Re: Breaking News on Sky News - SY back in PDL suspects to be interviewed

by **Tony Bennett** 04.07.14 11:28

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
endgame wrote:
Except that the last sentence is grotesquely untrue. The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre. The fact that there are many posters on this forum who genuinely believe that this is how the police do operate and that AR is pursuing possibly the most sophisticated operation ever undertaken by the Met Police is something I find difficult to come to terms with and which the whole of the Portuguese media, ex Home Secretary Rui Pereira and Goncalo Amaral find completely laughable.

Another one to add to the list of people who appear to have inside information about Operation Grange.

You have said this twice now about 'endgame', WLBTS - why have you done so, please?

All I can see is 'endgame' giving his honest opinion based on what he has seen in the 3-lus years Grange has been operating, and based on some awareness of normal police procedures.

Nothing I've seen 'endgame' write has ever suggested to me that he 'appears to have inside information about Operation Grange', as you claim

by **Tony Bennett** 04.07.14 11:32

PeterMac wrote:Tannerman is STILL on the Find Madeleine site.

The McCanns are publicly and openly and blatantly and brazenly
calling DCI Redwood a LIAR

I wonder if he cares.

NO - because the mainstream media prints his utterings all the time without critical comment.

He can therefore say and do what he likes, safe in the knowledge that the mainstream media will never question his actions or words

by inspirespirit 04.07.14 11:34

ChippyM wrote:
endgame wrote:
inspirespirit wrote:Sounds promising : Taken from... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10942089/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-questioning-leads-to-no-new-developments.html. To me it sounds as if they are working from the bottom, up. Getting rid of the dross before they get to the prime suspects.

"On finishing the latest search police said it had been the "first phase of this major investigation which has been agreed with the Portuguese".
A statement from Scotland Yard during the searches said there was "still a substantial amount of work yet to be completed in the coming weeks and months”.
"This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally," the statement said.
"This is the same as would be done in the UK for a murder or high-risk missing person inquiry."
Except that the last sentence is grotesquely untrue. The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre. The fact that there are many posters on this forum who genuinely believe that this is how the police do operate and that AR is pursuing possibly the most sophisticated operation ever undertaken by the Met Police is something I find difficult to come to terms with and which the whole of the Portuguese media, ex Home Secretary Rui Pereira and Goncalo Amaral find completely laughable.

"The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre."

But we don't know what may or may not be going on behind closed doors. We just have a commentary via the Media.

We Don't know that earlier evidence is or has been ignored.
We Don't Know that following one hypothesis or line of enquiry 100% excludes all others at this time or in the future!

I don't have 100% faith in this investigation being genuine but we don't know what is actually going on from day to day.

I agree with Chippy. We don't know what has actually gone on. This is an excerpt from today's Portugal Online.
"British police also brought two tracker dogs to Portugal, which sources close to the case had told The Portugal News could possibly be used in the search of a specific car, but this line of inquiry did not materialise.
Following the questioning which took place in Faro this week, the Attorney-General’s office in Lisbon sent a statement to The Portugal News reiterating the country’s strict secrecy laws which govern ongoing investigations.
“In the context of judicial cooperation requested by the English authorities, the investigation has been pursued as planned according to the respective responsible parties. We reaffirm that the content of the requests made by the British authorities is confidential and the Attorney General’s Office will not make any comments on the matter” the statement read.
Faro PJ police director Mota Carmo was not present at any stage during this latest phase of the investigation, police sources confirmed.
Questioned over whether relations between the two police forces have become strained over the past few months, sources here said: “Portuguese police have provided total support of British detectives as is requested by law and will continue to do so in the future.”

by Bishop Brennan 04.07.14 11:35

endgame wrote:
... The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre. The fact that there are many posters on this forum who genuinely believe that this is how the police do operate and that AR is pursuing possibly the most sophisticated operation ever undertaken by the Met Police is something I find difficult to come to terms with and which the whole of the Portuguese media, ex Home Secretary Rui Pereira and Goncalo Amaral find completely laughable.

The alternative is just so awful to contemplate though. It would suggest a level of cover-up or incompetence that is unheard of here in the UK. Apart from Hillsborough of course. Oh and Plebgate. The Lawrence case, yup. Oh and Elm House. And the 40-year Saville case. Did I mention Cyril Smith? Luckily there is no hint of cover-up in this latest Leon Britten saga. So how can you imply there is in the Maddie case. Outrageous! big grin

by FrankS 04.07.14 11:35

Tony Bennett wrote:
PeterMac wrote:Tannerman is STILL on the Find Madeleine site.

The McCanns are publicly and openly and blatantly and brazenly
calling DCI Redwood a LIAR

I wonder if he cares.

NO - because the mainstream media prints his utterings all the time without critical comment.

He can therefore say and do what he likes, safe in the knowledge that the mainstream media will never question his actions or words

When was the last time Andy Redwood spoke to the media Tony?

by whatliesbehindthesofa 04.07.14 11:36

Tony Bennett wrote:
whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
endgame wrote:
Except that the last sentence is grotesquely untrue. The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre. The fact that there are many posters on this forum who genuinely believe that this is how the police do operate and that AR is pursuing possibly the most sophisticated operation ever undertaken by the Met Police is something I find difficult to come to terms with and which the whole of the Portuguese media, ex Home Secretary Rui Pereira and Goncalo Amaral find completely laughable.

Another one to add to the list of people who appear to have inside information about Operation Grange.
You have said this twice now about 'endgame', WLBTS - why have you done so, please?

All I can see is 'endgame' giving his honest opinion based on what he has seen in the 3-lus years Grange has been operating, and based on some awareness of normal police procedures.

Nothing I've seen 'endgame' write has ever suggested to me that he 'appears to have inside information about Operation Grange', as you claim

It seems that you are unable or unwilling to recognise the obvious sarcasm in my post. It isn't my nature to make 'claims' about people, unlike some people.

ETA - you've also got your facts wrong, the first of the two posts I made in this style was a reply to Okeydokey, not endgame. A post that candyfloss thanked me for.

by Bishop Brennan 04.07.14 11:42

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
It seems that you are unable or unwilling to recognise the obvious sarcasm in my post. It isn't my nature to make 'claims' about people, unlike some people.

To be fair, it doesn't come across as witty, ironic or sarcastic. It reads more like you have been upset by someone having a dig at SY. AR's 'mum' was on here a while back and posted something similar when she felt that unkind words were said about Andy.

by whatliesbehindthesofa 04.07.14 11:44

Bishop Brennan wrote:
whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
It seems that you are unable or unwilling to recognise the obvious sarcasm in my post. It isn't my nature to make 'claims' about people, unlike some people.

To be fair, it doesn't come across as witty, ironic or sarcastic. It reads more like you have been upset by someone having a dig at SY. AR's 'mum' was on here a while back and posted something similar when she felt that unkind words were said about Andy.

I'm not upset by anyone. Nor am I Andy Redwood's mum.

by endgame 04.07.14 11:45

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
endgame wrote:
Except that the last sentence is grotesquely untrue. The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre. The fact that there are many posters on this forum who genuinely believe that this is how the police do operate and that AR is pursuing possibly the most sophisticated operation ever undertaken by the Met Police is something I find difficult to come to terms with and which the whole of the Portuguese media, ex Home Secretary Rui Pereira and Goncalo Amaral find completely laughable.

Another one to add to the list of people who appear to have inside information about Operation Grange.

The view is based purely on what I see, what has been written in the press and subsequently been demonstrated to be true, what AR, Hogan Howe and others have said about the investigation and comparison with what a "normal" police investigation looks like. In order to believe that this is some amazingly sophisticated game being played out to entrap the McCanns you have to completely reject all British media reporting, all media reporting and comment from Portugal, and the views of Goncalo Amaral and other informed Portuguese commentators. I think that those who believe in the cunning bluff strategy sometimes don't take into account these implications and are not prepared to explain why they totally dismiss the body of Portuguese comment on the case

On a personal note WLBTS, I prefer to discuss and debate rather than make snide comments about posters. I have no inside information about Operation Grange. Neither do you. My view is based on what I see. I simply see no evidence of the masterful cunning entrapment strategy.

by Themis 04.07.14 11:52

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:
endgame wrote:
Except that the last sentence is grotesquely untrue. The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre. The fact that there are many posters on this forum who genuinely believe that this is how the police do operate and that AR is pursuing possibly the most sophisticated operation ever undertaken by the Met Police is something I find difficult to come to terms with and which the whole of the Portuguese media, ex Home Secretary Rui Pereira and Goncalo Amaral find completely laughable.

Another one to add to the list of people who appear to have inside information about Operation Grange.

1 neither police force is going to tell anyone what they are doing and why - in any case they can't in Portugal
2 SY follow best practice and investigation procedures manuals they don't just make it up!

An example is elimination enquiries where types of groups are identified that may contain the offender. These groups are then populated and individuals within them are prioritised for enquiries to eliminate them against a set of criteria. A group is built around people who share a common characteristic(s) this could include;

Access to the scene at the time of the offence
In the vicinity of the scene at the time of the offence
Living in, or associated with, a certain geographical area
With previous convictions for similar offences
etc

Next establish the criteria by which the police are prepared to eliminate members (e.g. concrete alibis)

Then 'Trace Interview and Eliminate'

Best practice for family and associates is to conduct elimination enquiries in the early stages of the investigation, as at this time they are likely to be seen as routine.

My assumption - where this is not possible for what ever reason then do it at the very end.

Does any of this fit into what we are seeing in Portugal?

by jozi 04.07.14 11:56

endgame wrote:
inspirespirit wrote:Sounds promising : Taken from... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10942089/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-questioning-leads-to-no-new-developments.html. To me it sounds as if they are working from the bottom, up. Getting rid of the dross before they get to the prime suspects.

"On finishing the latest search police said it had been the "first phase of this major investigation which has been agreed with the Portuguese".
A statement from Scotland Yard during the searches said there was "still a substantial amount of work yet to be completed in the coming weeks and months”.
"This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally," the statement said.
"This is the same as would be done in the UK for a murder or high-risk missing person inquiry."
Except that the last sentence is grotesquely untrue. The idea that in any murder or missing person inquiry the police start by ignoring the evidence that exists, brainstorm all sorts of hypotheses based on no evidence at all and then decide that they need to explore all those hypotheses for several years before they might actually get round to looking at the evidence is utterly bizarre. The fact that there are many posters on this forum who genuinely believe that this is how the police do operate and that AR is pursuing possibly the most sophisticated operation ever undertaken by the Met Police is something I find difficult to come to terms with and which the whole of the Portuguese media, ex Home Secretary Rui Pereira and Goncalo Amaral find completely laughable.

I also find it bizarre and not in the least promising at all a especially this sentence....

"This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally," the statement said.

by AndyB 04.07.14 11:59

Themis wrote:2 SY follow best practice and investigation procedures manuals they don't just make it up!

Like in the Steven Lawrence case?

by FrankS 04.07.14 12:00

jozi wrote:"This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally," the statement said.

Yep.

I go along with that.

by jozi 04.07.14 12:08

FrankS wrote:
jozi wrote:"This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally," the statement said.
Yep.

I go along with that.

That is just ONE hypothesis , they did not find a body eh !!! Now just remind us all when is the trial to start again......nothing found to suggest that Maddie has come to harm ???????????????

IMO

by sofieellis 04.07.14 12:11

jozi wrote:
FrankS wrote:
jozi wrote:"This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally," the statement said.
Yep.

I go along with that.

That is just ONE hypothesis , they did not find a body eh !!! Now just remind us all when is the trial to start again......nothing found to suggest that Maddie has come to harm ???????????????

IMO

I honestly don't see how that can be used to support their allegations in the libel trial. Digging a thousand holes and not finding Madeleine, does not prove Madeleine isn't dead. The judge will be able to see that.

by Praiaaa 04.07.14 12:11

Here in a popular Med resort (not in PT) the Mirror headline 'Did you kill Maddie' has been brazenly displayed for a few days in full view of arriving holidaymakers, (no-one seems to have wanted to actually buy the paper). No doubt these arrivals had suitcases replete with poster packs etc, and no doubt have intended to devote a large part of their hols to searching the lawless hinterland for the hellish lair where Maddie is coming to no harm, being cared for by a soothing couple. Now, with the suggestion that she may in fact be dead, they are likely to regretfully abandon that worthy endeavour, and instead indulge in idle pursuits, such as jogging, or tennis.
Lets hope CR are on the case, eh? Shocking to put idea like that into people's heads. Suppose they even were to request a refund in the holiday pack purchase price? Poor KM, toiling away, day after day for MM. At least we can be comforted by the fact that her training in various specialists was probably done in the days before fees were required, so the poor McCs will not have acquired student debt. Also, good that there is no GP shortage in the UK, so KM need feel no guilt for not returning to work.

by inspirespirit 04.07.14 12:13

I don't believe for one moment that the police think it was burglars. burglars steal things. They don't kidnap and murder children. Nothing was stolen. Burglars are opportunists. If someone was robbing the apartment and Maddie had woken up, they would have just fled the scene, grabbing whatever they could on the way. The police obviously now believe she was murdered and buried locally, so they have to ask themselves 'Who and Why'. Every police officer worth his salt knows the chances of it being a stranger is phenomonally highly unlikely. I'm sure they will HAVE to go down the parent route once they have eliminated all other avenues of enquiry.

by FrankS 04.07.14 12:15

jozi wrote:
FrankS wrote:
jozi wrote:"This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally," the statement said.
Yep.

I go along with that.

That is just ONE hypothesis , they did not find a body eh !!! Now just remind us all when is the trial to start again......nothing found to suggest that Maddie has come to harm ???????????????

IMO

That is the ONLY hypothesis there is IMO.

Not by burglar's or abductors.

Unfortunately Maddie DID come to harm.

by Bishop Brennan 04.07.14 12:19

inspirespirit wrote:I don't believe for one moment that the police think it was burglars. burglars steal things. They don't kidnap and murder children. Nothing was stolen. Burglars are opportunists. If someone was robbing the apartment and Maddie had woken up, they would have just fled the scene, grabbing whatever they could on the way. The police obviously now believe she was murdered and buried locally, so they have to ask themselves 'Who and Why'. Every police officer worth his salt knows the chances of it being a stranger is phenomonally highly unlikely. I'm sure they will HAVE to go down the parent route once they have eliminated all other avenues of enquiry.

This is the interesting part. Even when I don my 'cover-up' or 'redwood is a buffoon' hat, it looks like they won't fit up a patsy. So yes - if they have now eliminated everyone, what is their next move? Do they simply say "oh well, we tried so very hard - but it's still a mystery - just keep an eye on those 4 Arguidos, they seem the most likely suspects"? Do they move onto the parents and give them a good grilling? Or what ?

It seems like we are getting very close to that point.

by unchained melody 04.07.14 12:26

I'm giving SY, PJ, Redwood the benefit of the doubt until they have concluded the investigations.
Then... we will see.

All this conjecture is a bit meaningless at the mo

by Guest 04.07.14 12:31

Bishop Brennan wrote:
inspirespirit wrote:I don't believe for one moment that the police think it was burglars. burglars steal things. They don't kidnap and murder children. Nothing was stolen. Burglars are opportunists. If someone was robbing the apartment and Maddie had woken up, they would have just fled the scene, grabbing whatever they could on the way. The police obviously now believe she was murdered and buried locally, so they have to ask themselves 'Who and Why'. Every police officer worth his salt knows the chances of it being a stranger is phenomonally highly unlikely. I'm sure they will HAVE to go down the parent route once they have eliminated all other avenues of enquiry.

This is the interesting part. Even when I don my 'cover-up' or 'redwood is a buffoon' hat, it looks like they won't fit up a patsy. So yes - if they have now eliminated everyone, what is their next move? Do they simply say "oh well, we tried so very hard - but it's still a mystery - just keep an eye on those 4 Arguidos, they seem the most likely suspects"? Do they move onto the parents and give them a good grilling? Or what ?

It seems like we are getting very close to that point.

I cannot see how it is possible for Operation Grange to complete a multi-million pound investigation without interviewing the McCanns and their friends. They were the last people to see her alive. They are the ones who set up the "checking" system. They are the ones who witnessed the way the flat was left and what happened in the hours preceding her disappearance. If we assume the police do believe the parents to be totally innocent of any involvement and that they are investigating a stranger abduction, it's surely unthinkable that they would not interview those key witnesses?
I think they must have interviewed them in the course of the investigation, because if they have not, isn't that in itself a bit odd?

-------

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/viewtopic.forum?t=9967