The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


Not a Whitewash

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Not a Whitewash

Post by Guest on 23.05.14 13:00

The blogger, Unterdent eppichge kehrt  answers Pat Brown on why it wont be a Whitewash.

Not sure where to stick this, so Mods move if see fit... 



I beg to differ...

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.de/2014/05/ten-reasons-why-i-cant-take-scotland.html



""For the moment, they may be solving cases right and left, but something is seriously wrong with the Madeleine McCann case and here are ten reasons why I think this is not business as usual and there is a political coverup going on of some sort.

1) The amount of funds being allotted to Scotland Yard to investigate one missing person's case - a case which is not even  within their own jurisdiction, a case in which the parents' own neglect of their children and refusal to cooperate with the authorities is shameful - is unprecedented and outrageous.


2) Scotland Yard began their "review" by publicly stating that the parents were not suspects instead of simply saying no one  can be excluded from suspicion who does not have a solid alibi as is the usual statement made by police right out of the gate.

3) Scotland Yard constantly says they are updating the parents of the missing child, something that is only done if the parents are absolutely not suspects.

4) Scotland Yard did not do a reconstruction of the crime; they only did a reenactment of the McCann version of the crime for television.

5) Scotland Yard validated Jane Tanner's version of what she saw on a narrow street where she was not seen by two people as she supposedly passed by them.

6) Scotland Yard verified that Tannerman existed with a claim that was not credible.

7) Scotland Yard relatively large "Operation Grange" team has spent three years reviewing files that should have taken no more than a few weeks or months.

8) After reviewing all the evidence and leads in the files, Scotland Yard is investigating suspects that have no connection to the case.

9) Scotland Yard wants to search for Maddies's body (and, yes, they would be searching for a body as all other evidence would be long gone after seven years) in the most unlikely place to find her, right near the apartment in a very open-to-the-view-of-the-public location with hard-as-rock ground where no shallow grave could have been missed by the PJ or anyone walking by.

10) In spite of the fact the PJ has asked for there to be no press about the case, Scotland Yard has its own people still giving interviews.""
[color][font]

@1
A flaw in reason and logic: This reason given is in no way supporting the claim. It is on the contrary supporting the opposite. If there was to be a cover-up why start a review, turn it into a full-fledged investigation, get the country that was treated so badly into their boat and press on for 5 years? I am sure Hewlett would have been able to be made into the perfect scapegoat - and I do believe that this was contemplated by some forces at the time - if that would be the current purpose.

@2
The examples for the exact same conduct in other cases are too numerous to be listed. There is no reason why Scotland Yard should adjust to the purported need of interested parties on the internet against common practice. Especially in the stages of a review. 

@3
Of course a police force HAS to inform the parents of a missing child until these parents are charged and a suspicion is drafted. As to extent of the information given we only have Clarence Mitchell's word to judge by.

@4
It was the request of the Policia Judiciaria for a reconstruction. It was requested to verify or discard the witness statements regarding the timeline of events, mainly to prove that Jane Tanner would have been unable to be where she claimed to have been and to see what she had claimed to have seen. No other statements could have been verified by a reconstruction since no third party witnesses were present. Not the time of the alarm, not the alleged checks. Since Scotland Yard had already smashed the Gordian Knot that Jane Tanner's statement presented to the case there is no need for a reconstruction, something police forces (UK, Germany) very rarely use anyway.

@5
This is debatable but in my opinion a genius move. We know she lied, she knows she lied, the police know she lied, but the petty reward for outing her lie through a reconstruction was discarded for the much more satisfying destruction of Gerry McCann's alibi at the "moment of her abduction". And the way for the Smith sighting was opened. And an offer was made to Jane...

@6
The claim that Tanner saw the abductor was refuted which is so much more important than to prove Jane was lying (which would have proved rather difficult anyway). The ultimate truth is more important than petty revenge on Jane.

@7
The bulk of the review was most certainly done on those parts of the files that have not been published: the reports about (mainly british) paedophiles or alleged paedophiles or rumours of paedophiles in the area. Taken together with the innumerous sightings that have been discarded never to be read by those following the case with a now preset mind this amounts to a huge workload that would have to be done BEFORE any conclusions could have been reached. A quick skim through the 10000 pages of the files can form an opinion but leads to a position that can be attacked in so many ways. (q.e.d.)

@8
All the leads Scotland Yard are following and of course have to follow are part of the case. As mentioned above there are the sightings and reports about paedophiles in the area and of course those alleged incidents that only recently and miraculously turned up have to be verified and investigated even though some might turn out to be mere creations of distraction not unlike some of the sightings we had to put up with the previous years. But by investigating them, evidence might even come from these. In the prospect of the world's biggest court case ever, they better make sure that every other possibility is properly investigated and excluded or I would be very unhappy.

@9
IMO there has yet an exact location to be named where they might be looking for evidence. The location in the center of Praia da Luz would be ideal to distract the world's media from the real procedings. Should they be close to finding her body they would never let the media partake in any unearthings. This open space in PdL is just sweetly perfect for the staging of excavations, with ample parking at hand...

@10
The PJ and Scotland Yard have asked the media to behave and lately Clarence has received the firm instruction to finally stfu. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am sure that at some stage in the past seven years there were efforts being made to cover-up the case and the hype around Hewlett was the closest we got to the presentation of a patsy. He was perfect, DNA evidence could have been provided and the public would have bought it.

But luckily there was never a general consent for a cover-up between all involved parties. 

In the past year we had the alibi of Gerry destroyed, Smithman brought to the public's attention, the cover-up of the photofits exposed, Madeleine's death accepted and even the dog's mentioned in connection with a fresh search for her body. I have no idea WHAT would convince the sceptics, but it can hardly have been better than that.[/font][/color]
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by tiny on 23.05.14 13:21

I go with pat brown on most of her points
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Angelique on 23.05.14 14:06

@tiny wrote:I go with pat brown on most of her points

Yes - ditto that

But then I am a "whitewasher"!

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem
avatar
Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by lj on 23.05.14 14:54

The point is that many think a whitewash needs a doer other than the McCanns, and the McCanns completely cleared. It does not. It needs SY coming up with nothing. That's why all the photo ops and digging and postering. That's why all the "PJ does not want to cooperate". They did everything. They, the best police force in the world, gave it all and (of course thanks to the PJ that don't play ball) could not come up with anything. That's it. Walk along people, nothing to see here. All important people that helped the McCanns (sometimes even violating the law) were right. That's what have to be achieved. Goal was always: nothing, nada at all costs.

Remember how the shelving in Portugal very specifically states that the parents failed to prove themselves innocent, it has been used to tell everyone how they were exonerated. Imagine if SY comes up with nothing. That's it they are innocent.

I'm with Pat here: whitewash of humongous proportions.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/
avatar
lj

Posts : 3327
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Mirage on 23.05.14 14:58

@tiny wrote:I go with pat brown on most of her points
Same here, Tiny.

I think SY have driven themselves up a blind alley. Or, more accurately, the establishment remit has driven them up a blind alley. Their scatter gun approach, characterised by inconsequential pronouncements, sporadic activity, lulls then more statements from senior officers indicates to me a loss of control and focus.

I believe there are various factors exerting pressures on key people, both inside and outside the investigation, which are producing bizarre and highly unorthodox behaviour.  One of these factors, IMO,  is a dynamically changing political landscape. It cannot be denied that the British people are VERY VERY angry with the establishment for a multitude of reasons. But the common denominators currently rocking this society can  be isolated and identified thus:

LIES: CORRUPTION: FRAUD.

This message is being reflected at OG from Portugal too. The PJ sit there, quiet and still in the eye of the storm, exerting a strange attract and repel effect on our suited and booted: the brazen-it-out brigade who so recently strutted their stuff, yet now appear to have come to heel.

When this crime took place in PdL, players whose middle name was "Entitlement" , never dreamt the drama would turn to saga, to political and diplomatic crisis. The pre-occupation of narcissists is self-preservation. Once that stage is achieved, on go the layers. Self-preservation is only stage 1. Stage 2 is reputation management. Stage 3 is reputation enhancement; then celebrity and so on. Taking on the world. T shirts that scream 'Never give up' --ever  the defiant message.

Now I have said that the public are VERY VERY angry with the establishment. I also think that Theresa May is VERY VERY angry with the police. Therein lies a strange and ambivalent history. Some officers affected confusion and dismay at her vitriolic attack. I can sympathise - to an extent. However, I think her aggressive tone and unambiguous threat was aimed at a very specific politicised stratum within the police. Unfortunately, that necessitated collateral damage, in the form of hurt feelings. A price paid.

That is why I think Rowley's statement followed post-haste. And the silence will not be for operational reasons alone. I am sure that the message coming loud and clear from the public is causing some consternation in certain quarters. And so it should because the public are wide awake and watching.

There are people who will doubtless spend the Bank Holiday weekend absorbing current affairs and what the ramifications might be for them in the future. If there is one lesson to be learned, there is always a future; and very often a serendipitous event that jettisons you unexpectedly into the past. Thomas Hardy knew all about that phenomenon.

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by morse on 23.05.14 15:02

I agree with the blogger Unterdent eppichge kehrt. A brilliant post and agree with every word of it. I can't really understand why the majority on here are so pessimistic. If SY can't reach a conclusion, i am sure the PJ won't give up.
JUSTICE FOR MADDIE
avatar
morse

Posts : 24
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Cristobell on 23.05.14 15:14

Andrew77R wrote:The blogger, Unterdent eppichge kehrt  answers Pat Brown on why it wont be a Whitewash.

Not sure where to stick this, so Mods move if see fit... 



I beg to differ...

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.de/2014/05/ten-reasons-why-i-cant-take-scotland.html




""For the moment, they may be solving cases right and left, but something is seriously wrong with the Madeleine McCann case and here are ten reasons why I think this is not business as usual and there is a political coverup going on of some sort.

1) The amount of funds being allotted to Scotland Yard to investigate one missing person's case - a case which is not even  within their own jurisdiction, a case in which the parents' own neglect of their children and refusal to cooperate with the authorities is shameful - is unprecedented and outrageous.


2) Scotland Yard began their "review" by publicly stating that the parents were not suspects instead of simply saying no one  can be excluded from suspicion who does not have a solid alibi as is the usual statement made by police right out of the gate.

3) Scotland Yard constantly says they are updating the parents of the missing child, something that is only done if the parents are absolutely not suspects.

4) Scotland Yard did not do a reconstruction of the crime; they only did a reenactment of the McCann version of the crime for television.

5) Scotland Yard validated Jane Tanner's version of what she saw on a narrow street where she was not seen by two people as she supposedly passed by them.

6) Scotland Yard verified that Tannerman existed with a claim that was not credible.

7) Scotland Yard relatively large "Operation Grange" team has spent three years reviewing files that should have taken no more than a few weeks or months.

8) After reviewing all the evidence and leads in the files, Scotland Yard is investigating suspects that have no connection to the case.

9) Scotland Yard wants to search for Maddies's body (and, yes, they would be searching for a body as all other evidence would be long gone after seven years) in the most unlikely place to find her, right near the apartment in a very open-to-the-view-of-the-public location with hard-as-rock ground where no shallow grave could have been missed by the PJ or anyone walking by.

10) In spite of the fact the PJ has asked for there to be no press about the case, Scotland Yard has its own people still giving interviews.""


@1
A flaw in reason and logic: This reason given is in no way supporting the claim. It is on the contrary supporting the opposite. If there was to be a cover-up why start a review, turn it into a full-fledged investigation, get the country that was treated so badly into their boat and press on for 5 years? I am sure Hewlett would have been able to be made into the perfect scapegoat - and I do believe that this was contemplated by some forces at the time - if that would be the current purpose.

@2
The examples for the exact same conduct in other cases are too numerous to be listed. There is no reason why Scotland Yard should adjust to the purported need of interested parties on the internet against common practice. Especially in the stages of a review. 

@3
Of course a police force HAS to inform the parents of a missing child until these parents are charged and a suspicion is drafted. As to extent of the information given we only have Clarence Mitchell's word to judge by.

@4
It was the request of the Policia Judiciaria for a reconstruction. It was requested to verify or discard the witness statements regarding the timeline of events, mainly to prove that Jane Tanner would have been unable to be where she claimed to have been and to see what she had claimed to have seen. No other statements could have been verified by a reconstruction since no third party witnesses were present. Not the time of the alarm, not the alleged checks. Since Scotland Yard had already smashed the Gordian Knot that Jane Tanner's statement presented to the case there is no need for a reconstruction, something police forces (UK, Germany) very rarely use anyway.

@5
This is debatable but in my opinion a genius move. We know she lied, she knows she lied, the police know she lied, but the petty reward for outing her lie through a reconstruction was discarded for the much more satisfying destruction of Gerry McCann's alibi at the "moment of her abduction". And the way for the Smith sighting was opened. And an offer was made to Jane...

@6
The claim that Tanner saw the abductor was refuted which is so much more important than to prove Jane was lying (which would have proved rather difficult anyway). The ultimate truth is more important than petty revenge on Jane.

@7
The bulk of the review was most certainly done on those parts of the files that have not been published: the reports about (mainly british) paedophiles or alleged paedophiles or rumours of paedophiles in the area. Taken together with the innumerous sightings that have been discarded never to be read by those following the case with a now preset mind this amounts to a huge workload that would have to be done BEFORE any conclusions could have been reached. A quick skim through the 10000 pages of the files can form an opinion but leads to a position that can be attacked in so many ways. (q.e.d.)

@8
All the leads Scotland Yard are following and of course have to follow are part of the case. As mentioned above there are the sightings and reports about paedophiles in the area and of course those alleged incidents that only recently and miraculously turned up have to be verified and investigated even though some might turn out to be mere creations of distraction not unlike some of the sightings we had to put up with the previous years. But by investigating them, evidence might even come from these. In the prospect of the world's biggest court case ever, they better make sure that every other possibility is properly investigated and excluded or I would be very unhappy.

@9
IMO there has yet an exact location to be named where they might be looking for evidence. The location in the center of Praia da Luz would be ideal to distract the world's media from the real procedings. Should they be close to finding her body they would never let the media partake in any unearthings. This open space in PdL is just sweetly perfect for the staging of excavations, with ample parking at hand...

@10
The PJ and Scotland Yard have asked the media to behave and lately Clarence has received the firm instruction to finally stfu. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am sure that at some stage in the past seven years there were efforts being made to cover-up the case and the hype around Hewlett was the closest we got to the presentation of a patsy. He was perfect, DNA evidence could have been provided and the public would have bought it.

But luckily there was never a general consent for a cover-up between all involved parties. 

In the past year we had the alibi of Gerry destroyed, Smithman brought to the public's attention, the cover-up of the photofits exposed, Madeleine's death accepted and even the dog's mentioned in connection with a fresh search for her body. I have no idea WHAT would convince the sceptics, but it can hardly have been better than that.
I agree Andrew, it would have been far less complicated to wrap this up several years ago, before more embarrassing details emerged.  A whitewash imo, is something you would do quickly and quietly, with the less people knowing, the better.  Operation Grange has been the complete opposite of that.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by russiandoll on 23.05.14 15:26

Apologies, was just told by UT who replied on the Pat Brown Blog thread that this post was also here. Please delete mine from Pat Brown Blog area if deemed a nuisance for it to be in 2 places on the forum.

  Johanna has got it nailed imo.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy

avatar
russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by ultimaThule on 23.05.14 15:32

Pat Brown's blog is not new and is also the subject of this earlier thread https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9481-pat-brown-latest-blog#242412 which was created on 3 May.
avatar
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by SixMillionQuid on 23.05.14 21:30

@morse wrote:I agree with the blogger Unterdent eppichge kehrt. A brilliant post and agree with every word of it. I can't really understand why the majority on here are so pessimistic. If SY can't reach a conclusion, i am sure the PJ won't give up.
JUSTICE FOR MADDIE
Why can't SY reach a conclusion? The evidence has been staring at them in the face for the last seven years.

We're lead to believe by non-whitewashers that the digging, and chasing burglars is a smokescreen for something else. So they must have come to a conclusion. They're biding their time. Aren't they?

____________________
"It is my belief that Scotland Yard was set out on a mission, not one to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann but to rewrite the history of the case in such a way that the majority of the public simply forgets the past." - The Pat Brown Criminal Profiling Agency
avatar
SixMillionQuid

Posts : 436
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2013-10-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by SixMillionQuid on 23.05.14 21:44

"@6
The claim that Tanner saw the abductor was refuted which is so much more important than to prove Jane was lying (which would have proved rather difficult anyway). The ultimate truth is more important than petty revenge on Jane."



Not difficult at all. Nobody believed she saw anyone crossing that road near 5A. Six years later an unnamed (what is there to hide) person appears and thinks it was him. Both Tanners sighting and SY explanation are not credible.

____________________
"It is my belief that Scotland Yard was set out on a mission, not one to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann but to rewrite the history of the case in such a way that the majority of the public simply forgets the past." - The Pat Brown Criminal Profiling Agency
avatar
SixMillionQuid

Posts : 436
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2013-10-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Tony Bennett on 23.05.14 22:05

@SixMillionQuid wrote:"@6
The claim that Tanner saw the abductor was refuted which is so much more important than to prove Jane was lying (which would have proved rather difficult anyway). The ultimate truth is more important than petty revenge on Jane."


Not difficult at all. Nobody believed she saw anyone crossing that road near 5A. Six years later an unnamed (what is there to hide) person appears and thinks it was him. Both Tanners sighting and SY explanation are not credible.
In our circles, SMQ, that's true, nobody did believe it. Neither of course did the Portuguese Police, despite the pressure they were under from the very top of the Britsih government to force them to issue Tanner's description to the public.

But if we are speaking of the British public, so successful has the media operation been since 6 May 2007 (the date of Clarence Mitchell's appointment), and so skilful have Redwood and his bosses been (in the same way that Machiavelli could be regarded as 'skilful'), that I'd be prepared to bet that 80% to 90% of CrimeWatch's audience believed Redwood when he said:

* Tanner really saw someone,

* I've found the man Tanner saw,

* I've got two e-fits of the same man drawn up by an Irish family [even though he didn't exactly say that - Machiavelli at work again], and

* I really, really want viewers to tell me about these four blond men hanging around Praia da Luz.

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14939
Reputation : 3019
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Okeydokey on 23.05.14 23:44

It's the great debate of case followers: whitewash or cunning ruse.

My head tells me time and time again: this is a whitewash.

Only my heart wants it to be otherwise.

I think you have to understand that the McCanns were saved politically to understand why it is a whitewash.

The McCanns were initially saved by political interference. It was political interference in my judgement that resulted for instance in a delay of three months in the Gaspar statement being sent to the Portugese authorities by the UK Police (whatever you think of the relevance of that piece of evidence, it was clearly crucial that it be despatched to the Portugese without delay). It was political interference that resulted in Amaral's dismissal. It was political interference that resulted in the Arguido status being lifted.

It was political interference that got this current Met Police "investigation" under way - an investigation that appears to completely ignore obvious deficiencies in the Tapas 9 account. Why? Why would any competent police investigators not query all these major  inconsitencies in the Team McCann narrative? 

One day, someone might write a book that explains it all. Not in our lifetimes I suspect. I think it's been a very complex interaction of media, politicians, judiciary, commercial, national and organisational interests, xenophobic stereotyping (as in "inefficient Portugese"), Irish/Liverpool identity appeal, Freemasonry influence... and many other factors.

People tend to always underestimate Gerry McCann's genius for orchestrating these interests in my view.

Okeydokey

Posts : 938
Reputation : 31
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Not a Whitewash

Post by XTC on 24.05.14 0:23

@SixMillionQuid wrote:"@6
The claim that Tanner saw the abductor was refuted which is so much more important than to prove Jane was lying (which would have proved rather difficult anyway). The ultimate truth is more important than petty revenge on Jane."



Not difficult at all. Nobody believed she saw anyone crossing that road near 5A. Six years later an unnamed (what is there to hide) person appears and thinks it was him. Both Tanners sighting and SY explanation are not credible.
Quite.

This is the British investigations " revelation " moment. Kind of  a heavy hint that everything that SY had been exploring in the past couple of years had not necessarily been a waste of time but this was significant- very significant. So what was this significant reveleation.? Jane Tanner was a). mistaken ( forgivable - an error ) or she was b). - lying. It does beg the question as to whether any member of DI Redwoods team have re-interviewed JT prior to this revelation hence the announcement or have they just deduced this ' fact ' from the files because a bloke bowled up to the Sergeants desk one day and decried " It was me - it was me! 

Is the original bundleman a witness to JT or is JT a witness to the original bundleman - or did they both see each other? Or did neither see each other? Failing that ( if the bundleman tale is true?) what did he see and does it have anything whatsoever with the planned dig because
dismissing and finding this revelatory confluence of events theoretically leads us to the Smith family. Or does it?- the 10pm bundleman was heading for the beach as far as I know. A bit like Basil Fawlty and the mentioning of the War I've not heard the clarion call of the Smith sighting emanating from SY recently neither. Is this due to newer evidence secretly emerging or is it as some people not surprisingly think a
diversion that will be in play while they all really look in a different area? I am assuming of course that these digs will be based on something or some areas that the PJ overlooked or missed first time round  and/or some evidence that the PJ overlooked. They knew about the Smith family alright.

I do understand the hope that is invested in the SY investigation and this is DI Redwood and his teams big chance to crack one of the strangest and bizarre tale of the 21st Century in terms of PR  and interpretable evidence. I wish all involved good luck in solving it as the kudos will be great and many books will be sold and many articles will be found in the press and media in general to keep us all enthralled in the years to come. The hard bit though is finding more credible evidence for a successful prosecution which is why I hope that the original bundleman is not a shifty invention supposedly to set a trap.

Imagine if Redwood and his team managed to solve the crime? Would you want to throw a chance like that away? I hope not - but usually hope is not always enough.

p.s. Re: Pat Brown's blog and blacksmith's retort: I honestly do not see the Great British public falling and awailing with great gnashing of teeth if the investigation pointed towards what is perceived as the wrong way. Many on here wouldn't be surprised and many outwith forums wouldn't be surprised either. There will be no public outrage and rioting in the streets. That's a media confection. In fact I suspect if the mystery is resolved there will be a great sigh of relief. It won't stop the public from reading the many ' experts' views on the matter post solution though. Myself included.

All only opinion though.

XTC

Posts : 210
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-03-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by coati mundi on 24.05.14 2:01

I would like to be optimsitic about the chances of the truth about this case coming out, but I now don't hold out much hope.

However, should a patsy be produced, he (and I presume that it would be a 'he') I believe that a conviction at trial would be almost impossible.

I have worked in the past in criminal defence work and so know how how a trial works. A living suspect (who is not either of two most obvious living suspects IMHO  )would in his defence be entitled to call into evidence in the trial all existing evidence - including the PJ files, the Eddie and Keela evidence (despite what anyone else says, the evidence that they alerted could be introduced and Grimes coud be questioned as to what it might mean; I would also produce the video evidence in support of that point). There could also be evidence called from expert witnesses to attest to the reliability of the dogs).

The defence would have to have the right to call any witness to give evidence about what had happened on the night of 3rd May 2007. Should those witnesses refuse  to give evidence, they could be witnessed summonsed, compelling them to appear.  Short of a confession from a patsy, there is no way a trial could proceed on any proper basis without live evidence from all of those present on the night in question. That would mean that the McCs and anyone else who had made a statement (or statements!) could be called as witnesses. Under certain circumstances, their statements, subject to the court's agreement, could be read in evidence.

Imagine what that would mean for people who might not have earlier told the truth, or had changed their version of the truth.

If the McCs are not telling the truth, and SY are on a mission to obfuscate the truth, there are only two ways to tell it:

1. She disappearead and we don't know how;

or

2. She was abducted, but we don't know quite how it happened.

Either way, it would not pass the CPS test of a a "reasonable prospect of conviction".

I think that whoever it was that decided to cover up the obvious inferences of this case,  would happy to close it with the title of this forum " The Completr Mystery'...

coati mundi

Posts : 94
Reputation : 60
Join date : 2014-02-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Cristobell on 24.05.14 11:11

@coati mundi wrote:I would like to be optimsitic about the chances of the truth about this case coming out, but I now don't hold out much hope.

However, should a patsy be produced, he (and I presume that it would be a 'he') I believe that a conviction at trial would be almost impossible.

I have worked in the past in criminal defence work and so know how how a trial works. A living suspect (who is not either of two most obvious living suspects IMHO  )would in his defence be entitled to call into evidence in the trial all existing evidence - including the PJ files, the Eddie and Keela evidence (despite what anyone else says, the evidence that they alerted could be introduced and Grimes coud be questioned as to what it might mean; I would also produce the video evidence in support of that point). There could also be evidence called from expert witnesses to attest to the reliability of the dogs).

The defence would have to have the right to call any witness to give evidence about what had happened on the night of 3rd May 2007. Should those witnesses refuse  to give evidence, they could be witnessed summonsed, compelling them to appear.  Short of a confession from a patsy, there is no way a trial could proceed on any proper basis without live evidence from all of those present on the night in question. That would mean that the McCs and anyone else who had made a statement (or statements!) could be called as witnesses. Under certain circumstances, their statements, subject to the court's agreement, could be read in evidence.

Imagine what that would mean for people who might not have earlier told the truth, or had changed their version of the truth.

If the McCs are not telling the truth, and SY are on a mission to obfuscate the truth, there are only two ways to tell it:

1. She disappearead and we don't know how;

or

2. She was abducted, but we don't know quite how it happened.

Either way, it would not pass the CPS test of a a "reasonable prospect of conviction".

I think that whoever it was that decided to cover up the obvious inferences of this case,  would happy to close it with the title of this forum " The Completr Mystery'...
But weren't the CPS involved when the case moved from Review to Investigation?  Why would the government spend £6m+ of taxpayers money if there was no prospect of a conviction?

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by galena on 24.05.14 11:26

@SixMillionQuid wrote:
@morse wrote:I agree with the blogger Unterdent eppichge kehrt. A brilliant post and agree with every word of it. I can't really understand why the majority on here are so pessimistic. If SY can't reach a conclusion, i am sure the PJ won't give up.
JUSTICE FOR MADDIE
Why can't SY reach a conclusion? The evidence has been staring at them in the face for the last seven years.

We're lead to believe by non-whitewashers that the digging, and chasing burglars is a smokescreen for something else. So they must have come to a conclusion. They're biding their time. Aren't they?
I agree.  The thing that led me to suspect the Find Maddie campaign was a phoney one was comparing the efforts of the McCanns with the efforts of parents who are really trying to find their lost children. Similarly my common sense is telling me that Operation Grange doesn't resemble a real police operation. For one thing Redwood dismissed the two most plausible suspects - Kate and Gerry - right from the start. For another he stated his intention to ignore everything that had gone before and start from zero (ie dismissing the strongest evidence in the case - the cadaver dog evidence) .  For another thing, police operations tend to operate with a certain amount of secrecy not announcing the identity of suspects/lines of enquiry to the media.

All a clever smokescreen?  Wait and see?  How long will we have to wait for and what exactly will we see?  Or did we just build up their hopes that they would finally have a resolution to the case and can't bear to admit that this is more of the same old same old?

galena

Posts : 288
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2013-09-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Cristobell on 24.05.14 11:42

@Okeydokey wrote:It's the great debate of case followers: whitewash or cunning ruse.

My head tells me time and time again: this is a whitewash.

Only my heart wants it to be otherwise.

I think you have to understand that the McCanns were saved politically to understand why it is a whitewash.

The McCanns were initially saved by political interference. It was political interference in my judgement that resulted for instance in a delay of three months in the Gaspar statement being sent to the Portugese authorities by the UK Police (whatever you think of the relevance of that piece of evidence, it was clearly crucial that it be despatched to the Portugese without delay). It was political interference that resulted in Amaral's dismissal. It was political interference that resulted in the Arguido status being lifted.

It was political interference that got this current Met Police "investigation" under way - an investigation that appears to completely ignore obvious deficiencies in the Tapas 9 account. Why? Why would any competent police investigators not query all these major  inconsitencies in the Team McCann narrative? 

One day, someone might write a book that explains it all. Not in our lifetimes I suspect. I think it's been a very complex interaction of media, politicians, judiciary, commercial, national and organisational interests, xenophobic stereotyping (as in "inefficient Portugese"), Irish/Liverpool identity appeal, Freemasonry influence... and many other factors.

People tend to always underestimate Gerry McCann's genius for orchestrating these interests in my view.
I agree the McCanns were saved politically in 2007.  The angelic face of Madeleine fitted the agenda of CEOP and the incumbent government's long term desire to have us all tagged and microchipped.  However, it must be remembered that most of the assistance stopped when the McCanns were made arguidos, although for some reason, Jim Gamble and CEOP continued to promote the abduction line, despite the suspect status of the parents.  It should be remembered that in her first term as Home Secretary, Theresa May introduced massive changes to the running of CEOP that forced JG and several others to resign.

This government's hands are clean in this case.  They were not involved in the cover up and Theresa May could not have made it clearer - she intends to root out corruption and the idea that she would allow the cover up of the most controversial missing child case in history in the lead up to a General Election, is ridiculous.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by joyce1938 on 24.05.14 12:00

Something has come to mind regarding mr amarals move from the case and taken to work in Faro ,where he decided the only way to help is to write his book on what he had experienced on the said case . So he resigned from the force and did what he felt he had to do . my problem now is ,if the local police and jp would not follow through and continue the search,but released the files for all to see .Why would they be doing what they are today ,who took a=over from mr am. ? was it not to pursue what was already in files ??? or to alter what had gone before . ?I know it was shelved ,where wetre they at ? at that time ?  So I feel just what are they following after the case was reopened,that could not have been carried on before? I just feel a bot puzzled ?  Hope all this makes sense for someone to reply  joyce1938
avatar
joyce1938

Posts : 860
Reputation : 114
Join date : 2010-04-20
Age : 79
Location : england

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Angelique on 24.05.14 12:19

Quote : SMQ - morse and galena

I am using iPad and unable to quote normally. This is just how I see it.

Where to start and there is so much to evaluate it's a little bit like " the ultimate question - answer - 42".

We are in the middle of a Review turned Investigation which was engineered by RB to Cameron for political reasons and I doubt very much that the McCanns had anything to do with it. It enabled several solutions to a growing problem all to do with us I think. We were questioning why there seemed to be a missing child (Madeleine) but no one was able to explain how and why and who was to blame for what happened. Not only that but the Files were released and everyone and his child could access information which in other circumstances would be hidden. So what the Government was trying to cover was slowly but surely seeping out to the general population - us. That's why the PJ did it. It occurred when UK was under virtual control from Corporations/Banks/individuals - money was and still is everything and there are many out there that will grab it if they can. But as regards to financing this Review/Investigation its only numbers really as the numbers involved in running the UK are so big the Governments really just shuffle them around - bit like BK but on a grander scale. So to appease us the protesting people to look good on the present Government aka Tories (not just Cameron) a tip to RB a nod to McCanns and hey also a push to the "37" cops who were the excess to be made redundant - off you go and shuffle paper do whatever's necessary waste paper,time,money etc, etc. But the outcome is to be "we don't know who dunnit - OK? On the scale of things as regards their sums (Government) £5 million is a drop in the ocean. To us it seems far too much now! But that also was expected - if it goes on much longer and the cost increases we/us/people will reach 'tipping point' they hope and start to ask them to "stop wasting taxpayers money". Difficult to asses when they think they have done enough and when we think too much has been spent.

As to the perpetrator of whatever happened to Madeleine and who was involved and why the need for this elaborate whitewash - I doubt we will ever know maybe our future generations will find out.

It makes no odds if the CPS visit the PJ and discuss anything really - it looks good. Redwood doesn't have to produce anything really and what he does is nothing to do with the PJ either.

The PJ are allowing SY to search, dig, visit all they like - they think is fine to make them look like idiots and pay for it as well.

I actually hope my opinion is wrong and we eventually get to the Truth.

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem
avatar
Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Woofer on 24.05.14 14:06

@joyce1938 wrote:Something has come to mind regarding mr amarals move from the case and taken to work in Faro ,where he decided the only way to help is to write his book on what he had experienced on the said case . So he resigned from the force and did what he felt he had to do . my problem now is ,if the local police and jp would not follow through and continue the search,but released the files for all to see .Why would they be doing what they are today ,who took a=over from mr am. ? was it not to pursue what was already in files ??? or to alter what had gone before . ?I know it was shelved ,where wetre they at ? at that time ?  So I feel just what are they following after the case was reopened,that could not have been carried on before? I just feel a bot puzzled ?  Hope all this makes sense for someone to reply  joyce1938


Hopefully GA will say in detail one day why he was moved but he has hinted that it was political.  It was also at the precise time Mr. Smith was due to come over to Portugal so whether someone did not want Mr. Smith to go is what needs to be researched.   GA was told about his transfer after Gordon Brown had been informed that he had been removed - so it could well have been GB who asked for his removal.   And did GB know that Mr. Smith was due to go over?

It was Paulo Rebelo who took over from GA - maybe he was more pliable than GA and took the case in a different direction.


Supposedly Joyce it is a completely different police force that`s tackling the new investigation - one in Porto (or is it Faro?).  I may have that wrong.  But don`t know if they are starting from zero or following on from the previous shelved files.
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by Guest on 24.05.14 14:13

@Woofer wrote:
@joyce1938 wrote:Something has come to mind regarding mr amarals move from the case and taken to work in Faro ,where he decided the only way to help is to write his book on what he had experienced on the said case . So he resigned from the force and did what he felt he had to do . my problem now is ,if the local police and jp would not follow through and continue the search,but released the files for all to see .Why would they be doing what they are today ,who took a=over from mr am. ? was it not to pursue what was already in files ??? or to alter what had gone before . ?I know it was shelved ,where wetre they at ? at that time ?  So I feel just what are they following after the case was reopened,that could not have been carried on before? I just feel a bot puzzled ?  Hope all this makes sense for someone to reply  joyce1938


Hopefully GA will say in detail one day why he was moved but he has hinted that it was political.  It was also at the precise time Mr. Smith was due to come over to Portugal so whether someone did not want Mr. Smith to go is what needs to be researched.   GA was told about his transfer after Gordon Brown had been informed that he had been removed - so it could well have been GB who asked for his removal.   And did GB know that Mr. Smith was due to go over?

It was Paulo Rebelo who took over from GA - maybe he was more pliable than GA and took the case in a different direction.


Supposedly Joyce it is a completely different police force that`s tackling the new investigation - one in Porto (or is it Faro?).  I may have that wrong.  But don`t know if they are starting from zero or following o.n from the previous shelved files.
This really is the $64 question.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by noddy100 on 24.05.14 14:28

If the tannerman who came forward really existed he would have been all over the tabloids by now

noddy100

Posts : 701
Reputation : 39
Join date : 2013-05-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by canada12 on 24.05.14 14:44

@noddy100 wrote:If the tannerman who came forward really existed he would have been all over the tabloids by now
Quite. But who is going to challenge the existence of SY's tannerman without having JT's version of tannerman possibly being exposed as a fabrication also??

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 201
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Not a Whitewash

Post by lj on 24.05.14 14:57

@coati mundi wrote:I would like to be optimsitic about the chances of the truth about this case coming out, but I now don't hold out much hope.

However, should a patsy be produced, he (and I presume that it would be a 'he') I believe that a conviction at trial would be almost impossible.

I have worked in the past in criminal defence work and so know how how a trial works. A living suspect (who is not either of two most obvious living suspects IMHO  )would in his defence be entitled to call into evidence in the trial all existing evidence - including the PJ files, the Eddie and Keela evidence (despite what anyone else says, the evidence that they alerted could be introduced and Grimes coud be questioned as to what it might mean; I would also produce the video evidence in support of that point). There could also be evidence called from expert witnesses to attest to the reliability of the dogs).

The defence would have to have the right to call any witness to give evidence about what had happened on the night of 3rd May 2007. Should those witnesses refuse  to give evidence, they could be witnessed summonsed, compelling them to appear.  Short of a confession from a patsy, there is no way a trial could proceed on any proper basis without live evidence from all of those present on the night in question. That would mean that the McCs and anyone else who had made a statement (or statements!) could be called as witnesses. Under certain circumstances, their statements, subject to the court's agreement, could be read in evidence.

Imagine what that would mean for people who might not have earlier told the truth, or had changed their version of the truth.

If the McCs are not telling the truth, and SY are on a mission to obfuscate the truth, there are only two ways to tell it:

1. She disappearead and we don't know how;

or

2. She was abducted, but we don't know quite how it happened.

Either way, it would not pass the CPS test of a a "reasonable prospect of conviction".

I think that whoever it was that decided to cover up the obvious inferences of this case,  would happy to close it with the title of this forum " The Completr Mystery'...

I agree, coati mundi, but I don't think there was ever an intent to prosecute.

Just "nothing" will do fine.


____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/
avatar
lj

Posts : 3327
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum