WHO 'wrote' this? - Operation Grange Remit

by jeanmonroe 05.03.14 11:37

Serious question.

WHO 'drafted' the Operation Grange 'remit'?

Op Grange Remit

The support and expertise proffered by the Commissioner will be provided by the Homicide & Serious Crime Command - SCD1.

The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’. This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);

The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies.
UK Law Enforcement agencies,
Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.

The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before.

It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter. Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK)

Somebody 'wrote/instructed' THAT

WHO?

HOME OFFICE? GOVERNMENT LAWYERS? FOREIGN OFFICE?

eta:Operation Grange quote: It will take too long to progress to any “action stage”

What is 'too long'?

But they DID upgrade the 'review' into an 'action stage' with a full scale 'investigation' launched on 4th July 2013.

So what did they 'find' to warrant doing THAT?

by AndyB 05.03.14 12:13

jeanmonroe wrote:But they DID upgrade the 'review' into an 'action stage' with a full scale 'investigation' launched on 4th July 2013.

So what did they 'find' to warrant doing THAT?

Presumably evidence or suspicion of a crime where the UK has jurisdiction, which does provide an interesting context for HH saying "murder" on the radio the other day.

The upgrade from review to investigation is the one thing that gives me hope that it might not be a whitewash.

by diatribe 05.03.14 14:59

AndyB wrote:

The upgrade from review to investigation is the one thing that gives me hope that it might not be a whitewash.

Although you might find the remit to be a tad disparaging.

''It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional-------''

by jeanmonroe 05.03.14 15:34

diatribe wrote:
AndyB wrote:

The upgrade from review to investigation is the one thing that gives me hope that it might not be a whitewash.
Although you might find the remit to be a tad disparaging.

''It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional-------''

WHICH/WHAT 'abduction' would that be then?

by Guest 05.03.14 16:49

Isn't that the remit for the REVIEW? Has anyone seen the remit for the INVESTIGATION?

by Woofer 05.03.14 17:07

I think that original remit includes review and investigation, as it says

"It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process".

which I understand to mean it won`t be just a review.

Goodness knows who drafts these things - whether its the Divisional Commander or a police committee or would it have come from the Home Office - Peter or Tony might know.

by Doug D 05.03.14 17:13

I agree Woofer, technically it's one & the same.

Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit.

I wonder how far we are from the 'transparency, openness & thoroughness' being revealed?

by AndyB 06.03.14 8:08

diatribe wrote:
AndyB wrote:

The upgrade from review to investigation is the one thing that gives me hope that it might not be a whitewash.
Although you might find the remit to be a tad disparaging.

''It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional-------''

Yes, but something caused Grange to move from review to investigation. My hope is based on the possibility that the "something" is evidence of a crime where the UK has jurisdiction. The UK does not have jurisdiction over an abduction abroad. Like I said earlier, it provides an interesting context for HH's use of the word "murder" because the UK could have jurisdiction over a murder committed abroad (although I personally do not believe Madeleine was murdered)