Madeleine McCann parents still under investigation in Portugal

Wow!  This was tonight? Is that a Portuguese news station? I thought there was no active Portuguese investigation at the moment?

From the BBC:

Police are following one remaining line of inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, Scotland Yard boss Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has said.
The UK-based investigation into her disappearance could finish in the next few months, he told LBC radio.
Madeleine, of Rothley, Leicestershire, was three years old went she missing from her family's Portuguese holiday apartment on 3 May 2007.
Despite a high-profile hunt, no trace of her has ever been found.
The remaining line of inquiry is centred around a letter asking for assistance sent from UK investigators to the Portuguese Public Prosecution Service in July 2015.

In October last year, the Metropolitan Police confirmed that the number of UK officers investigating the case had now dropped from 29 to four, as the majority of work on the case had been completed.
Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, said then that they fully understood the decision.

20:30 Kate and Gerry McCann leave their apartment to have dinner at a Tapas bar
[*]21:05 Gerry McCann checks on Madeleine and her siblings
[*]22:00 A man is seen carrying a child wearing pyjamas heading towards the ocean
[*]22:00 Kate McCann raises the alarm that Madeleine has gone missing

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Sir Bernard said: "There's been a lot of investigation time spent on this terrible case.
"It's a child who went missing, everybody wants to know if she is alive and if she is where is she, and sadly if she's dead then we need to give some comfort to the family.
"It's needed us to carry out an investigation together with the Portuguese and other countries have been involved.
"There is a line of inquiry that remains to be concluded and it's expected that in the coming months that will happen."
He said that line of inquiry was agreed to be "worthwhile pursuing" but once that had concluded, the probe, called Operation Grange, would likely end.
But he added: "If somebody comes forward and gives us good evidence we will follow it. We always say that a missing child inquiry is never closed."


The Home Office requested a review of the case in May 2011. Operation Grange, which has been supporting the Portuguese police's investigation, became a full investigation in July 2012.
The Met said in October that officers had finished bringing together and investigating the information held by Portuguese police, the UK investigation and private investigators working on behalf of the McCann family.
The inquiry took 1,338 statements and collected 1,027 exhibits but has not yet reached a conclusion.
Officers investigated more than 60 persons of interest. A total of 650 sex offenders were considered as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world.
Having reviewed all of the documents, "7,154 actions were raised and 560 lines of inquiry identified", the Met said.
More than 30 requests were made to "countries across the world asking for work to be undertaken on behalf of the Met".

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

[*]
22.00 a man is seen carrying a child in pyjamas towards the ocean...
Arrest that man!!!?

Translated with Google.


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

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

Thank you for the above post, can anyone translate? 

Did I just see helicopters flying...you know the ones which GM said didn't exist in Portugal?

This is at about 51 minutes in Amaral's interview from Saturday night. Joana hasn't got that far yet in the translations.

Doug D wrote:This is at about 51 minutes in Amaral's interview from Saturday night. Joana hasn't got that far yet in the translations.

At 45m - on the line of investigation that followed that an accidental death had taken place in that apartment & that the McCanns are suspects of concealing the cadaver.

"Gonçalo Amaral - No, I'm not obsessed, and I'll tell you why. What is in there is a specific time of the investigation, as I had said. A line of investigation that was being followed and was never resumed, and should be resumed. That line of investigation was not concluded, it did not reach a dead end, do you understand? If it had been concluded, then we would know what the results were. Now the issue here is that line of investigation is not allowed to be pursued."

xklamation wrote: "A line of investigation that was being followed and was never resumed, and should be resumed. That line of investigation was not concluded, it did not reach a dead end, do you understand? If it had been concluded, then we would know what the results were. Now the issue here is that line of investigation is not allowed to be pursued."

That's been the problem for the MET from day 1. The deliberately restrictive remit given to SY by the UK government meant that SY were not allowed to pursue this line of investigation for the duration of the 4 years and £12m spent.

Instead the 29 officers were condemned to 4 years of chasing shadows, looking for ghosts and barking up the wrong trees. A task that, to the surprise of nobody, has been ended with zero progress and zero leads.

Or, if we flip the coin over - let's assume that all the MET officers haven't been going in every day twiddling their thumbs and gazing out of the window. If, they have been doing their job, within a forced remit, they've proven one thing - the likelihood that the disappearance of MBM was caused by an unknown intruder on the night of 3 May 2007, is virtually zero. And that means the cause of her diasppearance has to lie elsewhere. 

As I understand it, OG's declared primary objective has been to find a missing live child. A child that was taken within a short, specified time frame. Failing that, to find a deceased child, taken alive, within the same specific short time frame. This has failed. I have a couple of questions (perhaps the monitors could get back to me):

1. Who made (had the power to make) the unusual decision to set such a closed remit for OG? Surely, when a child disappears under unknown circumstances, good and normal practise would be to leave all avenues of investigation open? 

2. Why, when it was clear that OG was failing to produce any results which would progress the understanding of what happened to MBM, (bearing in mind the known inconsistencies within the core statements; the cadaver dog results; etc) wasn't the primary objective re-assessed and updated to reflect this? 

The frustration of some of the MET officers must be enormous.


Richard - perhaps you can try and dig out the 'who' for us. Find him/her/them and it might point to the why. Find out the why and we might have the how and when of all this.

Surely, when a child disappears under unknown circumstances, good and normal practise would be to leave all avenues of investigation open?

Yes.

And the fact they weren't tells you everything you need to know.

The only way this will change is if someone at the top thinks it can't be sustained any longer and decide to throw someone to the wolves (having installed several lines of defence for others).

skyrocket wrote:

1. Who made (had the power to make) the unusual decision to set such a closed remit for OG? Surely, when a child disappears under unknown circumstances, good and normal practise would be to leave all avenues of investigation open? 

I don't see the remit as a "closed one".
Its only a matter of interpretation.

"As if the abduction took place in the UK" ...
meaning not "as if the abduction (indeed) took place"....
but "as if in the UK an abduction is reported"
meaning to apply UK procedures and MET Manual states that if in doubt think "murder".....

That's not interpretation.

That's invention.

The remit is the remit and it states "the abduction".

skyrocket wrote:1. Who made (had the power to make) the unusual decision to set such a closed remit for OG? Surely, when a child disappears under unknown circumstances, good and normal practise would be to leave all avenues of investigation open? 

We already know this, I've mentioned it many times on the forum.

It was Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell, the man who was appointed the Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) for Operation Grange (i.e. Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood's boss).

Using police terminology, Hamish Campbell was the SIO, while DCI Andy Redwood was merely the Investigating Officer (IO).

Goncalo Amaral was the 'investigation co-ordinator' for the original PJ investigation. Similarly, DCS Hamish Campbell was the investigation co-ordinator  for Operation Grange. He retired from that role in May 2013.

As I never tire on here of pointing out, Hamish Campbell was the Investigating Officer on the disastrous Met Police investigation into the murder of Jill Dando. His evidence playe a key part in the wrongful conviction of Barry George/Bulsara, who served 8 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. The Met Police even 'framed' Bulsara before he was arrested, making out that the likely 'profile' of the killer was an 'obsessive loner'.

The key piece of forensic evidence was a piece of residue 'found' in Bulsara's coat pocket (but wasn't wasn't 'found' on the original search). It matched the weapon known to have been used to kill Jill Dando. At the Court of Appeal when Bulsara's conviction was set asidem the appeal court judges all but said that this evidence was 'planted'.

I would suggest that the choice of Hamish Campbell to head up Operation Grange was no accident. I wrote an extensive piece on the forum on Hamish Campbell and related matters which can be found by searching under 'Campbell':

ETA   Added:

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

P.S. re Jill Dando

The forum-owner has put up a link to a 3-part film on vimeo of the killing of Jill Dando. I have watched Part 1 so far. It is pretty amateur, sound and vision are of very variable quality, and most of the 45 minutes is taken up with long recordings of news items with no commentary. IMO the only interesting bit was the last 5 minutes where it is claimed that Cliff Richard arranged a 'blind date' between Jill Dando and the man who was her fiancé at the date of her murder, Dr Alan Farthing. I understand that Farthing was one of the Queen's medical consultants. The maker of the video hints that Dando was murdered because she was uncovering evidence of a high-level cover-up of a paedophile ring connected to Jimmy Savile. It is sttaed on the film (without a source) that "Alan Farthing was the only person who knew that Jill Dando woiuld be at home that morning". Part 1 of these three films doesn't actually disclose any evidence. This theory has been around for a great many years but I am not sure if it can ever be substantiated. There is a short clip early on in this video of Hamish Campbell himself speaking about the murder of Jill

-----

P.P.S. re the remit: BlueBag wrote: "The remit is the remit and it states 'the abduction'.  REPLY: That's 100% correct. It is potentially a serious disciplinary offence for any police officer working on an investigation to ever step outside the remit. The remit of Operation Grange has always been crystal clear and there's no evidence that it's been altered, and stacks of evidence demonstrating that it hasn't been altered

Did anyone see Becky Shah's interview, this morning, on the BBC? If one didn't know she was referring to the lies and cover-ups of the Hillsborough disaster, one would think she was talking about the Madeleine McCann saga.

Nothing changes.

sallypelt wrote:Did anyone see Becky Shah's interview, this morning, on the BBC? If one didn't know she was referring to the lies and cover-ups of the Hillsborough disaster, one would think she was talking about the Madeleine McCann saga.

Nothing changes.

I thought exactly the same watching the Sky papers review last night, sallypelt. My irony meter blew up when the two signs TRUTH and JUSTICE popped up over Liverpool. I wondered if any current agent of the state received an urgent call of nature  at that very moment! 
 Even the Sun editor squirmed on behalf of his 'orrible rag's smear campaign.  They obviously never draw a lesson, do they? None too bright.
 
I noticed, a one, Julian Robinson, has also jumped on the troll bandwagon in a similar article for the mail online. One way of making a name for yourself, I suppose. ....... albeit, years down the line in an unflattering tv retrospective that reveals a remit to mislead the public. Maybe not the name he dreamed of when copy and paste was his thing.  Imagine copying and pasting from the Sun as a strategy to further your journalistic career!

I mean, it's not even  a case of "the truth will out" any more  - much of it IS already out and being read worldwide with more coming in an unstoppable flow via the Portuguese media.

Damage limitation must now be the Wider Agenda! I could draw a chart if it helps. Now where's my compass and set square?

I think it's simply been a case of the king's new clothes.

The reasons why SY were asked to investigate an abduction are because the government ... who actually know very little about the case ... believed everything the McCanns told them.

The thinking has been, two British doctors, never mind a group of nine British doctors, could not possibly be involved in covering up the death of a child. The problem must lie with translation, the Portuguese did not understand what the British doctors were telling them. Or the problem must lie with the PJ, their police force is not as good as the British etc. etc.

Others who may have had any doubts about the story, have put them to one side, the government, the media, the police, celebrities the public can't be wrong can they? People have not doubted the McCanns because they did not want to doubt the McCanns ... instead they want to think it must be the fault of the Portuguese police. (People did not want to doubt the police at Hillsborough, they did not want to doubt Dr Shipman, they didn't want to state the obvious about Jimmy Savile, the list goes on and on)

And because the McCanns have had a lot of support from the media, the government, celebrities it has been easy to dismiss those who question their version of events on the internet as trouble makers, trolls etc.

Of course I'm not saying here that the McCanns are definitely responsible for the disappearance of their daughter, but those are the reasons they have not seriously been considered as suspects by the British.

suzyjohnson wrote:I think it's simply been a case of the king's new clothes.

The reasons why SY were asked to investigate an abduction are because the government ... who actually know very little about the case ... believed everything the McCanns told them.

The thinking has been, two British doctors, never mind a group of nine British doctors, could not possibly be involved in covering up the death of a child. The problem must lie with translation, the Portuguese did not understand what the British doctors were telling them. Or the problem must lie with the PJ, their police force is not as good as the British etc. etc.

Others who may have had any doubts about the story, have put them to one side, the government, the media, the police, celebrities the public can't be wrong can they? People have not doubted the McCanns because they did not want to doubt the McCanns ... instead they want to think it must be the fault of the Portuguese police. (People did not want to doubt the police at Hillsborough, they did not want to doubt Dr Shipman, they didn't want to state the obvious about Jimmy Savile, the list goes on and on)

And because the McCanns have had a lot of support from the media, the government, celebrities it has been easy to dismiss those who question their version of events on the internet as trouble makers, trolls etc.

Of course I'm not saying here that the McCanns are definitely responsible for the disappearance of their daughter, but those are the reasons they have not seriously been considered as suspects by the British.

A British Ambassador warned the Government not to trust the McCanns, the Gaspars warned the UK police re an ominous sign, Yvonne Martin warned of recognising DP, and the blood and cadaver dogs alerted to death in the apartment; and there's also the McCanns dire version of events and lack of cooperation, and dodgy Jane Tanners absurd alibi for Gerry.  It's red flag city! 

Why would the Home Office delay and refuse to turn over basic information requested on the McCanns following Maddie's disappearance, if they believed and trusted in the couple?  Surely they would want to assist in moving the investigation rapidly forward.  Instead nothing!  They sure sent Mitchell out fast enough though.  And don't even get me started on the alleged 'all destroyed during testing' hair samples.

MayMuse wrote:

To whom and/or what are you responding?

Tony Bennett wrote:I fear the title of this thread is completely wrong..

Joana Morais posted this on another thread here this morning:

"The process reopened in Portugal forced by the investigation of the Met. Mind you, not because "new credible information" had arrived to the PGR but because the MET asked for several men, 11 or more, innocent and totally unrelated to the case to be questioned and for that they had to become arguidos - suspects. Some of these men's names and faces appeared in the world media .

"The Oporto PJ team did an unprecedented review - of an investigation carried out by another PJ team - that "discovered" a dead man, again an innocent man - a farcical if not racist attempt to blame a patsy. Any other findings? Zilch. This review was nothing more than an expedient to "show to the world" or for "the English to see" that the Portuguese PJ were actively doing something whilst their English counterparts had the front pages of the world media, due to tacit agreements with the UK media ex. photojournalists knowing precisely where and when Redwood would arrive in the Algarve". 

AMEN!  If only reliable sources with an inclination of the Portuguese angle, like Joanna Morais, would come forward more often and quell some of these ridiculous suggestions generated by a lack of knowledge and an over-active imagination.

The latest revelation as regards Dr. Amaral seems to have kick-started yet another round of invention to spin and/or fill the empty hours.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:   they've proven one thing - the likelihood that the disappearance of MBM was caused by an unknown intruder on the night of 3 May 2007, is virtually zero.

Not sure how you come to that conclusion.  I think you will find it was the PJ, at the time coordinated by Goncalo Amaral that came to that conclusion very early in the 'official' investigation - around 4th May 2007 if I remember correctly.

Ex-DCI Andy Redwood of Metropolitan Police fame, in allegiance with the BBC's Crimewatch production team, took great pains to recreate the timeline for the night of 3rd May.  By eliminating the stranger that didn't look like a tourist, carrying a semi-clad child into the night and as if by magic finding a man 'that came forward - who thinks he might be the man seen by Tanner', he managed in his revelation moment to extend the timeline in order to give the phantom abductor a window of opportunity.

This important factor has never been eliminated from the Operation Grange 'unofficial' investigation, to my knowledge.

So & I think I may have said this before, this has been just a very expensive 'theatre' production!? 
Do the Uk investigation team & the Government think we are all idiots?
It is a mockery of our British justice system which shows high levels of interference & protection from the start! And not just in this sorry case! 

How on earth can our relationship with Portugal ever be in 'good-standing'! 
 
Madeleine's 'case' is known world-wide and the 'farcical' of it all (I feel) has damaged our reputation!
We cannot crawl under a stone ( even unturned) and hide!

This will never disappear & Madeleines name will go down in history! 

I'm sorry to say that I'm British! 
Amaral, the PJ & all the Portuguese people which this 'diabolical event' has affected have my utmost respect & support. 

Bless you Madeleine 

All nations have their corrupt, powers that be. I have a very good friend who lived in Zimbabwe who told me how opposers of Mugabe would have mysterious car crashes. I thought 'that wouldn't happen in Britain!' Now I know different.

What I meant to say is that such evil people will stop at nothing.

MayMuse wrote:So & I think I may have said this before, this has been just a very expensive 'theatre' production!? 
Do the Uk investigation team & the Government think we are all idiots?
It is a mockery of our British justice system which shows high levels of interference & protection from the start! And not just in this sorry case! 

How on earth can our relationship with Portugal ever be in 'good-standing'! 
 
Madeleine's 'case' is known world-wide and the 'farcical' of it all (I feel) has damaged our reputation!
We cannot crawl under a stone ( even unturned) and hide!

This will never disappear & Madeleines name will go down in history! 

I'm sorry to say that I'm British! 
Amaral, the PJ & all the Portuguese people which this 'diabolical event' has affected have my utmost respect & support. 

Bless you Madeleine 

Crikey when was all things UK damned and all things Portuguese heavenly!

The Portuguese investigation was botched...just as the Soham case was initially botched in UK. It's the nature of investigations except the disappearance of Madeleine McCann was an iconic disappearance, for reasons yet to be ascertained.

Portugal has dirty hands too!

aquila wrote:

MayMuse wrote:So & I think I may have said this before, this has been just a very expensive 'theatre' production!? 
Do the Uk investigation team & the Government think we are all idiots?
It is a mockery of our British justice system which shows high levels of interference & protection from the start! And not just in this sorry case! 

How on earth can our relationship with Portugal ever be in 'good-standing'! 
 
Madeleine's 'case' is known world-wide and the 'farcical' of it all (I feel) has damaged our reputation!
We cannot crawl under a stone ( even unturned) and hide!

This will never disappear & Madeleines name will go down in history! 

I'm sorry to say that I'm British! 
Amaral, the PJ & all the Portuguese people which this 'diabolical event' has affected have my utmost respect & support. 

Bless you Madeleine 

Crikey when was all things UK damned and all things Portuguese heavenly!

The Portuguese investigation was botched...just as the Soham case was initially botched in UK. It's the nature of investigations except the disappearance of Madeleine McCann was an iconic disappearance, for reasons yet to be ascertained.

Portugal has dirty hands too!

Never said all Portuguese were 'heavenly'! But in this case ( as it has played out) they ( particularly Amaral) have had,in my opinion a raw deal!

Verdi wrote:

MayMuse wrote:

To whom and/or what are you responding?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] it was Joanna's part translation

Tony Bennett wrote:




The key piece of forensic evidence was a piece of residue 'found' in Bulsara's coat pocket (but wasn't wasn't 'found' on the original search). It matched the weapon known to have been used to kill Jill Dando. At the Court of Appeal when Bulsara's conviction was set asidem the appeal court judges all but said that this evidence was 'planted'.

I thought the key piece of  evidence was totally forensically discredited, Tony and that was the grounds upon which Monsieur le Bulsara's case was resubmitted to the Court of Appeal. I stand be corrected, but the basis of his appeal wasn't that the police planted this piece of evidence, but that it didn't prove anything and was inadmissable as evidence.

Monsieur le Bolsara was initially poorly advised, had he not been, he would never have answered any of the police questions at his IUC.  As a result of this, his answers gave the impression of him being a shifty character. One should never respond to police questioning under these circumstances, if for no other reason, it ties one to a certain line of defence at an early stage when one doesn't know the entirety of the evidence against one.

A similar analogy would be turning up to a duel with a catapult, only to find one's opponent has a Kalashnikov rifle.