LEVESON - LEICESTERSHIRE POLICE KNEW PORTUGUESE POLICE LEAKS WERE UNTRUE

This seems to be more about The Media being pissed off because The UK Police didn't put them right, off the record.
What Leicester Police should have done for the sake of The McCanns is another matter, but I do not see why The Police should be blamed for The Press shooting their mouths off when they knew that The PJ were breaking their own laws by leaking this stuff.

crazytony wrote:If I remember correctly, the British Forensic Science Department did issue a denial to the 100% count but, by then it was too late; the Portuguese Judiciary had already got the attention they wanted.

Something was said, but the damage had already been done, Tony - not least by Martin Brunt.

I don't know if the UK press knew which way was up by this time, Sabot; a clear statement from a senior UK officer would have stopped an awful lot of groundless speculation and nonsense, IMO.

I feel his first responsibility was to Madeleine and her parents, as victims, and not to the PJ as - whatever they were.

I hope Baggott feels some shame when he looks at that headline:

Leveson inquiry: ex-police chief defends not preventing false McCann DNA reports
Matthew Baggott says it was correct 'not to put the record straight' over false reports about Madeleine McCann case

If he HAD put the record straight, then there would almost certainly have been no Rothely Stalking, no threats from LaffinThug to firebomb the McCann family - he could have nipped all that in the bud.

AND HE HAD A MORAL DUTY TO DO SO

Full statement here:

http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Transcript-of-Afternoon-Hearing-28-March-2012.pdf

Quote, p 70/71:

We wanted to focus the media away from the speculation and the unfairness of that and into the
2 search for Madeleine.
3 So there was a number of complex things running at
4 the same time, but even with the benefit of hindsight,
5 sir, I'm still convinced we did the right thing and
6 I think integrity and confidence, particularly with the
7 Portuguese, featured very highly in our decision-making
8 at that time.

Could someone please explain to me how allowing baseless LIES and speculation to spread through the media did anything to help the search for Madeleine?

The damage Baggott's silence did has carried on to this day, IMO.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/madeleine-metaphorically-killed-off-by.html

Madeleine Metaphorically Killed Off By UK Cop Because He Wanted To Play Nice With The Portuguese Judiciary.

Well said, Tony - Baggott has a lot to answer for, IMO.

Oh, look at all this later on in:

http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Transcript-of-Afternoon-Hearing-28-March-2012.pdf



Q. I said that I would return to the investigation into the
5 disappearance of Madeleine McCann, Mr Baggott. You deal
6 with this at question 50 of your statement. That's at
7 page 55407. There are two paragraphs I believe you've
8 already covered, setting out that it was
9 a Portuguese-led inquiry.
10 MR BAGGOTT: Yes.
11 Q. And a decision was made at an early stage that you would
12 comply, or the police in this country would comply with
13 the requirements of Portuguese law, including the
14 Judicial Secrecy Act.
15 MR BAGGOTT: Yes.
16 Q. Over the page on 55408, internal numbering 24, third
17 paragraph down:
18 "Due to the vast quantity of local, national and
19 international media that descended on the village of
20 Rothley, Leicestershire, where the McCann family live,
21 a large policing operation had to take place to ensure
22 that villagers were able to go about their daily
23 business. We did have complaints from local residents
24 about the media's behaviour."
25 I wanted to ask you what those complaints entailed,

what they were about?
2 MR BAGGOTT: I think there was a variety of complaint around
3 disruption to daily life, which was caused by a large
4 international media descending for the long term and the
5 disruption that caused to people's business.
6 Secondly, if I recall, the intrusiveness of asking
7 residents about their thoughts and what had happened,
8 and a degree of speculation. So it was not only
9 a physical presence and the requirement of having to
10 preserve people's quality of life, but on the other hand
11 the media in going and asking questions.
12 Q. You wrote a letter to editors that's at tab 10 of our
13 bundle, 55383. Amongst who was this circulated, this
14 letter?
15 MR BAGGOTT: If I recall, this went to all the prominent
16 editors. I can provide, I'm sure, a written record of
17 who it went to, if you should so choose.
18 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Don't we need to go to the next one
19 first, because it's chronologically first in time?
20 MS BOON: It is, sir, that's quite right. The first one is
21 page 55384, tab 11.
22 MR BAGGOTT: Thank you.
23 Q. "Since the beginning of May 2007 my force,
24 Leicestershire Constabulary, has had the responsibility
25 for co-ordinating the UK law enforcement response to 1 Madeleine McCann's disappearance. As the
2 Chief Constable I have become increasingly concerned
3 regarding the continued speculation and rumour
4 surrounding this investigation, hence this exceptional
5 request of you.
6 "I would be most grateful if you could ensure
7 restraint in reporting on the case while the Portuguese
8 authorities complete their inquiries and conclude their
9 judicial processes. Over recent weeks I have been
10 surprised at the reporting of some alleged facts that,
11 as far as I am aware, bear little relation to the
12 evidence. I am deeply concerned at the implications
13 that this may have for all involved.
14 "Recent reports have quoted anonymous Leicestershire
15 police sources. I am confident that the very few
16 officers who know the detail of the inquiry have not and
17 will not divulge confidential detail to the media, nor
18 do they brief others who have provided specialist
19 assistance or who have a legitimate interest in the
20 inquiry.
21 "I know you will appreciate that the implications of
22 Portuguese judicial secrecy mean that we are not in
23 a position to release information, brief the press on
24 the investigation's progress, or confirm or deny any
25 specifics relating to the case.

1 "At the heart of this inquiry is an innocent little
2 girl who went missing on 3 May. Our focus remains on
3 doing everything in our power to assist the judicial
4 police and the Portuguese authorities to find out what
5 has happened to Madeleine."
6 I won't read out the letter on 8 October, but that's
7 a repeat of that request, is it?
8 MR BAGGOTT: Yes.
9 Q. What response, if any, or reaction did you get to those
10 letters?
11 MR BAGGOTT: If I recall, there was one complaint made to
12 the Press Complaints Commission, which resulted in
13 a noting of the file, but the speculation did continue
14 in spite of the first letter, and then I felt obliged to
15 write the second letter, again appealing to the better
16 nature of the media and to understand the complexity of
17 this situation. So I think the fact that I wrote two
18 letters is indicative of itself of the concerns of the
19 UK effort to try and find Madeleine.
20 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Ms Boon's question was what reaction
21 did you get to these letters?
22 MS BOON: Yes.
23 MR BAGGOTT: Not hugely positive, because the speculation
24 continued.
25 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: And you say you filed a complaint to
1 the Press Complaints Commission. Would Leicestershire
2 have that, both the complaint and their response?
3 MR BAGGOTT: I think we could provide it, sir. I shall make
4 inquiries if that's what you wish.
5 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: I would like to see how the Press
6 Complaints Commission dealt in writing with the
7 complaint you made, if that's not inconvenient.
8 MR BAGGOTT: Certainly, sir.
9 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Thank you.
10 MS BOON: I have been asked by a core participant to ask you
11 whether you felt that you had the necessary tools to
12 prevent or at least object to the misreporting in the
13 press about Madeleine's disappearance and Leicestershire
14 police's involvement.
15 MR BAGGOTT: I think there could have been a greater voice
16 or a greater authority to explain the boundaries of what
17 that press reporting should have been. The difficulty
18 I think there is with this is it involves a European
19 dimension as well as a national one, in which case --
20 but I think there could be some stronger guidelines and
21 consequences.
22 That said, without going into the detail, I am aware
23 that there were civil proceedings taken in the following
24 months, which by themselves exercised a degree of
25 constraint and control over the reporting
1 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Yes. The problem is: is that good
2 enough? Because it may be that the Drs McCann can
3 recover damages, but to such extent as damage has been
4 done, the damage has been done.
5 MR BAGGOTT: I think in this particular case, sir, the
6 speculation, if it had been a UK court, may well have
7 undermined the fairness of subsequent proceedings
8 against whoever was charged with that offence, and
9 secondly, it certainly hindered the inquiries to find
10 and trace Madeleine simply because of the reaction that
11 came from the media speculation.

===================

So, why didn't he stop it? He knew it wasn't true, so surely was his responsibility to tell the truth?

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/Police-right-say-McCann-leaks-untrue/story-15654901-detail/story.html

Police 'right not to say McCann leaks untrue'

The police chief at the time Madeleine McCann went missing has defended his decision not to tell the media that leaked DNA evidence implicating her parents was wrong.

Matthew Baggott the then Chief Constable of Leicestershire – now head of the Police Service of Northern Ireland – was interviewed at the Leveson Inquiry into the media yesterday.

The inquiry has previously heard from Jerry Lawton, a Daily Star reporter, that Portuguese police were leaking DNA results wrongly implicating her parents with a hire car.

Lord Justice Leveson yesterday said Mr Lawton criticised the force, which he said knew the leaks were wrong, for not telling reporters off the record "don't go there'' with the hire car details.

The judge said he was concerned the force did not have the chance to respond and asked Mr Baggott if he would like to.

Mr Baggott said the force had to "respect the primacy of the Portuguese investigation".

He said there was also "an issue of Portuguese law, their own judicial secrecy laws".

This meant "it would have been utterly wrong" to have held an off-the-record briefing over the matter.

Madeleine's father Gerry, in his submission to the inquiry in November, told how he had urged Mr Baggott to write to media organisations urging them to stop inaccurately reporting details of the girl's disappearance.

Mr McCann said Mr Baggott, who left the Leicestershire force in 2009, wrote letters in September and October 2007.

"Our campaign team pressurised Leicestershire police to write to the broadcasters and editors and there's a letter from Matt Baggott, who was chief constable at that time, urging restraint and saying there was very inaccurate reporting," Mr McCann said.

Portugal police announced this month that a new team had been appointed to re-examine the original investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.

It follows a review by Scotland Yard officers which began in May last year.

Madeleine disappeared from the family's holiday accommodation in Portuguese resort of Praia de Luz in May 2007. She was a few days short of her fourth birthday at the time.

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

If Baggott had told the truth, then he would have prevented so, so much harrassment and misery for the McCann family.

And the damage he has done to efforts to find Madeleine is incalculable.

I don't know how he sleeps at night.

I am so sorry, but I just cannot see how The Leicester Police would have been able to say that what was being said was wrong. They had no right to do so.
The one thing that was absolute is that it was a Portuguese Investigation, and I don't think for a minute that anyone thought that it might be corrupt, or even incompetent. In the beginning.

The problem lies with allowing a foreign country to determine the possible fate of a British Citizen. And that Britain should not be allowed to interfere with this. Something that The Government of Britain seems to have settled for.

In so far as I can see, Portugal has got sweet feck all right to decide anything because they clearly do not know.
And yet again I am not explaining myself very well.

He said there was also "an issue of Portuguese law, their own judicial secrecy laws".
Hello, where does he think the media got the information from...Peter Pan?
The media, were being briefed daily by the PJ from Amaral's office, for pity sake!
Bag-Puss condoned the breach of the Judicial Secrecy laws by saying nothing.
However, when Amaral accused Bag-puss's own officers of pandering to the McCanns, all hell was let loose and denials and condemnations made to the Attorney General of Portugal! I guess Leicester Police Force reputation was more important than a child's life!
Go Figure!

It's really shocking that Baggott put keeping Gonc sweet ahead of telling the truth. I do hope he has since enjoyed Gonc's demented ravings and accusations aimed at the UK police.

I really did expect better of Baggott - it is inexcusable to let those disgusting lies gain a foothold when he could have stopped it by simply telling the truth.

He didn't even have to go on record to do it, either, he could have spoken to the UK press quietly and they would never have printed all that crap that was coming from Gonc.

Baggott has a lot to answer for, IMO.

In my opinion the man doesn't give a damn.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/cop-demoted-after-mccanns-outburst-510764
The bungling Portuguese police chief running the Madeleine McCann probe was last night kicked off the case by furious bosses.

Officials demoted boozy chief inspector Goncalo Amaral after he launched an astonishing public attack on parents Kate and Gerry and British detectives.

The 48-year-old accused the McCanns of manipulating the investigation and claimed police here are pandering to the family.

His outburst angered bosses who decided it was the final straw in a series of embarrassing blunders during the investigation to find missing four-year-old Madeleine.

A Policia Judiciaria spokesman said: "Goncalo Amaral has been removed from the DIC (Portugal's CID) in Portimao and all the cases it is dealing with.

"We cannot make any comment on the reasons for his dismissal. But he did not resign, he was removed."

The McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "We are aware of what's happened and simply cannot comment.

"However Kate and Gerry have consistently said they are willing to co-operate with Portuguese authorities and will continue to do so, regardless of who is in charge of the hunt for Madeleine."

A source close to the family added: "Things like this are frankly just a distraction, what they want is for people to concentrate on the search for Madeleine.

"The most important thing is that the inquiry is led by someone who can do a professional and good job and help them find their daughter."

Amaral accused doctors Kate and Gerry, from Rothley, Leics, of distracting the investigation. And he said of Leicestershire detectives: "British police have only worked on what the McCanns want them to work on, and which is most convenient for them.

"They have only investigated tips and information developed and worked on for the McCanns, forgetting the couple are suspects in the death of their daughter."

But a source close to the couple, both 39, said: "It's wrong. Leicestershire police are not doing anything at Gerry and Kate's behest. They are there for liaison."

Amaral was number three in the investigation but in charge of running it on a day-to-day basis from Portimao.

He works as little as four and a half hours a day and takes boozy three-hour lunches despite a mountain of Madeleine leads to investigate.

The inspector also vented his anger that Leicestershire police were following a wild tip emailed to Prince Charles's website.

It suggested a disgruntled maid at the Ocean Club complex in Praia da Luz where Madeleine vanished from on May 3 may have kidnapped her.

Amaral, who will be moved to Faro, ranted: "The lead has no credibility. This story about kidnapping for revenge is another lead worked on by the McCanns.

"Everything said by employees, current or former, has already been investigated by the Policia Judiciaria."

But the McCann family source said: "The lead was passed by Clarence House to the Met Police and they took it seriously because it was from a real woman and she had left the Ocean Club in bad circumstances."

Amaral has probed just two child murders in his 26-year career.

He is under investigation for allegedly helping cover up a police beating to extract a confession from Leonor Cipriano, 36, the mother of a missing girl.

She is serving 16 years for the murder of her eight-year-old daughter Joana, even though the body has never been found and she has retracted her statement

Sorry, Sorry. I just can't see what else The Leicester Police could have done. They warned The Press about speculating, but they were ignored.
It is entirely the fault of The Press, and I cannot begin to understand why any one else should be held responsible.

It would have been entirely wrong for The Police of UK to point out something that they weren't even sure of at the time. And there is no way in which they could have said that Goncalo Amaral was a lying barstard.

Vilify me if you dare, but I am not wrong. And it doesn't really matter anyway.

Sabot wrote:Sorry, Sorry. I just can't see what else The Leicester Police could have done. They warned The Press about speculating, but they were ignored.
It is entirely the fault of The Press, and I cannot begin to understand why any one else should be held responsible.

It would have been entirely wrong for The Police of UK to point out something that they weren't even sure of at the time. And there is no way in which they could have said that Goncalo Amaral was a lying barstard.

Vilify me if you dare, but I am not wrong. And it doesn't really matter anyway.

The beauty of being here on this forum, Sabot, we are all entitled to our own opinion without the fear of vilification

I think, in an ideal world, that should have been enough, Sabot. However, when people get told not to speculate, they don't think, Oh, I mustn't do that, I am clearly totally wrong.

No, they think, Oh, I must have touched a nerve, hit the truth, etc.

Which is why, IMO, he should have spelled out just how wrong they were and told them the truth.

crazytony wrote:

Sabot wrote:Sorry, Sorry. I just can't see what else The Leicester Police could have done. They warned The Press about speculating, but they were ignored.
It is entirely the fault of The Press, and I cannot begin to understand why any one else should be held responsible.

It would have been entirely wrong for The Police of UK to point out something that they weren't even sure of at the time. And there is no way in which they could have said that Goncalo Amaral was a lying barstard.

Vilify me if you dare, but I am not wrong. And it doesn't really matter anyway.

The beauty of being here on this forum, Sabot, we are all entitled to our own opinion without the fear of vilification

Thank you, Tony. I am a trifle pissed off with The Leicester Police getting the blame. This was an intolerable situation. The PJ were cocking it up, and no one was allowed to gainsay them. And probably for good reason, under the circumstances. Who knew in those days that they were utterly useless? Good Policemen don't see this coming.

This Investigation should never have been left to The Portuguese. It was the disappearance of a British Child, and in these days of the effing European Union then Britain should have been leading the investigation.
What price a bloody Passport which cost me nearly £90 the last time I was forced to apply.

Madeleine McCann is the responsibility of Britain, and it is for Britain to determine what happened to her. And not some third world fascist state with corrupt policemen who will beat shit out of anyone for a false confession.

Britain should get it's act together, and tell Portugal to feck off. But I amn't holding my breath.

bb1 wrote:I think, in an ideal world, that should have been enough, Sabot. However, when people get told not to speculate, they don't think, Oh, I mustn't do that, I am clearly totally wrong.

No, they think, Oh, I must have touched a nerve, hit the truth, etc.

Which is why, IMO, he should have spelled out just how wrong they were and told them the truth.

That isn't the point, Bonny. The Leicester Police weren't the ones who were telling lies. It was never their place to say that it was lies. In fact it was almost impossible for them to do so since they had no absolute proof that what The PJ appeared to be saying was lies. Especially since no one actually knew that it was The PJ in the first place.

Come on, this was beyond anything that you or I would understand.

I see what you mean, Sabot. I just wish that, as in your previous post, he had stood up for Madeleine and her family and stopped it, and to Hell with the diplomatic niceties.

Sabot wrote:

bb1 wrote:I think, in an ideal world, that should have been enough, Sabot. However, when people get told not to speculate, they don't think, Oh, I mustn't do that, I am clearly totally wrong.

No, they think, Oh, I must have touched a nerve, hit the truth, etc.

Which is why, IMO, he should have spelled out just how wrong they were and told them the truth.

That isn't the point, Bonny. The Leicester Police weren't the ones who were telling lies. It was never their place to say that it was lies. In fact it was almost impossible for them to do so since they had no absolute proof that what The PJ appeared to be saying was lies. Especially since no one actually knew that it was The PJ in the first place.

Come on, this was beyond anything that you or I would understand.

It is too late now to weep over the grotesque mistakes made; no one in the UK was to know what a liar Goncalo Amaral would turn out to be.

bb1 wrote:I see what you mean, Sabot. I just wish that, as in your previous post, he had stood up for Madeleine and her family and stopped it, and to Hell with the diplomatic niceties.

It can't be done, Bonny. No one can say since no one knows. And I don't suppose that Diplomatic Niceties ever came into it. It is only Amaral who appears to think that they did to him what he tried to do to them.
But there you go.

crazytony wrote:

Sabot wrote:

bb1 wrote:I think, in an ideal world, that should have been enough, Sabot. However, when people get told not to speculate, they don't think, Oh, I mustn't do that, I am clearly totally wrong.

No, they think, Oh, I must have touched a nerve, hit the truth, etc.

Which is why, IMO, he should have spelled out just how wrong they were and told them the truth.

That isn't the point, Bonny. The Leicester Police weren't the ones who were telling lies. It was never their place to say that it was lies. In fact it was almost impossible for them to do so since they had no absolute proof that what The PJ appeared to be saying was lies. Especially since no one actually knew that it was The PJ in the first place.

Come on, this was beyond anything that you or I would understand.

It is too late now to weep over the grotesque mistakes made; no one in the UK was to know what a liar Goncalo Amaral would turn out to be.

That is sadly it, Tony. None of us had the faintest idea. None of us knew what this man had done before.
I don't actually know if The UK Police Forces should have known, but would you have expected such a horror story? Would you have expected a long serving police officer to tell such horrendous lies?
This is all a bit beyond me, I am afraid. And I didn't just come up The Clyde on a water biscuit.

I do so hope the lying Portuguese blogger doesn't start. Not after the latest revelations.
And I am still very angry with Baggott, he could have spoken to the Home Office and they could have issued a statement.