THE DISCUSSION FORUM
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

+17
Slartibartfast
Johnny22
Miss B Having
Montclair
Saldo
AJS
dannyboy
pathfinder73
Faithlilly
Grom
stopspammers
GLOBAL MODERATOR
Drivel Spotter
enyam
Texty
Travers
South Downs
21 posters

Page 6 of 9 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Admin2 Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:35 pm

AJS wrote:Hello. Yes, perhaps I wasn't interpreting you correctly. Cheers.

No problemo AJS.
Admin2
Admin2
Admin

Posts : 402
Join date : 2017-10-10

https://thediscussionforum.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Travers Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:13 pm

Montclair wrote:
Travers wrote:The problem with HOLMES, for the PJ, is that it operated in English and the PJ had neither the linguistic ability nor experience to use it effectively. I'm sure it could have been a valuable tool in processing the questionnaires, but it would have needed to have been done by TASK people, probably on their own initiative, rather than at the request of PJ.

None of this is a restriction to OG if they are doing their job properly.

My major concern with OG is that it won't be a team member who will be making the final decisions, but someone much further up the command chain and possibly not even a member of the UK Justice system.

Why do you make the assumption that the PJ did not have enough knowledge of English or the experience to use HOLMES? Do you know that this is a fact?

No, this is my opinion. HOLMES requires training, and I think it unlikely that PJ received or possibly even wanted, without which they would not be able to operate the system effectively.
Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary.
Travers
Travers

Posts : 160
Join date : 2017-10-10

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Miss B Having Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:19 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
Texty wrote:Yes, that's been an interesting aspect  - almost invisible since she took over, a stark contrast to her predecessors, and unlike them, playing no part in updates/announcements.

Probably come to realise what a poisoned chalice it is. Early days I think those in charge thought it would an easy solve because of “poor PJ investigation” and were looking forward to the glory.

I have been sayig that for many a year. They believed in the McCann PR. What police service would even think of taking a hands off- its an abduction we are investigating here stance [althought ,initially it wasn't an investigation just a review]. ou would think after the ripper tapes leading a team astray and causing more time for more murders this would nt be allowed to happen again. Oh I am in the notty chair again ... lol

Miss B Having

Posts : 74
Join date : 2017-11-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Ayfive Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:00 pm

Travers wrote:
Montclair wrote:
Travers wrote:The problem with HOLMES, for the PJ, is that it operated in English and the PJ had neither the linguistic ability nor experience to use it effectively. I'm sure it could have been a valuable tool in processing the questionnaires, but it would have needed to have been done by TASK people, probably on their own initiative, rather than at the request of PJ.

None of this is a restriction to OG if they are doing their job properly.

My major concern with OG is that it won't be a team member who will be making the final decisions, but someone much further up the command chain and possibly not even a member of the UK Justice system.

Why do you make the assumption that the PJ did not have enough knowledge of English or the experience to use HOLMES? Do you know that this is a fact?

No, this is my opinion. HOLMES requires training, and I think it unlikely that PJ received or possibly even wanted, without which they would not be able to operate the system effectively.
Perhaps you have evidence to the contrary.

When you have a stealth bomber tucked away in your hangar why bother farting about with a Hawker Hind?.
By the time this case came up HOLMES was knocking on for 25 years old having had but one update. The PJ system on the other hand was a little better.
Ayfive
Ayfive

Posts : 71
Join date : 2017-10-12

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:58 am

Hello Faithlill. Yes, I think it is tantamount, as you say.

But I’ve also been thinking – what if Grange and, where relevant, the PJ, have actually been telling the truth all along. That they are not suspects [in the investigation] and never have been since 2012.

That would suggest that, yes, there was an agreed instruction  to the commander of Grange that the couple were not to be treated in any sense as suspects. That leaves the question – why was the stipulation made?

If you believe the fix was in, then no problem, it’s a cover up and with the “no, there have been no interviews as suspects”, admission, the truth has slipped out. So there’s nothing to discuss.

But what if, for the sake of argument and to see where it goes, we assume that there are good, honest reasons for such an “exclusion”? What might they be?

Well, one clearly relates to what many people have suggested (it’s not a theory of mine): that Grange are eliminating every known possibility that was identified during the review stage – except anything involving the McCanns. The idea being the Sherlock Holmes thing, “whatever is left after you have eliminated…”

It’s never occurred to me before that this can be accomplished without any questioning of the Nine. So Grange does its job in good faith and takes on all the garbage, the burglars, the druggies, Stinky Binman, etc. and becomes a laughing stock. At least on Jill Haverns and Only in America. Well of course: if you’ve actually got the funds to investigate every known, viable lead – and that is vanishingly rare – then you’re going to be investigating all the nutter reports that pour in, even though you know that 98% are the usual crap.  

But what if it works? What if they can eventually demonstrate that every known possibility, apart from anything involving the McCanns, has been explored and eliminated?  What difference does it make whether they questioned the Nine or not? I don’t think it makes any.

Again, assume the police are as aware as we are that the Nine, accompanied where necessary by their lawyers,  are not going to add anything of value if questioned as witnesses – so there’s no point in interviewing them anyway. Question them as suspects? But they can’t until they have evidence, exactly the same bind the PJ were in.

The big question, of course, if we accept the assumption, is what is the next stage? It’s impossible to believe that they will report and see if they can have another seven years to investigate the Nine. Is it that they then hand the case and all the evidence over to the PJ?

With the case files containing, among other things, the Grange conclusions on Smithman and the revelation file on Bundleman, the Portuguese prosecutors might be able to make a case that there is prima facie evidence for questioning some of them as arguidos or suspetos.  I don’t know, of course.

Just a line of thinking, that’s all.

AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Grom Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:02 am

I think the McCanns make a very good impression in a face to face meeting. Sir Paul Stephenson, who agreed to take on the review gave an interesting interview. He acknowledged that reading the media would lead you to have doubts about them. So he wasn't sure, but he changed his mind. Why? Because he met them.

Grom

Posts : 153
Join date : 2017-10-11

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Faithlilly Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:30 am

AJS wrote:Hello Faithlill. Yes, I think it is tantamount, as you say.

But I’ve also been thinking – what if Grange and, where relevant, the PJ, have actually been telling the truth all along. That they are not suspects [in the investigation] and never have been since 2012.

That would suggest that, yes, there was an agreed instruction  to the commander of Grange that the couple were not to be treated in any sense as suspects. That leaves the question – why was the stipulation made?

If you believe the fix was in, then no problem, it’s a cover up and with the “no, there have been no interviews as suspects”, admission, the truth has slipped out. So there’s nothing to discuss.

But what if, for the sake of argument and to see where it goes, we assume that there are good, honest reasons for such an “exclusion”? What might they be?

Well, one clearly relates to what many people have suggested (it’s not a theory of mine): that Grange are eliminating every known possibility that was identified during the review stage – except anything involving the McCanns. The idea being the Sherlock Holmes thing, “whatever is left after you have eliminated…”

It’s never occurred to me before that this can be accomplished without any questioning of the Nine. So Grange does its job in good faith and takes on all the garbage, the burglars, the druggies, Stinky Binman, etc. and becomes a laughing stock. At least on Jill Haverns and Only in America. Well of course: if you’ve actually got the funds to investigate every known, viable lead – and that is vanishingly rare – then you’re going to be investigating all the nutter reports that pour in, even though you know that 98% are the usual crap.  

But what if it works? What if they can eventually demonstrate that every known possibility, apart from anything involving the McCanns, has been explored and eliminated?  What difference does it make whether they questioned the Nine or not? I don’t think it makes any.

Again, assume the police are as aware as we are that the Nine, accompanied where necessary by their lawyers,  are not going to add anything of value if questioned as witnesses – so there’s no point in interviewing them anyway. Question them as suspects? But they can’t until they have evidence, exactly the same bind the PJ were in.

The big question, of course, if we accept the assumption, is what is the next stage? It’s impossible to believe that they will report and see if they can have another seven years to investigate the Nine. Is it that they then hand the case and all the evidence over to the PJ?

With the case files containing, among other things, the Grange conclusions on Smithman and the revelation file on Bundleman, the Portuguese prosecutors might be able to make a case that there is prima facie evidence for questioning some of them as arguidos or suspetos.  I don’t know, of course.

Just a line of thinking, that’s all.

I think we are making an assumption that at the tapas friends haven't been questioned. How do we know that ? From a newspaper article ? How could a full and thorough investigation of the case not involve at least some questioning of the main protagonists? That really would suggest a cover-up and I don't believe that's what's happening. Even when the police don't believe that anything productive will come from interviewing a witness, whether through fear, guilt etc, they will still question them. Further the nature of the friend's rogatory interviews was obviously limiting in terms of information gathering. Building up a picture of what happened that night is necessary and any small piece of information that the friends could add to that is important ( at least I believe that is how it would have been sold ). Much of what is revealed in an interview has little to do with the answers given so the friends attitude to actually being questioned could also provide valuable intelligence to the investigation.

Your final paragraph I absolutely agree with. Portugal has primacy in this case so any questioning of suspects and subsequent prosecution would take place there.


Last edited by Faithlilly on Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:51 am; edited 1 time in total

Faithlilly

Posts : 40
Join date : 2017-10-11

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Admin2 Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:41 am

Grom wrote:I think the McCanns make a very good impression in a face to face meeting. Sir Paul Stephenson, who agreed to take on the review gave an interesting interview. He acknowledged that reading the media would lead you to have doubts about them. So he wasn't sure, but he changed his mind. Why? Because he met them.

The McCanns have their PR team who have prepared them, but sometimes the mask slips.
Admin2
Admin2
Admin

Posts : 402
Join date : 2017-10-10

https://thediscussionforum.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:56 pm

Hello Faithlilly.

Rowley said in his official Yard interview:

Q: Just to be clear you did not interview the McCanns as potential suspects?
MR: No.

Redwood said in his official 2013 media conference: “Neither her parents or any of the members of the group that were with her are either persons of interest or suspects.”

I agree that you could say that some of them might have been questioned but I’m not putting that forward. I’m asking where things go on the assumption that it was a decision at the beginning not to include the Nine in this investigation for operational and investigative reasons, not for political ones.

Until now it has widely been accepted that saying the group are not suspects (in this investigation) destroys Grange’s prospects and credibility. I don’t see why. It might be that it made, and makes, sense to split the Nine off completely if the aim is to eliminate all possibilities and suspects except abduction and the Nine which they can, and have, suggested were dealt with by the original investigation. Apart from anything else it defangs the McCanns until the investigation is complete.

Anyway, on this assumption – that’s all it is - we then have two options coming up: the Yard say they cannot solve the case, i.e. add a word to the 2007 “type of crime unknown” conclusion – which is going to look very funny indeed when they are reminded that they haven’t looked at the group, so it’s hardly tenable; or they can pass the evidence to the Portuguese with all leads discounted and with the only evidence of abduction – Bundleman – refuted. That’s a very different potential prosecution case from 2007, isn’t it? And a very different Home Secretary and a very different public climate. Who survives to do the Smethurst work of mobilising the public against extradition? Mitchell?

There may be other options: I haven’t thought them through.

We all know something is up. Why? Because both the Yard and PJ become literally incoherent when questioned about the “not-suspects” affair. De Carmo loses his temper in his interview and Rowley genuinely talks gibberish.

MR: So when we started, we started five or so years into this and there is already a lot of ground been covered, we don’t cover the same ground, what we do is pull all the material we had at the start, all the Portuguese material, private detective material, with all the work that had been done, what that evidence supports, what rules these lines of enquiry out, what keeps them open and you progress forward… if the material was convincing it ruled out that line of enquiry we would look somewhere else. So you reflect on the original material, you challenge it, don’t take it at face value. You don’t restart an investigation pretending it doesn’t exist and do all the same enquiries again that is not constructive.

And don’t forget the sublime and wondrous: “The McCanns are parents of a missing girl we are trying to get to the bottom of.” Oh dear.

Now that’s not how you do cover-ups. It just isn’t. To me both are struggling with the fact that they cannot yet give the real reasons for the decision but know they will be held to account for what they say.

Either way, of course, I’m still arguing that the police are acting honestly and in good faith.




AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Grom Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:59 pm

I wonder what Mr Gamble's report said and how much it influenced how the review was set up? He has actually acknowledged that the PJ did not clear the ground beneath their feet by looking at those close to MBM. He is also, however, convinced that the parents are innocent. What he bases that conviction on he hasn't said.

A lot of people seem sure of the McCann's innocence but they never offer any explanation as to why. One ex-Met officer (whose name escapes me) said there was 'no family history', but not everyone attracts the attention of the authorities. Simon Foy said 'they were where they were' whatever that means. I assume he was saying they had alibis for when the two men were seen carrying children. That's only true if you accept the timeline given by the group, however.

One huge problem for me is the amount of praise heaped on the parents; careful, loving, lived for their kids etc. Their behaviour paints a different picture imo.

Grom

Posts : 153
Join date : 2017-10-11

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Ayfive Tue Jan 23, 2018 3:06 pm

All good stuff but:
Why should we consider the T9 as an entity rather than as the T7 plus two? There is a potential end result common to both which for different reasons is undesirable.
The Portuguese have primacy over any crime committed on their soil.
If a crime were committed in Portugal then it is possible a crime has been committed in England that flows directly from the crime committed in Portugal.
Join up the dots.
Ayfive
Ayfive

Posts : 71
Join date : 2017-10-12

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Tue Jan 23, 2018 4:15 pm

I tend to think, by the way, that once Cameron agreed, on behalf of the government, to a "review" of the case he took no interest in the mechanism for doing so. Constitutionally he didn’t have the power to involve himself; once the thing was agreed then it would fall to the Home Secretary, not the PM, to set the necessary meetings and discussions going within the Metropolitan Police. And, whatever demands might go into the beginning of the government bureaucracy mincer, a very different product always emerges at the other end.  

The Yard, like most bureaucracies, is deeply conservative and would have been aghast at taking on anything new, with potential for things to go wrong, for people to be blamed and for more money to be spent. The harassed looks of most Yard bosses tell their own story, don’t they?   That’s why Gamble, an Ulsterman and an outsider smelling of blood and strife and armed police and ambition, was anathema to them. They want a quiet life in the few years they have power.

FWlittleIW, I have a close friend who worked under Cameron  when PM. Of course one never probes in cases like that – you just don’t, otherwise you put them in an impossible position – but I once gave them the opportunity to give a very brief general appraisal of the man.

“What’s he like? Pretty much what you’d expect,” was the gist of it, “charming, terribly well-mannered, decent, thoughtful, conscientious and ” – said with a smile – “if you ask me, a little bit thick.”

Possibly. But certainly not the man, exposed or not exposed to Brooks's skirts, to immerse himself in the intricacies and moral problems of a very complex case. Most anecdotal evidence suggests that, decision taken,  he delegates. I don’t think he knows enough about the McCann case  to want a particular result.

All just opinion and gossip, of course.

AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Admin2 Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:11 pm

AJS wrote:I tend to think, by the way, that once Cameron agreed, on behalf of the government, to a "review" of the case he took no interest in the mechanism for doing so. Constitutionally he didn’t have the power to involve himself; once the thing was agreed then it would fall to the Home Secretary, not the PM, to set the necessary meetings and discussions going within the Metropolitan Police. And, whatever demands might go into the beginning of the government bureaucracy mincer, a very different product always emerges at the other end.  

The Yard, like most bureaucracies, is deeply conservative and would have been aghast at taking on anything new, with potential for things to go wrong, for people to be blamed and for more money to be spent. The harassed looks of most Yard bosses tell their own story, don’t they?   That’s why Gamble, an Ulsterman and an outsider smelling of blood and strife and armed police and ambition, was anathema to them. They want a quiet life in the few years they have power.

FWlittleIW, I have a close friend who worked under Cameron  when PM. Of course one never probes in cases like that – you just don’t, otherwise you put them in an impossible position – but I once gave them the opportunity to give a very brief general appraisal of the man.

“What’s he like? Pretty much what you’d expect,” was the gist of it, “charming, terribly well-mannered, decent, thoughtful, conscientious and ” – said with a smile – “if you ask me, a little bit thick.”

Possibly. But certainly not the man, exposed or not exposed to Brooks's skirts, to immerse himself in the intricacies and moral problems of a very complex case. Most anecdotal evidence suggests that, decision taken,  he delegates. I don’t think he knows enough about the McCann case  to want a particular result.

All just opinion and gossip, of course.


Cameron, in my view was a popularist and his bowing down to Brooks was an example of that.

Like many politicians, he did things which he believed would get him votes. One of which springs to mind was his 'hoodie' speech which Labour slightly twisted at the time to make him look rather foolish.

Then we have the debacle of Brexit, which was more to do with Tory infighting and the perceived threat of UKIP.

Essentially, in my view, he was all mouth and no trousers. Now we have BoJo. I wonder if the latter has an opinion on the case, or is he more keen to kiss Trump's rear end, in the illusion we will have a major Trading Deal with the U.S.A. ?

The reality of which , is that we do more trade with Belgium. lol!

All that is off topic I know, but to finish on an anecdote from one of my students, who unlike many of his generation, does watch the news and is not interested in social media, read about a survey among American teens.

One question did bring a chuckle to my face. Asked to name a country beginning with the letter 'U', approximately 80% of them could not do so. Some of the answers were hilarious.
Admin2
Admin2
Admin

Posts : 402
Join date : 2017-10-10

https://thediscussionforum.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Watcher Tue Jan 23, 2018 8:57 pm

Some really interesting points raised today.
I find it very difficult to accept the idea that the UK police were told to keep their hands off the McCanns. What I do think is that they may well have been told do not proceed unless you are 99% positive you can make it stick.
In terms of the rest of the party, I don't see anything to indicate a conspiracy. However, there are several members of the group who should, and indeed were, treated as suspects.
In terms of following up every lead, no matter how bloody ridiculous, I think there is some scope to try to locate everyone who was in the vicinity, just in case they saw something which they haven't mentioned or which did not seem significant at the time. That may be the only way to build a case and there is some evidence to suggest that there may be snippets which have not been made public - Kate refers to one in the Big Book of Lies.
However, if they are investigating each sighting that is plainly bonkers and a complete waste of money.
I don't believe in a government conspiracy as such, or that the McCanns were being 'protected', but I do think any outcome other than the gruesome twosome emerging squeaky clean and smelling like a perfumed trollop would be seen as highly embarrassing for the UK government, so I do detect a certain amount of non-boat-rocking behaviour
Watcher
Watcher

Posts : 84
Join date : 2017-10-13
Location : No 10 Downing St - oh crap, I wasn't supposed to say!

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Ayfive Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:50 pm

Watcher wrote:Some really interesting points raised today.
I find it very difficult to accept the idea that the UK police were told to keep their hands off the McCanns. What I do think is that they may well have been told do not proceed unless you are 99% positive you can make it stick.
In terms of the rest of the party, I don't see anything to indicate a conspiracy. However, there are several members of the group who should, and indeed were, treated as suspects.
In terms of following up every lead, no matter how bloody ridiculous, I think there is some scope to try to locate everyone who was in the vicinity, just in case they saw something which they haven't mentioned or which did not seem significant at the time. That may be the only way to build a case and there is some evidence to suggest that there may be snippets which have not been made public - Kate refers to one in the Big Book of Lies.
However, if they are investigating each sighting that is plainly bonkers and a complete waste of money.
I don't believe in a government conspiracy as such, or that the McCanns were being 'protected', but I do think any outcome other than the gruesome twosome emerging squeaky clean and smelling like a perfumed trollop would be seen as highly embarrassing for the UK government, so I do detect a certain amount of non-boat-rocking behaviour

I agree in principle with most of that, having articulated in similar vein myself, apart from the last sentence.
Even our politicians could swing that one around easily enough. In fact they really only need to straight bat it with neither spin nor weasel word.
It's scarcely an event of world political or legal significance despite how some may wish to see and present it.
Ayfive
Ayfive

Posts : 71
Join date : 2017-10-12

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:22 am

Hello watcher.

The basic assumption that I put up – to see where it goes and because it suddenly came into my mind and demanded attention – is that the police are telling us the whole truth when they say that the group are not suspects or persons of interest [in this investigation].

Associated with this behaviour is their clear unwillingness to discuss in any way why this is so, while making no attempt to cover themselves against future accusations that they deceived the public by not revealing the reasons for the decision or stalling/flannelling when asked about it. Following that line suggests to me that:

a) They are not in the least worried about being caught out or accused of acting in bad faith over the matter. And

b) That any attempt to give the reasons will destroy the entire purpose of the exercise - whatever exactly that is.

That’s about as far as I go. a) seems absolutely obvious unless you are of the uncombed persuasion. b) seems to me a very reasonable, and rather suggestive, inference.

AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Faithlilly Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:48 am

Watcher wrote:Some really interesting points raised today.
I find it very difficult to accept the idea that the UK police were told to keep their hands off the McCanns. What I do think is that they may well have been told do not proceed unless you are 99% positive you can make it stick.
In terms of the rest of the party, I don't see anything to indicate a conspiracy. However, there are several members of the group who should, and indeed were, treated as suspects.
In terms of following up every lead, no matter how bloody ridiculous, I think there is some scope to try to locate everyone who was in the vicinity, just in case they saw something which they haven't mentioned or which did not seem significant at the time. That may be the only way to build a case and there is some evidence to suggest that there may be snippets which have not been made public - Kate refers to one in the Big Book of Lies.
However, if they are investigating each sighting that is plainly bonkers and a complete waste of money.
I don't believe in a government conspiracy as such, or that the McCanns were being 'protected', but I do think any outcome other than the gruesome twosome emerging squeaky clean and smelling like a perfumed trollop would be seen as highly embarrassing for the UK government, so I do detect a certain amount of non-boat-rocking behaviour

Theresa May when  Home Secretary didn't seem particularly keen to launch a review in the first place, remember the McCanns disgust that she hadn't even read the scoping report when they had last talked to her, so having the decision torn from her hands must have been a very bitter pill to swallow.

While I agree that maybe a few years ago the McCann's freedom may have been assured by the weight of public support directed towards them and the leverage politically that afforded them but that's certainly not true now. As long as there is a result, any result, for the millions spent on this investigation I'm not sure the general public will mind who in the end the guilty turn out to be.

In the end the high profile that they so strived for might just be their undoing.


Faithlilly

Posts : 40
Join date : 2017-10-11

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:41 pm

I think that's a pretty good summing up.

On the "separated investigations" question readers will probably remember that the very first review squad (predating Grange), the large Porto squad revealed by Goncalo Amaral, deliberately excluded all officers in any way connected with the 2007 PJ investigation.

AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Wed Jan 24, 2018 1:58 pm

And another hello to all.

This is now getting out of hand and it may be I've taken up too much of this thread because the swamp is getting deeper.

Having looked for the very first time, I cannot see a legal basis for the questioning of any of the Nine as suspects or persons of interest. Not one. The remit was for an investigative review  which could expand under certain circumstances into an "investigative phase" with an absence of definition of what would justify such a phase.

To use a new phase of an  "investigative review" as an excuse to question individuals as suspects or persons of interest, particularly those already questioned without result in the past,   would immediately fail, as far as I can see, under UK legal challenge.

The only possibility of such questioning would be the obvious one: new evidence having come to light amounting to a prima facie case against certain individuals.

No such evidence has come to public light. If the police feel they have some but won't reveal it then they cannot proceed.

The McCann lawyers, who as lawyers for those requesting the review would have had a right to be consulted from the off, know this well. So do the CPS. The "government" having agreed to the request from the victims, has no status in the affair.

I'll be happy to hear from anyone who has evidence for a different view.

None of these objections, naturally, apply to a CPS decision after the investigation/ review, to proceed against anyone in the light of evidence that  emerges from it, or to pass on their conclusions to the Portuguese.  Nothing could stop that.

So I think now that the police of both forces definitely are telling the truth.

AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Travers Wed Jan 24, 2018 2:03 pm

Is a person of interest just not someone who might have useful information to impart. i.e. a witness to certain events ?
I feel that the Tapas group would fit that description
Travers
Travers

Posts : 160
Join date : 2017-10-10

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Faithlilly Wed Jan 24, 2018 2:20 pm

AJS wrote:And another hello to all.

This is now getting out of hand and it may be I've taken up too much of this thread because the swamp is getting deeper.

Having looked for the very first time, I cannot see a legal basis for the questioning of any of the Nine as suspects or persons of interest. Not one. The remit was for an investigative review  which could expand under certain circumstances into an "investigative phase" with an absence of definition of what would justify such a phase.

To use a new phase of an  "investigative review" as an excuse to question individuals as suspects or persons of interest, particularly those already questioned without result in the past,   would immediately fail, as far as I can see, under UK legal challenge.

The only possibility of such questioning would be the obvious one: new evidence having come to light amounting to a prima facie case against certain individuals.

No such evidence has come to public light. If the police feel they have some but won't reveal it then they cannot proceed.

The McCann lawyers, who as lawyers for those requesting the review would have had a right to be consulted from the off, know this well. So do the CPS. The "government" having agreed to the request from the victims, has no status in the affair.

I'll be happy to hear from anyone who has evidence for a different view.

None of these objections, naturally, apply to a CPS decision after the investigation/ review, to proceed against anyone in the light of evidence that  emerges from it, or to pass on their conclusions to the Portuguese.  Nothing could stop that.

So I think now that the police of both forces definitely are telling the truth.

Good afternoon AJS

I agree. I believe that a fully rounded review would have had no credibility if at least some of the tapas friends had not been re-questioned, but as witnesses not suspects or persons of interest.

Faithlilly

Posts : 40
Join date : 2017-10-11

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Wed Jan 24, 2018 5:55 pm

"Is a person of interest just not someone who might have useful information to impart. i.e. a witness to certain events ?
I feel that the Tapas group would fit that description."

I hesitate because you appear to know this case as well as I do. But still: I think the "suspect or person of interest" is a belt and braces thing covering more than just the various legal definitions of suspects.

It looks to me like the questioning of the Nine or any other person in Grange can only be completely voluntary in response to an appeal for help with specific aspects of the review process, not questions of guilt or innocence of anyone.

I've previously thought, and said, that the police were being cute about this. I now think, given the legal situation - for which thank God, since it protects us all against "governments"  deciding who should be investigated - that I was wrong.

AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Grom Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:01 pm

I wonder what the PJ have been doing, meanwhile? They reviewed their files and I can think of quite a few questions arising in there. I'll start a thread, I think.

Grom

Posts : 153
Join date : 2017-10-11

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Faithlilly Wed Jan 24, 2018 10:05 pm

AJS wrote:"Is a person of interest just not someone who might have useful information to impart. i.e. a witness to certain events ?
I feel that the Tapas group would fit that description."

I hesitate because you appear to know this case as well as I do. But still: I think the "suspect or person of interest" is a belt and braces thing covering more than just the various legal definitions of suspects.

It looks to me like the questioning of the Nine or any other person in Grange can only be completely voluntary in response to an appeal for help with specific aspects of the review process, not questions of guilt or innocence of anyone.

I've previously thought, and said, that the police were being cute about this. I now think, given the legal situation - for which thank God, since it protects us all against "governments"  deciding who should be investigated - that I was wrong.

For a person of interest I was using the Cambridge Dictionary definition :

'a person who the police think might have been involved in a crime, but who has not been arrested:
No one has been arrested, but several people have been labeled "persons of interest" and questioned.'


....and of course any questioning of the friends would have been completely voluntary...my thoughts, they would have had little room for refusal without raising further questions.

Faithlilly

Posts : 40
Join date : 2017-10-11

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by AJS Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:28 am

Hello Faithlilly.

On the contrary. It doesn't matter what further questions are raised; unless the Grange officers have solid evidence connecting them to the disappearance they have no more right to question the McCanns or the 7 than you or me.

AJS

Posts : 55
Join date : 2017-10-13

Back to top Go down

Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge? - Page 6 Empty Re: Has this case driven some of the McCann supporters over the edge?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 6 of 9 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

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