MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

**bb1** Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:45 pm

http://www.met.police.uk/cgi-bin/htsearch?words=madeleine+mccann&config=metpolice&restrict=&Search+this+site.x=0&Search+this+site.y=0&Search+this+site=Search+this+site

Op Grange Remit

The support and expertise proffered by the Commissioner will be provided by the Homicide & Serious Crime Command - SCD1.

The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’. This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);

• The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies.
• UK Law Enforcement agencies,
• Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.

The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before.

It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter. Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit.

End

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

Stand by for a mass outbreak of carpet-chewing over this phrase...

as if the abduction occurred in the UK

**Sabot** Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:56 pm

Stand by for a bit of messing about with that phrase. I'm sure one of them will manage to do that.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:02 am

Pity the poor forkers, Sabot. They had all convinced themselves that the reason the Yard went to see M3 was that they were investigating the 'fraudulent fund', to use one of their favourite cliches.

When the truth was, as we said, that they were following any leads which M3 may have found.

And did we not also tell them that the UK police KNEW Madeleine had been abducted?
Yes.

Did they listen?
No.

It's well past time they woke up and smelled the coffee.

**greenink211** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:17 am

Actually this worries me a lot. Surely the Met Police should at the early stage this document seems to refer to have been concentrating on all possibilities as to what happened? Even though we have no proof the McCanns were involved in anything surely that is a key part of the review? I suspect and hope this is just a playing with words based on a very short statement. After all the document is accompanied by the memo which refers to the disappearance of Madeleine.

But if it transpires that the SY review does not look at the McCanns and everyone else who was close to Madeleine that week I for one will not have much faith in it as I think that has to be part of their work however quickly it might be resolved.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:29 am

I suspect the UK police ruled the McCanns and their friends out of any involvement a long time ago, greenink.

The whole 'parental involvement' theory revolves around a barking spaniel and Gonc's failure to understand DNA - oh, and the inappropriate wearing of earrings.

Also, guilty people do not normally demand that the police investigate them; innocent people do, though.

**greenink211** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:36 am

But the content of these documents seems to suggest the overall aims of the review not a later version of such aims.

And, I would be worried if the review does not include some kind of reference to other possible scenarios and the reasons these were ruled in or out. It would be a serious flaw in the review to my mind.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:36 am

I also suspect they used the unambiguous word ABDUCTION on purpose, having been pestered beyond endurance by Bennett and co.

It is such a specific word, they wouldn't have used it if they didn't want to send a clear message, I don't think?

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:40 am

I would be worried if the review does not include some kind of reference to other possible scenarios and the reasons these were ruled in or out. It would be a serious flaw in the review to my mind.

I really don't see the UK police revealing very much at all about their thinking, they just don't work that way?

**Sabot** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:40 am

The Leicester Police were in there almost from Day One. They have seen the evidence, and they know whether or not it was an Abduction, in so far as it's possible for anyone to know.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:47 am

You think it means they may be more pro-active than had been assumed, HB? Their actions so far would certainly suggest that.

Sabot's right, Leicestershire police would know far more about what has been going on than we do; they would not have carried that link all the this time if they had had the slightest suspicion of the McCanns.

None of us has the slightest idea what's been going on behind the scenes, and we may well never be privy to the Yard's thoughts on the matter.

**Sabot** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:55 am

There wouldn't be any point in carrying on with The Review if they had found any evidence pointing to The McCanns. And if there was any such evidence then Leicester Police would have had it.
Let us not forget that Gonc spent five months looking for just that. And at great and intense length. There is nothing so diligent as an obsessed copper working on gut instinct. If there was anything Gonc would have found it.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:03 pm

Jayelles wrote:I agree with Greenink that all avenues must be looked at and that for the sake of integrity, they must include this.

However, it doesn't take an awful lot of investigative prowess to conclude that the McCanns-dunnit theory simply doesn't hold water. Unless they are psychopaths and this was a highly premeditated crime, they simply could not done all they would have had to do in the time frame available and appeared normal to everyone.

Even the antis acknowledge this sicne their theories involve a ridiculously high level of conspiracy in order to account for the unworkability of a McCanns-dunnit theory. Bennett's followers get around it by having Madeleine dead long before the 3rd and the McCanns and their friends finding substitute Madeleines to put into the nursery. We have government experiments involving cloned Madeleines. We have non-existent Madeleine with the McCanns photo-shopping every photo that ever existed of her. We have the masons helping out with goodness knows what. We have Luz locals hiring out their freezers for the storage of dead children without question. We have dozens of people willing to lie and risk jail for a couple they barely know.

All of these are necessary to account for what some people cannot accept - namely, that madeleine McCann was abducted and the evidence and witness testimony overwhelmingly supports parental non-involvement.

Remember - SY were commissioned in May. Yet they only came out of their incident room late summer when they'd been reviewing for a couple of months already. Brown started shrieking "Why aren't they questioning the parents?". How does she know they hadn't? How does she know that they hadn't extensively questioned the McCanns and their friends during those early months of the review.

Let's face it the portuguese police statements are pretty ropey quality. Question made in Portuguese, question translated into English, answer given in English, answer translated into Portuguese, answer then paraphrased for a report, report then translated back into English... And of course any errors are the McCanns fault!

Thanks, Jayelles, that's what I was making a very bad job of trying to express.

The 'parental involvement' theory falls apart as soon as it is exposed to any kind of logical scrutiny, and as for the Fridge Theory, the least said about that, the better.

IMO, the Met used the word ABDUCTION very precisely and deliberately; because they KNOW Madeleine was ABDUCTED.

If the forkers insist on shrieking otherwise, well, that is their problem; the grown-ups aren't listening to them.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:14 pm

This sheds a bit of light on it, I think - I had forgotten all about that preliminary review:

http://regretsandramblings.com/2012/01/05/remember-this-november-2010/

quote:

Yes back in November 2010 Kate McCann spoke about the review. You can listen from about 1 min. Kate McCann tells you that under Alan Johnson a review was carried out to see whether it would be worth an investigative review which is now being conducted by team of Scotland Yard officers under the Operation Grange Investigation.

I suspect the police will have cleared the 'parental involvement' nonsense from under their feet then, before the Grange review even started?

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 12:51 pm

Oh, why are these people so thick?

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Profiler-Pat-Brown-uses-Anne-Bremner-to-sue-Kate-and-Gerry-McCann/243809885675504

Kerryn Davies The body fluids that were found in the car had an 88% match to Madeleine's DNA. 15 out of 19 markers, which is enough to convict people in certain countries!
20 minutes ago

For the millionth time:

IT WAS FIFTEEN OUT OF THIRTY SEVEN, GO AND READ THE POLICE FILES

**Sabot** Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:29 pm

bb1 wrote:Oh, why are these people so thick?

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Profiler-Pat-Brown-uses-Anne-Bremner-to-sue-Kate-and-Gerry-McCann/243809885675504

Kerryn Davies The body fluids that were found in the car had an 88% match to Madeleine's DNA. 15 out of 19 markers, which is enough to convict people in certain countries!
20 minutes ago

For the millionth time:

IT WAS FIFTEEN OUT OF THIRTY SEVEN, GO AND READ THE POLICE FILES

This sort of distortion isn't helping the uneducated. But Scotland Yard will know the facts of the DNA findings and precisely what they mean, along with a lot of other things that have been distorted.
We are still looking at this in the light of Internet gossip, even thought we don't actually believe most of it. This has made everything look so complicated, when in fact most of it is quite simple.

As for the dogs, heaven knows what SY thought when they saw the videos. But no one arrested Karen Matthews for killing her daughter and concealing a body when the dogs hit on the settee, fortunately, as it happens.
SY will know what Eddie reacts to, and the value of what was found. This was no doubt all done very early on. The DNA was already in the hands of Leicester Police long before The Review began, and it was in English.

Scotland yard haven't had to deal with most of the garbage, although even we have managed to debunk most of it. Quite miraculous, really. Us, I mean.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:19 pm

I am too befuddled by Portuguese law to feel miraculous, personally biggrin

Thing is, it isn't going to matter a toss what we say, what Scotland Yard says, what interpol says, what the Man from UNCLE says, the forkers are still going to repeat trash about fridges, masons, and dogs not lying.

At this point in the proceedings, there is no point in attempting to reason with them, other than one or two of us who enjoy trying to get some reality into their thick heads.

**greenink211** Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:01 pm

I have to admit that I have not followed any of these cases in detail from the start. I came to the McCann case from a different perspective. Interest in abuse. Since I first looked at it I have been somewhat startled to see how little importance is placed on actual evidence and proof. It doesn't matter how flimsy it might be, or where it originated; if it supports the case against the parents it is valid and accepted.

Jayelles, you have expressed very clearly the reality about the review but I repeat my fear that unless the report at the end in some way explains why the McCanns have been exonerated then it will be seen as worthless by many.

Though, others have also expressed the view that whatever is said (and our system doesn't allow for a great deal to be said) it will be ignored by those who are fixated on their hatred. That is unfortunately the truth but I hope that Scotland Yard don't contribute to that by failing to address the point about all avenues being explored.

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:23 pm

I suspect that that has been done already, greenink:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

I confess, I had completely forgotten about that; it does help make a bit more sense of the current position?

**bb1** Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:35 pm

Delusional hounder:

And perhaps PB and other profilers, body language experts, forensic psychologists and so forth have already submitted their views to the police and we also do not know what if anything, will be done regarding the Gaspar statements, Exeter connections etc.

rofl

Pretendy profilers? Cod science about nose-scratching, and the meaning of red trousers? The whole flim-flammery of the forker crusade?

I doubt that very much - something tells me Scotland Yard are going to be more interested in boring stuff like 'evidence' - you know, the sort of thing the internet vigilantes always ignore.

**greenink211** Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:49 pm

bb1 wrote:I suspect that that has been done already, greenink:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

I confess, I had completely forgotten about that; it does help make a bit more sense of the current position?

It may have been done but I still think my point about the need for some explanation of the reasons is needed. I know its not our usual way of working and I know it won't affect the hate mongers but it will allay fears of reasonable people.

**Sabot** Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:17 pm

Personally, I don't think it is any of our business of how Scotland Yard will come to their conclusions. They are paid to do just that. With the help of considerably more expertise and experience than we have.

Besides, no one has to prove their innocence. Without evidence they are innocent. The reasons for why do not have to be explained to anyone.

**bb1** Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:30 pm

How the forker mind works:

Even if an honest copper wants the truth to get out so emails evidence to the press. They won't print it for fear of being Carter-Rucked by the McCanns. Lets hope the "honest copper" sends information to this forum or another one like it so we can share it with the world. I for one won't be scared to share it.

1. OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT

2. Why on earth would a real, senior police officer want anything to do with pondlife ghouls like them?

**crazytony** Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:38 pm

bb1 wrote:How the forker mind works:

Even if an honest copper wants the truth to get out so emails evidence to the press. They won't print it for fear of being Carter-Rucked by the McCanns. Lets hope the "honest copper" sends information to this forum or another one like it so we can share it with the world. I for one won't be scared to share it.

1. OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT

2. Why on earth would a real, senior police officer want anything to do with pondlife ghouls like them?

So, in their opinion, an honest law enforcement officer should bypass all legal means and revert to illegal means?

**Sabot** Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:55 pm

Delusional. But then they aren't going to believe any Review that doesn't find The McCanns guilty. You really can't argue with this sort of corrupted mind.

Obviously Scotland Yard will release some sort of statement eventually which will probably leave us in no doubt that they believe The McCanns to be innocent, and that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.
The best I can hope for is that SY will have some idea of the route that was taken. And if The McCanns keep at that Madeleine will be found one day.

I do believe that The McCanns will keep at it.

**bb1** Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:14 pm

So, in their opinion, an honest law enforcement officer should bypass all legal means and revert to illegal means?

I know, delusional lunatics. But isn't it interesting to see that sense of entitlement rearing its ugly head again? It doesn't seem to dawn on them that THIS IS NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS.

Maybe they have invested so much in their blind hatred that they mysteriously imagine they are somehow part of the case?

Newsflash - they aren't. Neither is it some kind of internet game being staged for their entertainment.

Sponsored content

MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED

Re: MET POLICE CONFIRM - MADELEINE WAS ABDUCTED