Why Operation Grange can only be a whitewash

jeanmonroe wrote:

PeterMac wrote:BEFORE

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

AFTER

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

Is that why some of the Met officers stayed behind ? ? 

Very nicely 'white washed'!   

Is that same stretch of the wall?

To the question what do you use to do a whitewash?
Answer: 38 MET elite detectives using a big political brush and roller?

To whom is this case so politically embarrassing? Who, particularly, is demanding the whitewash? It is not the current PM Cameron. None of it happened on his watch. The appalling populist Blair? His equally unloveable successor Brown? Both were mixed up in the case originally, but they have been out of power for some time. Someone powerful is currently pulling the strings, but who? and why?

Maybe a few older contributors remember the ace journo and spy-spotter Chapman Pincher who died recently aged 100. One of his many maxims went thus:

'Politically embarrassing is a higher security classification than top secret.'

comperedna wrote:To whom is this case so politically embarrassing? Who, particularly, is demanding the whitewash? It is not the current PM Cameron. None of it happened on his watch. The appalling populist Blair? His equally unloveable successor Brown? Both were mixed up in the case originally, but they have been out of power for some time. Someone powerful is currently pulling the strings, but who? and why?

Maybe a few older contributors remember the ace journo and spy-spotter Chapman Pincher who died recently aged 100. One of his many maxims went thus:

'Politically embarrassing is a higher security classification than top secret.'

Prime ministers MPs and such, who can be voted out, are by and large, compromised, bought and paid for by those who have familial inherited power and wealth.
So the latter of the two is where I would place my bet.
Imo.

comperedna wrote:To whom is this case so politically embarrassing? Who, particularly, is demanding the whitewash? It is not the current PM Cameron. None of it happened on his watch. The appalling populist Blair? His equally unloveable successor Brown? Both were mixed up in the case originally, but they have been out of power for some time. Someone powerful is currently pulling the strings, but who? and why?

Maybe a few older contributors remember the ace journo and spy-spotter Chapman Pincher who died recently aged 100. One of his many maxims went thus:

'Politically embarrassing is a higher security classification than top secret.'

I'm sure Chapman Pincher was absolutely right, but I think all the covering up took place under the last government, they were up to the necks in it.  Someone interfered with the original Portuguese investigation by having Goncalo Amaral removed as co-ordinator, he was getting too close to the truth. 

Someone was putting pressure on the Portuguese NOT to investigate the parents and a lot of evidence was lost. The clothes worn by the McCann family for example were not forensically examined - Kate did the washing on Saturday 5th May!  Remember the McCanns were demanding senior officers from the moment the alarm was raised. Gerry was heard arguing with the first police who arrived on the scene, Kate scathingly refers to them as Tweedledum and Tweedledee, so far beneath them that they deserved no respect.  Imo, K&G were awaiting the results of their frantic phone calls, they had contacted someone with the power to influence the investigation and they were waiting for their call for help to filter through.  Clearly the plebby Tweedledum and Tweedledee didn't know who the McCanns were, they hadn't received the call to go easy on them.  Whoever that someone was, and it must have been someone connected to the British government, was responsible for the cover up.  They effectively scuppered the original investigation and may or may not have influenced the way in which the McCanns became heroes in the eyes of the British public, rather than the neglectful parents they really were. 

If the Review had followed the lines of the report prepared by CEOP, the case would have been put to bed a long time ago, with the McCanns cleared and the blame laid at the door of a dead patsy.  No-one would have known about the political interference.  I am 99.9% certain the Review the McCanns were eventually granted, is not the one they wanted, that is, not the one recommended by Jim Gamble. 

Chapman Pincher was right, and his theory was played out to its fullest in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance.  However, we are 7 years on.  David Cameron has no reason to protect the opposition, and in fact, if the case is solved truthfully, exposing all of those who assisted in the cover up, it would be a political coup, especially if they fight the coming election on the basis of their track record in uncovering corruption within the police.  Theresa May is a very determined lady and no friend of the Police Federation, she has many enemies who would bury her in a moment if there were even a whiff of wrongdoing from her department. 

I do understand the cynicism surrounding the case, as observers we have seen the way in which the public can so easily be manipulated to believe whatever their government wants.  We have seen how the media work hand in hand with whoever is in power, there are no party loyalties or principles involved, everything is based on mutual backscratching. 

At the end of the day, most of the people involved in the cover up* will be able to worm their way out of the blame, by stating they implicitly believed the McCanns, and they have a good case, almost everyone did.  And in fairness, most of the McCanns support stopped when they were made arguidos, the most notable exception being CEOP who continued to push the abduction story.  Consular assistance for them however stopped in the summer of 2007, Kate whines about it in her book, and Clarence puts it plainly in the Vanity Fair interview.  They were demanding to put their case to the Prime Minister, but were only offered someone mid consular level. It is also worth looking at the emails that came out with the Wiki leaks scandal.  The British Consul were desperately backtracking.

Alan Johnson and Jacqui Smith 'sat' on the CEOP report.  They had no intention of financing a Review that would implicate them and others even further.  However, they won't have to account for why they didn't pursue it, though they might be asked why they ignored the ignored the official PJ files and all the evidence that was coming out of Portugal.  When you go down the command chain step by step, you can see how many will be able to pass the buck onto their advisors and/or blame human fallibility.  

Some however, will have no way out, and I think that is why Operation Grange is so large and why it is taking so long.  The idea that 3 years on they are still sifting through mountains of paper nonsense is ridiculous.  Every 'abbductor' lead has been followed up, some of them several times, and there is still not one shred of evidence that an abduction took place. 

The effects of Operation Grange so far, have been catastrophic to the McCanns' campaign and fundraising.  Their supporters have abandoned them in droves.  If Operation Grange is a whitewash, it will first have to repair the horrendous damage it has done if it is to close with the public believing the parents had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance.  The public now believe that Madeleine is dead and buried somewhere in the vicinity of the parents' holiday apartment.  Not in another town, or even in another country, but in the area where the parents spent the summer of 2007.  And lets not forget, DCI Redwood said she may have died in the apartment.  How will they cover that bit up?











*By cover up I mean what went on between 2007/9.

comperedna wrote:To whom is this case so politically embarrassing? Who, particularly, is demanding the whitewash? It is not the current PM Cameron. None of it happened on his watch. The appalling populist Blair? His equally unloveable successor Brown? Both were mixed up in the case originally, but they have been out of power for some time. Someone powerful is currently pulling the strings, but who? and why?

Maybe a few older contributors remember the ace journo and spy-spotter Chapman Pincher who died recently aged 100. One of his many maxims went thus:

'Politically embarrassing is a higher security classification than top secret.'

Well, that's the big question.

Has to be - the 'establishment' - that runs over and across our main political parties. Media moguls, wealth businessmen who donate huge amounts, top ranking civil servants who advise the PM on what 'can and cant' be done. You cant afford to upset the establishment. Whilst this occurred under the Blair / Brown governments - DC still has to bow to and be advised by the same establishment figures.  Those who really control the country. If you look at some characters in this case - who remain in the background but clearly play roles - they their extreme wealth clearly will provide links to the establishment. We are still run by a an old boys network, like it or not.  GA asked for political courage - but none of the current wimps have any. Hence they dont get my vote any more.

HelenMeg wrote:

comperedna wrote:To whom is this case so politically embarrassing? Who, particularly, is demanding the whitewash? It is not the current PM Cameron. None of it happened on his watch. The appalling populist Blair? His equally unloveable successor Brown? Both were mixed up in the case originally, but they have been out of power for some time. Someone powerful is currently pulling the strings, but who? and why?

Maybe a few older contributors remember the ace journo and spy-spotter Chapman Pincher who died recently aged 100. One of his many maxims went thus:

'Politically embarrassing is a higher security classification than top secret.'

Well, that's the big question.

Has to be - the 'establishment' - that runs over and across our main political parties. Media moguls, wealth businessmen who donate huge amounts, top ranking civil servants who advise the PM on what 'can and cant' be done. You cant afford to upset the establishment. Whilst this occurred under the Blair / Brown governments - DC still has to bow to and be advised by the same establishment figures.  Those who really control the country. If you look at some characters in this case - who remain in the background but clearly play roles - they their extreme wealth clearly will provide links to the establishment. We are still run by a an old boys network, like it or not.  GA asked for political courage - but none of the current wimps have any. Hence they dont get my vote any more.

Good post Helen and I can see what you are saying and some of it I agree with.  However, Operation Grange are digging a deeper and deeper hole.  Far from establishing the public's perception of the McCanns as victims of an horrendous crime, they are by their actions, demolishing the case for abduction.  Surely this would go contrary to what the 'establishment' ordered them to do?

Good post.

Anyone who thinks our current system works any other way is deluded.

Helenmeg wrote:
 DC still has to bow to and be advised by the same establishment figures.  Those who really control the country. If you look at some characters in this case - who remain in the background but clearly play roles - they their extreme wealth clearly will provide links to the establishment. We are still run by a an old boys network, like it or not.  

I don't think 'the establishment' is a single entity that thinks the same thoughts and speaks with one voice. There are many disparate groups of very powerful people, some powerful in this field, and some in that. The interests of the rich and famous are not identical.

I'm sure there has to be something more specific driving this on. I know some are banking on paedophila, or maybe the making of pornographic images of children, but I only see a few hints of that. I confess that after seven years of scrutiny of the case as best I can, I am stumped.

I don't think the McCanns themselves are that important, except of course in being the missing child's parents. Whether Madeleine died in an accident, or worse, the probable not very competently organised initial cover up by family and friends was just good enough. There certainly is no evidence of an 'abduction'. The real puzzle is why there have been, and still continue to be, such Herculean efforts behind the scenes from some very particular powerful source to make sure what really happened is not discovered.  I can't be for the sake of an unlovely pair of two-bit medics! There has to be some key factor that is currently not obvious.

comperedna wrote:I don't think 'the establishment' is a single entity that thinks the same thoughts and speaks with one voice. There are many disparate groups of very powerful people, some powerful in this field, and some in that. The interests of the rich and famous are not identical.

I'm sure there has to be something more specific driving this on. I know some are banking on paedophila, or maybe the making of pornographic images of children, but I only see a few hints of that. I confess that after seven years of scrutiny of the case as best I can, I am stumped.

I don't think the McCanns themselves are that important, except of course in being the missing child's parents. Whether Madeleine died in an accident, or worse, the probable not very competently organised initial cover up by family and friends was just good enough. There certainly is no evidence of an 'abduction'. The real puzzle is why there have been, and still continue to be, such Herculean efforts behind the scenes from some very particular powerful source to make sure what really happened is not discovered.  I can't be for the sake of an unlovely pair of two-bit medics! There has to be some key factor that is currently not obvious.

Yes I agree... but I think the Herculean efforts originally were not to hide what happened to Madeleine - but to hide what was going on behind the scenes. A normal and thorough investigation of Madeleine's demise would have led to other events being exposed. I dont think the esatblishment is a single entity - more A VIRTUAL cloud of various influential sorts. So someone who was at PdL the week of the 28th April 2007 - who wished to get the establishment's assistance in concealing what was going on - would have called his / her contact (lets say a governmental person). The governmental person would have then pulled in a favour from a top civil servant who is a loyal mate of, say, Rupert, and before you know it - you have mates taking care of mates. I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

HelenMeg wrote:

I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

I just don't believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, and even tho it was cheap FP and DP make it clear in their rogs that they still blagged discounts. - you are taking GM at his  own inflated sense of importance. No way was this a shady Bilderburg type week - plenty of more discreet and luxurious places to go and do nefarious things behind closed doors if that is what anyone wanted to do.
If it was pre-planned and/or an establishment cover-up neither we nor the  media nor the world would ever have heard of the McCanns, and there would certainly be no cadaver scent found by any dogs in the apartment.

Praiaaa wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:

I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

I just don't believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, and even tho it was cheap FP and DP make it clear in their rogs that they still blagged discounts. - you are taking GM at his  own inflated sense of importance. No way was this a shady Bilderburg type week - plenty of more discreet and luxurious places to go and do nefarious things behind closed doors if that is what anyone wanted to do.
If it was pre-planned and/or an establishment cover-up neither we nor the  media nor the world would ever have heard of the McCanns, and there would certainly be no cadaver scent found by any dogs in the apartment.

I can't see any top establishment figures holidaying at Warners.  Another problem with this theory is the amount of publicity the McCanns sought following Madeleines disappearance.  If there were sexual shenanigans going on, they would hardly encourage the world's media to descend on PDL.  Dozens, perhaps even hundreds, of eager, investigative journalists looking for a scoop and scratching around for stories, some were there for weeks and months on end. 

On top of which, Madeleine's disappearance was thoroughly investigated by the PJ and there is no evidence to suggest the tapas group were anywhere other than around the resort and in the Tapas bar.  Where were they all meeting up for these shenanigans?  David Payne had his mother in law with him, so their apartment was probably out.  Are we really to believe that a top figure of the establishment, so powerful that two governments have spent millions to cover his tracks was playing toss the keys in a bowl with a group of doctors in an economy holiday resort?

I agree with you Praiaaa, the idea is ludicrous.  It would have to be someone more powerful than the Prince of Wales, because the press are doing their utmost to find stories linking him to Savile. 

There is no doubt that there was an horrendous abuse of power in the early days and some might be brought to book for interfering in a criminal investigation once they have finished playing the blame game.  Any involvement of VIPS is imo, related to the 'abuse of power' issue rather than wiping out any trace of a mystery person so important that a fake investigation on an unprecedented scale has been going on for 3 years and continuing.

It really is puzzling isn't Cristobell.

I can't get my head round why the media have no problem questioning/exposing stuff all the way up to royalty, but won't go anywhere near the meat of this case. I don't buy it is because of being sued, either.

I agree with others it is something big and possibly not directly related to the M's/what happened to Madeleine, I just can't think what that could be to cause the media to behave how they have or why OG would conduct a whitewash/coverup in public to appease a public 99.9% of which have basically forgotten/don't care/had enough of it.

Cristobell wrote:

Praiaaa wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:

I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

I just don't believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, and even tho it was cheap FP and DP make it clear in their rogs that they still blagged discounts. - you are taking GM at his  own inflated sense of importance. No way was this a shady Bilderburg type week - plenty of more discreet and luxurious places to go and do nefarious things behind closed doors if that is what anyone wanted to do.
If it was pre-planned and/or an establishment cover-up neither we nor the  media nor the world would ever have heard of the McCanns, and there would certainly be no cadaver scent found by any dogs in the apartment.

I can't see any top establishment figures holidaying at Warners.  Another problem with this theory is the amount of publicity the McCanns sought following Madeleines disappearance.  If there were sexual shenanigans going on, they would hardly encourage the world's media to descend on PDL.  Dozens, perhaps even hundreds, of eager, investigative journalists looking for a scoop and scratching around for stories, some were there for weeks and months on end. 

On top of which, Madeleine's disappearance was thoroughly investigated by the PJ and there is no evidence to suggest the tapas group were anywhere other than around the resort and in the Tapas bar.  Where were they all meeting up for these shenanigans?  David Payne had his mother in law with him, so their apartment was probably out.  Are we really to believe that a top figure of the establishment, so powerful that two governments have spent millions to cover his tracks was playing toss the keys in a bowl with a group of doctors in an economy holiday resort?

I agree with you Praiaaa, the idea is ludicrous.  It would have to be someone more powerful than the Prince of Wales, because the press are doing their utmost to find stories linking him to Savile. 

There is no doubt that there was an horrendous abuse of power in the early days and some might be brought to book for interfering in a criminal investigation once they have finished playing the blame game.  Any involvement of VIPS is imo, related to the 'abuse of power' issue rather than wiping out any trace of a mystery person so important that a fake investigation on an unprecedented scale has been going on for 3 years and continuing.

Yep I fully agree with this and will add that I think 'top' establishment figures were very naive and believed the stories told by certain Mcparties and now are struggling to backtrack without looking/sounding like idiots.
JohnyT

TheTruthWillOut wrote:It really is puzzling isn't Cristobell.

I can't get my head round why the media have no problem questioning/exposing stuff all the way up to royalty, but won't go anywhere near the meat of this case. I don't buy it is because of being sued, either.

I agree with others it is something big and possibly not directly related to the M's/what happened to Madeleine, I just can't think what that could be to cause the media to behave how they have or why OG would conduct a whitewash/coverup in public to appease a public 99.9% of which have basically forgotten/don't care/had enough of it.

Actually I think it IS because they're frightened of being sued......even posters on here are hence the putting of allegedly and IMO after most posts.
JohnyT

(IMO of course!)

Praiaaa wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:

I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

I just don't believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, and even tho it was cheap FP and DP make it clear in their rogs that they still blagged discounts. - you are taking GM at his  own inflated sense of importance. No way was this a shady Bilderburg type week - plenty of more discreet and luxurious places to go and do nefarious things behind closed doors if that is what anyone wanted to do.
If it was pre-planned and/or an establishment cover-up neither we nor the  media nor the world would ever have heard of the McCanns, and there would certainly be no cadaver scent found by any dogs in the apartment.

Personally, I don't believe that kind of activities took place in PDL that week.
For that reason I don't believe anyone wealthy was there who needed to be protected at all cost, being the possible reason for the cover up.

And, not because I believe cheapo resorts are beneath the wealthy.  Yes, generally speaking anyone wealthy would not be seen dead in cheapo resorts.  However, anyone wealthy with predilection for that kind of activities would go anywhere, to any sorts of venues regardless so long as they know the goods so to speak are available there.
In fact cheapo and seedy places, beneath their social class/standard places, are exactly the sort of places  they are not adversed to use to carry out seedy criminal activities since hiding in plain sight is often a safe bet.

Look at wealthy Savile, and look at and the sorts of unsavoury places he used to carry out the abuse.

Elm house was hardly palatial.

JohnyT wrote:

TheTruthWillOut wrote:It really is puzzling isn't Cristobell.

I can't get my head round why the media have no problem questioning/exposing stuff all the way up to royalty, but won't go anywhere near the meat of this case. I don't buy it is because of being sued, either.

I agree with others it is something big and possibly not directly related to the M's/what happened to Madeleine, I just can't think what that could be to cause the media to behave how they have or why OG would conduct a whitewash/coverup in public to appease a public 99.9% of which have basically forgotten/don't care/had enough of it.

Actually I think it IS because they're frightened of being sued......even posters on here are hence the putting of allegedly and IMO after most posts.
JohnyT

(IMO of course!)

But why seemingly only in this case? There have been hundreds of allegations and revelations by the press on royalty, politicians and celebs in the seven years of this case and the prospect of them being sued didn't stop them. Some people have successfully sued the press and they still do this.

What is it that is stopping them posting facts? Can't be successfully sued for that can they?

Is it they are awaiting a trial win for Amaral and then the Kraken will be released?

Praiaaa wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:

I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

I just don't believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, and even tho it was cheap FP and DP make it clear in their rogs that they still blagged discounts. - you are taking GM at his  own inflated sense of importance. No way was this a shady Bilderburg type week - plenty of more discreet and luxurious places to go and do nefarious things behind closed doors if that is what anyone wanted to do.
If it was pre-planned and/or an establishment cover-up neither we nor the  media nor the world would ever have heard of the McCanns, and there would certainly be no cadaver scent found by any dogs in the apartment.

So, if you dont believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, how do you explain PE being there - on the board of STEMCOR no less?  How do you explain Bridget and husband there. Even Consultants are very well paid by most peoples standards. DP, MO, RO GM - all Consultants - not just average doctors. Check their GMC registrations - all Consultants earning nice big salaries. How do you explain them being there? In your opinion nobody 'wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season' yet we can clearly see that they did do week commencing 28th April 2007. In my opinion they can and did - what is puzzling is why they went... and I dont know why that was.   

STEMCOR
Stemcor is one of the world’s largest independent steel traders.
Our services span every step in the steel supply chain and include finance, provision of raw materials, steel trading, distribution and stockholding. With turnover exceeding £5bn in 2012, we trade around 20 million tonnes of steel and steel-making raw materials per annum through a network of offices in 45 different countries. Stemcor aims to be the partner of choice for producers and purchasers of steel in every part of the world. We achieve this by nurturing strong business relationships, by continuously improving our processes and by adding value at every step - from minehead to factory floor.

Stemcor’s strategic direction will remain unchanged. Oppenheimer will continue to be an active Chairman and have oversight of Group strategy, mergers, acquisitions, disposals and structural changes. Philip Edmonds will continue as Deputy Chairman.

TheTruthWillOut wrote:

JohnyT wrote:

TheTruthWillOut wrote:It really is puzzling isn't Cristobell.

I can't get my head round why the media have no problem questioning/exposing stuff all the way up to royalty, but won't go anywhere near the meat of this case. I don't buy it is because of being sued, either.

I agree with others it is something big and possibly not directly related to the M's/what happened to Madeleine, I just can't think what that could be to cause the media to behave how they have or why OG would conduct a whitewash/coverup in public to appease a public 99.9% of which have basically forgotten/don't care/had enough of it.

Actually I think it IS because they're frightened of being sued......even posters on here are hence the putting of allegedly and IMO after most posts.
JohnyT

(IMO of course!)

But why seemingly only in this case? There have been hundreds of allegations and revelations by the press on royalty, politicians and celebs in the seven years of this case and the prospect of them being sued didn't stop them. Some people have successfully sued the press and they still do this.

What is it that is stopping them posting facts? Can't be successfully sued for that can they?

Is it they are awaiting a trial win for Amaral and then the Kraken will be released?

If injunctions/super injunctions are in place, fear of imprisonment would stop editors/owners from printing anything when ordered to do so by the courts.

We know there are celebs using the courts (injunctions) to stop tales of their private lives emerging, who knows who has what injunction in place?

Could be Plebgate, but even they have been investigated by the press at how they are being abused by the rich and powerful. I remember Giggs and Terry in particular being outed a few years ago.

I`m beginning to think this has nothing to do with any particular political party covering up.  It goes beyond them to the people who control politicians, i.e. the Secret Services. Watching Richard Hall`s documentary made me see things more clearly. It is the appointment of CM that is so obviously a spooks operation.
 
I`ve often thought the Mcs were fighting the SSs and that`s why they immediately created the publicity whirlwind.  It could be that the Mcs and SSs had each other by the short and curlies. The Mcs wanted MBMs body back and they were going to make one hell of a fuss about it.  CM was there to control what they said and no doubt BK played a similar part.
 
Just my thoughts at the moment.

It would be good if an MP would stand in the HOC and name names, but I think I remember reading that Bercow has said that Members of the House should be very careful about doing this sort of thing again?

Edited to add - this post in response to Truthwillout.

JohnyT wrote:

TheTruthWillOut wrote:It really is puzzling isn't Cristobell.

I can't get my head round why the media have no problem questioning/exposing stuff all the way up to royalty, but won't go anywhere near the meat of this case. I don't buy it is because of being sued, either.

I agree with others it is something big and possibly not directly related to the M's/what happened to Madeleine, I just can't think what that could be to cause the media to behave how they have or why OG would conduct a whitewash/coverup in public to appease a public 99.9% of which have basically forgotten/don't care/had enough of it.

Actually I think it IS because they're frightened of being sued......even posters on here are hence the putting of allegedly and IMO after most posts.
JohnyT

(IMO of course!)

That's a very good point Johny.  The McCanns have firmly established themselves in the nation's psyche as victims of the Press.  They have received a number of large payouts and they told the world and its dog the sheer hell the press had put them through when they appeared at the Leveson Enquiry.  They have, or at least appear to have, the sympathy of those who wish to chastise the media. 

Some UK newspaper had to hand over large sum of money to the McCanns and are probably not keen to do so again.  On their newsdesks, the missing Madeleine is moving towards the bottom of the pile, there are newer, fresher, stories that are of more interest to the public, than a weekly helping of 'new suspect' and the McCanns' agony.  Hard to believe, but not many people are as obsessed with this case as we are!  Editors know that every McCann story is a legal minefield, so they stick with safe.  They either don't have the time, the resources or the interest in new Maddie stories to investigate them thoroughly. 

Having said that, I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the Smithman efits hit the newsdesks.  How could they write a story without making any reference to the similarity between Gerry and the efits, but most of them managed it if I recollect correctly. The public weren't so easily fooled and within hours the wags on twitter were superimposing the faces with Gerry and finding a match!  Maybe some things don't need saying.

HelenMeg wrote:

Praiaaa wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:

I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

I just don't believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, and even tho it was cheap FP and DP make it clear in their rogs that they still blagged discounts. - you are taking GM at his  own inflated sense of importance. No way was this a shady Bilderburg type week - plenty of more discreet and luxurious places to go and do nefarious things behind closed doors if that is what anyone wanted to do.
If it was pre-planned and/or an establishment cover-up neither we nor the  media nor the world would ever have heard of the McCanns, and there would certainly be no cadaver scent found by any dogs in the apartment.

So, if you dont believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, how do you explain PE being there - on the board of STEMCOR no less?  How do you explain Bridget and husband there. Even Consultants are very well paid by most peoples standards. DP, MO, RO GM - all Consultants - not just average doctors. Check their GMC registrations - all Consultants earning nice big salaries. How do you explain them being there? In your opinion nobody 'wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season' yet we can clearly see that they did do week commencing 28th April 2007. In my opinion they can and did - what is puzzling is why they went... and I dont know why that was.   

STEMCOR
Stemcor is one of the world’s largest independent steel traders.
Our services span every step in the steel supply chain and include finance, provision of raw materials, steel trading, distribution and stockholding. With turnover exceeding £5bn in 2012, we trade around 20 million tonnes of steel and steel-making raw materials per annum through a network of offices in 45 different countries. Stemcor aims to be the partner of choice for producers and purchasers of steel in every part of the world. We achieve this by nurturing strong business relationships, by continuously improving our processes and by adding value at every step - from minehead to factory floor.

Stemcor’s strategic direction will remain unchanged. Oppenheimer will continue to be an active Chairman and have oversight of Group strategy, mergers, acquisitions, disposals and structural changes. Philip Edmonds will continue as Deputy Chairman.

I agree, HelenMeg,  Let's not forget banker, Robert Naylor, was also there.

HelenMeg wrote:

Praiaaa wrote:

HelenMeg wrote:

I believe that there may have been some very very wealthy business men partaking in activities that week - who pulled in favours.

I just don't believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, and even tho it was cheap FP and DP make it clear in their rogs that they still blagged discounts. - you are taking GM at his  own inflated sense of importance. No way was this a shady Bilderburg type week - plenty of more discreet and luxurious places to go and do nefarious things behind closed doors if that is what anyone wanted to do.
If it was pre-planned and/or an establishment cover-up neither we nor the  media nor the world would ever have heard of the McCanns, and there would certainly be no cadaver scent found by any dogs in the apartment.

So, if you dont believe anyone wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season, how do you explain PE being there - on the board of STEMCOR no less?  How do you explain Bridget and husband there. Even Consultants are very well paid by most peoples standards. DP, MO, RO GM - all Consultants - not just average doctors. Check their GMC registrations - all Consultants earning nice big salaries. How do you explain them being there? In your opinion nobody 'wealthy would go to a cheapo MarkWarner holiday out of season' yet we can clearly see that they did do week commencing 28th April 2007. In my opinion they can and did - what is puzzling is why they went... and I dont know why that was.   

I can see Praiaaa's point that MW wont be choice of the super duper rich.
MW is not 5-stars, at most 3-stars. Incidentally star rating is given according to facilities on offer, and not according to standard of furnishing or furniture or quality of service.
The more amenities and facilities on offer eg. pool, tennis court, WIFI, safe, saloons, boutiques, spa, creche, boat or equipment for water sports etc, in a holiday accommodation the higher the star ratings.

People taking packaged accommodation of this sort of category are typically ordinary working middle class, which the T9 are. MW is not a seedy back packers type nor an extremely low cost no facilities type. It's mid of the range, exactly the sort taken up by middle class with decent wages (bankers, doctors, white collar workers) on a budget holiday for the family. Simple decent accommodation with facilities, nothing extraordinary for not extraordinary people.

Generally not preferred choice of the super duper wealthy, but there are exceptions to the rule of course, if the wealthy is super stingy or prudent with money.

The wealthy have been known to drop their standards and take a side road if there is something tempting on their arrival there.  IMO that`s how the upper crust are controlled - all it takes is a weakness in themselves and their whole family are done for and open to blackmail.

Interesting news today regarding Manchester Chief of Police being served a criminal and misconduct notice due to a poorly handled investigation.

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

A DS and a DCI also served with criminal and misconduct notices.

Sky News reporting probe was set up due to whistle-blower within the force. Somebody didn't like what was going on ?

Surely, taking into account the size of OG, the mccann affair cannot be a whitewash ?

You would think NOT. It's about not getting caught out.
It will only become tiresome and troublesome if you are found out.
If you get away with it, no problem whatsoever!

So it depends really.

Particularly with this case, where there is so much damming material available.

I wouldn't be too comfortable being in the OG team if I knew this was the way things were heading.

I do have my days of doubt, but overall I have faith in OG.

I do have faith, only to a relative extent.

They are taking far too long. If they are focusing on netting the bogus private detectives and other peripheral characters as well for perverting the course of justice then fair enough.
But so far despite the CW appeal, digs, and interviews of Tom Dick and Harry in Portuguese, silence so far.

Can only be very good (watertight) or VERY bad (no head or tail, no clue)