Express, STAR : Madeleine file to be kept secret to save Portugal's blushes

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/329977/Madeleine-McCann-file-kept-secret

MADELEINE MCCANN FILE KEPT SECRET

Sunday July 1,2012
By James Murray
THE Home Office is refusing to release secret files on the Madeleine McCann case to avoid diplomatic ructions with Portugal.
The documents are believed to record discussions with the Metropolitan Police about sensitive details of the baffling case.
Rejecting attempts by a newspaper to see the files, the Home Office said there would be “specific detriment to the UK’s relationship with Portugal” if they were released.
It also claimed disclosure of three of the documents would “stifle discussion” between officials.
A Met review of the case was ordered last year after pressure from the Home Office and David Cameron.
Sources said there were “serious concerns” within the Met that they were investigating a “foreign” case over which they had no jurisdiction.
Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry McCann, of Rothley, Leicestershire, are convinced she is still alive. She was taken in May 2007 from a holiday apartment on the Algarve.

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

If that is accurate, then I think it tells us everything we need to know about Madeleine's abduction.

At the very least, Amaral screwed up big-time.

It does indeed seem to be accurate, it is in this document:

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ico.gov.uk%2F~%2Fmedia%2Fdocuments%2Fdecisionnotices%2F2012%2Ffs_50430043.ashx&ei=MY3vT-biCdC68gOvpLmLDQ&usg=AFQjCNHnXJECrq7lamAMCoDn8P5Y0ufUZA&sig2=65GgO5WpOd_LBiHgq5t-jg

which I haven't read, but is to do with the FOI act.

Bren has linked to the document:

http://regretsandramblings.com/2012/07/01/oh-dear-not-so-rosey-then-is-it/

http://regretsandramblings.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/fs_50430043.pdf

And I do believe the 'complainant' is Bennett:

Public interest test

Sound familiar?

Well done Bren for posting the whole thing so we can read it for ourselves. This would be a very good time for the forkers, hounders, ghouls and Gonc Cult to withdraw from the internet and take up basket-weaving or something.

After issuing two public interest extension letters, the Home Office
provided the complainant with a substantive response on 1 December
2011.

That's got to be Bennett whinging - hope he likes his latest EPIC FAIL being publically exposed.

. This is because the documents contained information
provided to the UK in confidence by Portuguese officials and internal
discussions between the Home Office and MPS of such information.
Secondly, disclosure would prejudice the UK’s relations with the wider
international community because it would create the perception that the
UK was unwilling to respect the wishes of international partners who had
provided information to it. Such partners would, as a consequence, be
unwilling to assist the UK or share information with it in similar
circumstances in the future

Pity Portugal hadn't shown similar respect for the UK, isn't it, and NOT splattered witness statements and personal information about witness all over the internet?

Pity Gonc hadn't shown similar respect and not passed on information to Portuguese tabloids? Or the phone numbers of witnesses to that raddled Cabrita creature?

Nanny ‏@MyNanny25
@TeddyShepherd Good morning Mel, yes I have blogged them . A bit of Express propaganda I think, don't you? #McCann #Fraud

Wrong as usual, IRONSIDE. The Big Clue is the words at the top:

The Home Office

PS - IRONSIDE seems to have forgotten he flounced off.

J B Littlemore ‏@JBLittlemore
@wicatty009 According to quote in the Express it is the Home Office that knows something ... ask that Governement department! #McCann

How STUPID are these people?

GO AND READ THE WHOLE THING FOR YOURSELVES

http://regretsandramblings.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/fs_50430043.pdf

About " Amaral screwed up big-time", coming from this barsteward, what else to expect but this.

Not quite sure what the exact points are, but that Document seems quite straight forward to me. There are good reasons to refuse certain requests. This has always been the right of The FOIA.
Firstly, as far as I can see, the UK's relationship with Portugal could be affected, although I personally would not care about that.
Secondly there is the question of what The Media and the likes of Bennett would do with it, which would likely further damage the relationship between The UK and Portugal. Something that Portugal did not consider when releasing The Files. But not an excuse for UK to behave in the same fashion.

It is clear from that Document that The Review is being conducted in an all encompassing fashion because certain aspects are not to be made available. And if there had been any suggestion that all would have been laid bare, then it would have affected the nature of The Review.

The UK Police do not release every aspect of their Investigations, and this has never been a problem in the past. We, The Public do not know exactly what Scotland Yard has discovered, and since some of it could contain clues to what happened to Madeleine, we are not going to be told.

Beside, what is anyone going to do about it, except waste Police time?

It is a country's right to retain to itself such items as might prejudice its relationship with other states. FOI is usually a good thing, but in some cases it is not. As has been said, a pity Portugal did not exercise restraint before giving out to the media. As far as regards UK/Portuguese police collaboration in the future I would think the UK will think very careful before deciding what to say on any matter that involves the PJ. LL

I think Bennett has been using a patsy - or another name.

The material covered in that document is identical to his whinges and demands, quote:

Tony Bennett on Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:29 pm

The Madeleine Foundation will appeal against the Met Police's refusal to answer 6 out of the 11 FOI Act questions. I've highlighted the most important parts in red:


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Dear Mr Bennett

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2011080000691


I respond in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 02/08/2011. I note you seek access to the following information:

Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 Questions - Madeleine McCann Review Team Please answer the following questions in relation to the Madeleine McCann Review Team:

Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 Questions - Madeleine McCann Review Team Please answer the following questions in relation to the Madeleine McCann Review Team:

1. What is the precise remit of the Review Team?
2. When was that remit agreed?
3. Who decided the remit?
4. When completed, to whom will the Review Report be presented?
5. On 14 May 2011, the Daily Telegraph said that "Scotland Yard's new investigation is being overseen by Commander Simon Foy, one of the force's most experienced detectives". Please either confirm that, or provide information as to who is in overall command of this Review.
6. On 15 May 2011, the Daily Record said that " Scotland Yard said Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, from the Homicide and Serious Crime Command, would be the senior investigating officer in the case". Please either confirm that, or provide information as to who is the senior investigating officer in the case.
7. On 15 May 2011, the Independent on Sunday said that "Mr. Redwood will report to Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell, Homicide and Serious Crimes Command (HSCC), operational command unit commander." Please either confirm that, or provide information as to who is the person in overall charge of the HSCC".
8. On 20 and 22 July 2011, an officer from the Intelligence Section of the Madeleine McCann Team, Sam, Pay No. 220629, stated that the policy of the Team was not to answer any correspondence. Please state whether or not this is the case.

9. Please state whether, if evidence or other information is sent to the Madeleine McCann Review Team, any acknowledgement of the receipt of that information will be given.
10. Does the Madeleine McCann Review Team have a deadline for completing its review? If so, when is it?
11. Does the Madeleine McCann Review Team have a budget? If so, what is it? Do the funds allocated to this Review Team come from the Home Office or from the Metropolitan Police Authority?

He got knocked back and decided to moan and waste more taxpayers' money.

But the reference numbers are different:

Bennett:

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2011080000691

This one:

Reference: FS50430043

Wasn't Bennett also making a pest of himself as John Johnson, or something?

This doesn't read like a standard media enquiry - this is a reply to A COMPLAINT:

The complainant requested correspondence

Balance of public interest test

Bennett's the one who didn't know what 'public interest' meant.

And quite right too, LL. Certain elements of The PJ are not to be trusted. In fact some of them were still leaking information to Amaral after Amaral had been sacked, and even when The Rogatory Interviews were being conducted. Too much of it is in Amaral's book to doubt that.

And what Bennett would do with The FOI if released to him, makes me feel quite ill.

That little word, "Only", crops up quite a lot in that Document, and we all know what Bennett can do with, "Only." The use so often of, "Only" leads me to suspect that these remarks are pointed at Bennett.

However, personally, I have no burning desire to know what is in some of these Documents. And the only reason for why some of them do is because they intend to abuse it, without a single thought for Madeleine.

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2011080000691

That would appear to be the answer to bennett on Sept 2011. LL

bb1 wrote:I think Bennett has been using a patsy - or another name.

The material covered in that document is identical to his whinges and demands, quote:

Tony Bennett on Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:29 pm

The Madeleine Foundation will appeal against the Met Police's refusal to answer 6 out of the 11 FOI Act questions. I've highlighted the most important parts in red:


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Dear Mr Bennett

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2011080000691


I respond in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 02/08/2011. I note you seek access to the following information:

Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 Questions - Madeleine McCann Review Team Please answer the following questions in relation to the Madeleine McCann Review Team:

Re: Freedom of Information Act 2000 Questions - Madeleine McCann Review Team Please answer the following questions in relation to the Madeleine McCann Review Team:

1. What is the precise remit of the Review Team?
2. When was that remit agreed?
3. Who decided the remit?
4. When completed, to whom will the Review Report be presented?
5. On 14 May 2011, the Daily Telegraph said that "Scotland Yard's new investigation is being overseen by Commander Simon Foy, one of the force's most experienced detectives". Please either confirm that, or provide information as to who is in overall command of this Review.
6. On 15 May 2011, the Daily Record said that " Scotland Yard said Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, from the Homicide and Serious Crime Command, would be the senior investigating officer in the case". Please either confirm that, or provide information as to who is the senior investigating officer in the case.
7. On 15 May 2011, the Independent on Sunday said that "Mr. Redwood will report to Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell, Homicide and Serious Crimes Command (HSCC), operational command unit commander." Please either confirm that, or provide information as to who is the person in overall charge of the HSCC".
8. On 20 and 22 July 2011, an officer from the Intelligence Section of the Madeleine McCann Team, Sam, Pay No. 220629, stated that the policy of the Team was not to answer any correspondence. Please state whether or not this is the case.

9. Please state whether, if evidence or other information is sent to the Madeleine McCann Review Team, any acknowledgement of the receipt of that information will be given.
10. Does the Madeleine McCann Review Team have a deadline for completing its review? If so, when is it?
11. Does the Madeleine McCann Review Team have a budget? If so, what is it? Do the funds allocated to this Review Team come from the Home Office or from the Metropolitan Police Authority?

He got knocked back and decided to moan and waste more taxpayers' money.

But the reference numbers are different:

Bennett:

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2011080000691

This one:

Reference: FS50430043

Wasn't Bennett also making a pest of himself as John Johnson, or something?

This doesn't read like a standard media enquiry - this is a reply to A COMPLAINT:

The complainant requested correspondence

You beat me to it Bonny.

This does seem to be what you think, a reply to a Bennett request.

Remember his evidence he was supposed to have had?

1. We have three classes of evidence that we wish to submit to you. These are as follows:
A comprehensive dossier of circumstantial evidence, including new material not disclosed in the Portuguese Police files and which includes material relating, for example, to various telephone records of some of the parties involved, matters relating to the creche/baby-minding records at the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, matters relating to other guests at the Ocean Club that week, and analyses of various witness statements which demonstrate, we say with clarity, that the McCanns and their friends did not tell the truth about events in Praia da Luz. This includes, for example, numerous contradictory statements going well beyond mere inconsistences, and changes of story. Some of these issues were of course highlighhted in the police report of Tavares de Almeida dated 10 September 2007, the date the McCanns returned to England after being made arguido and arguida on 7 September 2007. As the Senior Investigating Officer in this case, I expect you will already have read this document some time ago and recorded your response to it in your policy folder.


2. A similar dossier, which is ready to send to you, detailing various aspects about the McCanns' private investigations. *** The rest of this section has been removed at the request of Brian Kennedy's lawyers, Carter-Ruck ***


3. Information, of a first-hand nature, received from a female insider within the McCann Team whose information strongly tends to suggest that the entire McCann Team private investigation team was exercised in the creation of a huge smokescreen to cover up what really happened to Madeleine McCann, rather than being a genuine attempt to find Madeleine. We would only wish to disclose this lady's information to you in person to one of your team of detectives.

However, before sending you any of this information, we need to establish if you want to receive it. When Prime Minister David Cameron, in response to a letter from Dr Gerald McCann, announced in the Sun newspaper on 12 May this year - the same date as Dr Kate McCann’s book 'madeleine' was published - that he had procured a thorough Scotland Yard Review into Madeleine's disappearance, he stated that the whole purpsoe of the Review was 'to support the McCann family'. We do not know for example the terms of the review that were agreed between the Prime Minister and Sir Paul Stephenson. If the terms of the review team under your leadership have been determined, please supply us with a copy of them.

Well done, LL. We all know it's him, but nice to have proof. The fact is that any Media outlet would almost certainly have accepted a "No" the first time.

There is no doubt in my mind that Bennett wants this information so that he can abuse it, as he abuses everything that The McCanns and prominent Supporters say. He is determined to do anything disgusting to point to the guilt of The McCanns, and he is not averse to changing or cutting document in the process. He is the last person who should have this information.

Thanks, sabot. It won't let me copy the actual document or the link, but if you want to read it then google Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2011080000691. LL

Jeezuz, I have to laugh at Bennett's demands. His arrogance is spectacular, as is his total lack of charm. Who the feck does he think he is? He has no manners whatsoever, but obviously expected a personal visit from someone or another. I mean, would you go to his house to be insulted? Would you give him personal information when you know what he is going to do with it?

Lamplighter wrote:Thanks, sabot. It won't let me copy the actual document or the link, but if you want to read it then google Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2011080000691. LL

HAHAHAHAHAH. Thank God for all those little Google Bots that so many of them fail to notice, that all come back to bite them on the bum.

My my, it wasn't Bennett, it was the Star:

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/259644/Madeleine-McCann-Key-files-into-probe-kept-top-secret-to-avoid-Portugal-row/

MADELEINE MCCANN: KEY FILES INTO PROBE KEPT TOP SECRET TO AVOID PORTUGAL ROW

1st July 2012 By Jonathan Corke
CRUCIAL files relating to Madeleine McCann’s disappearance are being kept secret by the Government to avoid a diplomatic war with Portugal.

They contain discussions between Home Office ­officials and the Met over ­vital information on the case.

But Home Secretary Theresa May and her staff have spent the past nine months preventing the Daily Star Sunday from obtaining the papers.

They said there would be “specific detriment to the UK’s relationship with Portugal” if the four files were released.
Ms May also claimed disclosure of three of the documents would “stifle discussion” ­between ­officials.

But we understand the papers may show a difference of opinion between the Home Office and Met officers, who are reviewing the files on Madeleine’s 2007 disappearance in Praia da Luz.

The Met review was ordered last year after pressure from the Home Office and David Cameron.

Sources said there were “serious concerns” within the Met that they were investigating a “foreign” case over which they had no jurisdiction.

Although the £2million-a-year bill for the Scotland Yard team is being met by the Home Office, around 27 detectives are being used.

Labour peer Lord Harris, 58, said: “My reservation was the way in which the Prime Minister ­instructed the Metropolitan police to investigate the McCann case – which is difficult in that it’s not in the Met’s ­jurisdiction – in a different country and everything ­depends on the co-operation of the ­Portuguese ­authorities.”

Our first request for the documents was made last September but the Home ­Office turned us down.

We appealed but again the Home Office decided ­secrecy was more important.

Last week, after more than five months’ deliberation, the Information ­Commissioner ruled in the Home Office’s favour but ­informed us we can now ­appeal to an Information Tribunal.

Its response said: “The documents contained ­information provided to the UK in ­confidence by ­Portuguese officials and ­internal discussions ­between the Home Office and the ­Metropolitan Police ­Service of such ­information.”

Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry McCann, of Rothley, Leicestershire, are convinced she is still alive.

Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said the couple remained optimistic of a breakthrough.

40.
The Home Office argued that it was clearly not in the public interest to release information that would prejudice the UK’s relations with another country. This is because such prejudice would undermine the UK’s ability to work with other countries, in serving the public interest, in matters of trade, defence, the environment, human rights cases, the fight against terrorism, international crime, and specifically in terms of this particular request the safe return of Madeleine McCann.

I would say that that confirms that the Yard believes there is a good chance that Madeleine is still alive?

I wonder, will it be easier for the Yard and Portugal once the Portuguese authorities have dealt with Gonc themselves?

So far we have a pdf wherein the Home Office explains and defend her actions referring withelding important documents.

Now what is in those files Home Office don't want you to know???

We have all given up on Joana Morais long time ago. So News, updates, Developments in Portugal are not shared with us from that angle. No problemo.
We have our own sources and informants.

I remember information was confirmed that the Madeleine McCann case had become a matter of National Security!!!!!

Changed my mind.

It might be a good thing if Portugal just got on with it. Or does Portugal think that we will all lose interest in the arseholes that were employed by The PJ?
The shame and disgrace has to end at the doorstep of Portugal. And it isn't just about Madeleine.

I think Gonc was the cause of the 'National Security' business, Rose. He was too thick to grasp that all UK officers - and other civil servants - sign the Official Secrets Act as a matter of course. Which is why they don't blab off to tabloids calling themselves Sources in the PJ.....

But - agree, he almost certainly the stumbling block. Hopefully, after Portugal has finished with him, things will start to progress?

It takes time, not too much I hope.