY scanning the far horizon.

Agree tigger. I do struggle to decide quite what AR/SY are up to here. Sometimes I am hopeful that they are working from 'the outside in' as it were, taking into account all the known evidence - other times I'm not hopeful. So much confusion in this case (most deliberate and 'good') Not good for truth though sadly nah

by Woofer 24.01.14 23:04

I suppose we will get to know eventually whether SY have ignored the ECVR dogs` findings. If they do, it will be a blatant dismissal of these dogs` abilities IMO. It`s going to be interesting to see how they get round dismissing the dogs` findings.

by rainbow-fairy 25.01.14 2:06

Woofer wrote:I suppose we will get to know eventually whether SY have ignored the ECVR dogs` findings. If they do, it will be a blatant dismissal of these dogs` abilities IMO. It`s going to be interesting to see how they get round dismissing the dogs` findings.

Asolutely Woofer - used sucessfully in so many cases yet 'unreliable' here... Do they really think that such an explanation will wash?

by mysterion 25.01.14 14:17

I am greatly re-assured by the legal responsibilities imposed on SY in this investigation. What bothers me is that SY may identify the villains and have sufficient evidence to charge them in the UK, but not in Portugal. Would SY have to name them by law or would it be a political decision to decide whether it was in the national interest? Hang on, haven`t we been here before?

by mysterion 25.01.14 14:18

I am greatly re-assured by the legal responsibilities imposed on SY in this investigation. What bothers me is that SY may identify the villains and have sufficient evidence to charge them in the UK, but not in Portugal. Would SY have to name them by law or would it be a political decision to decide whether it was in the national interest? Hang on, haven`t we been here before?

by mysterion 25.01.14 14:19

Apologies for the double post.

by notlongnow 25.01.14 14:20

Looking forward to the court case if the 3 stooges are arrested.

by plebgate 25.01.14 14:43

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Woofer wrote:I suppose we will get to know eventually whether SY have ignored the ECVR dogs` findings. If they do, it will be a blatant dismissal of these dogs` abilities IMO. It`s going to be interesting to see how they get round dismissing the dogs` findings.
Asolutely Woofer - used sucessfully in so many cases yet 'unreliable' here... Do they really think that such an explanation will wash?

I don't think SY will ignore the dogs' findings they will have to look at all evidence contained in the files, even that statement by one of their own - Mr. Lee Rainbow IMO.

by rainbow-fairy 25.01.14 20:58

plebgate wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:
Woofer wrote:I suppose we will get to know eventually whether SY have ignored the ECVR dogs` findings. If they do, it will be a blatant dismissal of these dogs` abilities IMO. It`s going to be interesting to see how they get round dismissing the dogs` findings.
Asolutely Woofer - used sucessfully in so many cases yet 'unreliable' here... Do they really think that such an explanation will wash?
I don't think SY will ignore the dogs' findings they will have to look at all evidence contained in the files, even that statement by one of their own - Mr. Lee Rainbow IMO.

I would hope so plebgate... the more cases the dogs are used (and correct) the less likely they will be to dismiss them easily. Either way they will remain a thorn in the McCanns side IMO