BREAKING NEWS ON BBC - Madeleine McCann case: Police team cut to four

Just posting this in full.....


Maddie hunt “drastically” scaled back: “£10 million spent and nothing achieved”, says Sky News


News that manpower behind Scotland Yard’s four-year investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has been drastically reduced is finding mixed reaction in the world’s press. Sky News’ crime reporter Martin Brunt - who has followed the case minutely over the last eight years - said on camera this afternoon that it is a case of “£10 million spent and nothing achieved”. Elsewhere, news channels are simply repeating the official statement put out earlier this afternoon, while social media is aflame with what many have labelled an exercise in PR spin and whitewash. For now, Portuguese media has not indicated whether the truncated Operation Grange - reduced from 29 full-time staff to just four officers - is due to make any more visits back to Portugal. The news comes in a week where, curiously, “Maddie stories” have yet again peppered the popular press. As often happens before any kind of ‘serious announcement’, fluff pieces have surfaced and almost instantly disappeared. On Sunday in UK, the Sunday People led with a long exposé on a man who took hundreds of photographs in and around Praia da Luz during the time Madeleine went missing, and who was long ago discounted as a person of interest despite the discovery of unrelated DNA in his holiday apartment. These photographs are now being studied by Grange, Portuguese press has today confirmed. Almost certainly tomorrow there will be further news this end as to whether new rogatory letters have been received and whether new interviews in Portugal will be forthcoming. Tony Symonds of the BBC has tweeted that the remaining officers will be focusing “on a small number of definite lines of inquiry” - while the McCann family are quoted as having thanked police for the “meticulous and painstaking work that they have carried out for the last four-and-a-half years”, pursuing “disparate information across the world” and investigating “more than 60 persons of interest”. What is intriguing in this latest statement is that news services and police are no longer talking about an abduction. The investigation centres on “the disappearance of Madeleine McCann”, explained the statement put out by Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley, and Sky News too refers to the case constantly now as a “disappearance”. The McCann’s however continue to talk of “abduction”. Speaking outside Scotland Yard this afternoon, the McCann's press spokesman Clarence Mitchell said Madeleine's parents were buoyed by the fact that they still feel there is no evidence to suggest their daughter "has come to any harm". The Met's official statement came the very day the public appeal to raise money to help former Maddie detective Gonçalo Amaral in the legal fight instigated against him six years ago by the McCanns was temporarily closed down, having raised over €73,000 in six months - largely from people based in UK. natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

http://portugalresident.com/maddie-hunt-%E2%80%9Cdrastically%E2%80%9D-scaled-back-%E2%80%9C%C2%A310-million-spent-and-nothing-achieved%E2%80%9D-says-sky-news

gbwales wrote:

Honeyblade wrote:No evidence to suggest she came to harm that night ?...a whaaaa...the hand gestures desperately trying to enforce the words .. Yep he's ruffled alright bet there was a fair bit of spit flying then ;0

He even starts off that sentence with a weird remark/leak about 'no evidence of what happened that night' before abandoning it for "she's probably fine" approach....
I'm staggered that journalists don't say "Really?????" whenever that line about the lack of evidence of harm is spoken. To me it's the most unnatural response imaginable. A parent should be out of their mind with worry *not knowing* anything about the state of their child - both in the early days - and now.

Anyway, I remain optimistic from the press release, and these clips.

@ Cristobell. Enjoyed the blog.

I'd have thought a three-year-old disappearing from her bed and nobody seeing hide nor hair of her for over eight years was pretty strong evidence in itself of 'harm' having come to her. Or are some abductions harmless? Then there's those two dogs repeatedly alerting to a corpse in the last place the child was seen alive. Dogs whose findings have been responsible for putting killers behind bars. Why tell such stupid lies? Why not just say the parents remain hopeful she'll be found and are grateful to Scotland Yard/David Cameron/the public/Uncle Tom Cobbley...

Popcorn wrote:

gbwales wrote:

Honeyblade wrote:No evidence to suggest she came to harm that night ?...a whaaaa...the hand gestures desperately trying to enforce the words .. Yep he's ruffled alright bet there was a fair bit of spit flying then ;0

He even starts off that sentence with a weird remark/leak about 'no evidence of what happened that night' before abandoning it for "she's probably fine" approach....
I'm staggered that journalists don't say "Really?????" whenever that line about the lack of evidence of harm is spoken. To me it's the most unnatural response imaginable. A parent should be out of their mind with worry *not knowing* anything about the state of their child - both in the early days - and now.

Anyway, I remain optimistic from the press release, and these clips.

@ Cristobell. Enjoyed the blog.

I'd have thought a three-year-old disappearing from her bed and nobody seeing hide nor hair of her for over eight years was pretty strong evidence in itself of 'harm' having come to her. Or are some abductions harmless? Then there's those two dogs repeatedly alerting to a corpse in the last place the child was seen alive. Dogs whose findings have been responsible for putting killers behind bars. Why tell such stupid lies? Why not just say the parents remain hopeful she'll be found and are grateful to Scotland Yard/David Cameron/the public/Uncle Tom Cobbley...

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."

Adolf Hitler.

Worked out well for old Adolf as well didn't it?

Dee Coy wrote:

Walt wrote:

Officers have investigated more than 60 persons of interest. A total of 650 sex offenders have also been considered as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world.

Try as they might they just can't find a patsy,they were and still are investigating an abduction as per the original remit,its there in black and white.

I think so too, Walt. It's beyond comprehension, though, that they don't know really where they should be looking. So what's been the point of it all?

They have had to make the case watertight so the couple who are more slippery than a box of eels cannot get off. That means tying up every loose end however tenuous.

Tannerman was the perfect patsy but the met blew him out of the water on live tv - and the Mcs were forced to sit and watch. The met haven't helped the McCanns at all, the comments on any news article will tell you that. So I don't believe in a whitewash anymore.

It couldn't be a whitewash.
Imagine 29 weathered HOMOCIDE detectives whitewashing for all that's there to see for "citizens" ...

Châtelaine wrote:It couldn't be a whitewash.
Imagine 29 weathered HOMOCIDE detectives whitewashing for all that's there to see for "citizens" ...

My thoughts too Chatelaine.

If it was a white wash they would have had a much smaller team for a much shorter period. Also thinking of the number of officers involved do people seriously think NO ONE would have let something slip over the years ? Gossip is the backbone of a bobbies life some where something would have leaked ( and been repeated)

Bampots wrote:Well worth bringing this over!
http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk
MET PRESS RELEASE - MADELEINE McCANN - ONE INTERPRETATION

I agree, a great interpretation and one that gives me more hope, too.

Ah, Cristobell - you've pushed me back onto that pendulum again!

Cristobell's latest blog is so spot on with her interpretation. Cheers girl, my optimism has gone up another notch.

margaret wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:

Walt wrote:

Officers have investigated more than 60 persons of interest. A total of 650 sex offenders have also been considered as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world.

Try as they might they just can't find a patsy,they were and still are investigating an abduction as per the original remit,its there in black and white.

I think so too, Walt. It's beyond comprehension, though, that they don't know really where they should be looking. So what's been the point of it all?

They have had to make the case watertight so the couple who are more slippery than a box of eels cannot get off.  That means tying up every loose end however tenuous.

Tannerman was the perfect patsy but the met blew him out of the water on live tv - and the Mcs were forced to sit and watch. The met haven't helped the McCanns at all, the comments on any news article will tell you that. So I don't believe in a whitewash anymore.

I don't believe its a whitewash,what I believe is that OG are bona fide but have been investigating an abduction.

But the evidence couldn't have led them to conclude an abduction anymore, and they now say disappeared.

margaret wrote:But the evidence couldn't have led them to conclude an abduction anymore, and they now say disappeared.

Quite.

Detectives aren't stupid, though it amazes me how many people seem to think they are.

Why would they have dug up the ground in several places if they had been investigating an abduction? DUH.

They have in a sense been investigating an "alleged" abduction - in other words, investigating all the people who some have CLAIMED could have "abducted" Madeleine.

They had to do that in order to pre-empt cries that they hadn't investigated thoroughly enough and that x or y COULD HAVE abducted Madeleine.

Very important if the case comes to court to ensure that there is no other possible explanation for the disappearance than what the prosecution is saying happened, because otherwise doubt could be put into a jury's mind (if it's tried by a jury) by the defence counsel.

Fingers crossed.

margaret wrote:But the evidence couldn't have led them to conclude an abduction anymore, and they now say disappeared.

That is their get out,its why its a smaller team,over to you PJ we're done with our remit.
One thing is certain there are no imminent arrest of the t7,four officers wont go into 7.

nobodythereeither wrote:

margaret wrote:But the evidence couldn't have led them to conclude an abduction anymore, and they now say disappeared.

Quite.

Detectives aren't stupid, though it amazes me how many people seem to think they are.

Why would they have dug up the ground in several places if they had been investigating an abduction? DUH.

Why would Amaral believe its was for show,remember the writing on the wall at the time.

Walt wrote:

nobodythereeither wrote:

margaret wrote:But the evidence couldn't have led them to conclude an abduction anymore, and they now say disappeared.

Quite.

Detectives aren't stupid, though it amazes me how many people seem to think they are.

Why would they have dug up the ground in several places if they had been investigating an abduction? DUH.

Why would Amaral believe its was for show,remember the writing on the wall at the time.

I don't suppose that the investigative team are phoning Sr Amaral every night to update him on what they are doing and why

Walt wrote:

margaret wrote:But the evidence couldn't have led them to conclude an abduction anymore, and they now say disappeared.

That is their get out,its why its a smaller team,over to you PJ we're done with our remit.
One thing is certain there are no imminent arrest of the t7,four officers wont go into 7.

Of course there is no imminent arrest, the investigation hasn't finished yet, and in any case the case is led by the Portuguese police.

Walt, you seem to be very negative about these latest developments. I can't help wondering why on earth you think SY would have spent all this time and money and energy to work towards a "get out"?

I have just read this which doesn't fill me with confidence if true. Please remove admin if not allowed.

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12107p20-update-from-met#326033

Mo wrote:I have just read this which doesn't fill me with confidence if true.  Please remove admin if not allowed.

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12107p20-update-from-met#326033

The investigation isn't finished. Nobody has been charged. What do you expect them to say? They have obviously got to be very careful or they could upset the whole apple cart.

Apparently the McCanns' former media advisor was on the programme!

I understand it is an ongoing investigation but It was this section that disturbed me.

This is a phone in:

Sarah - You inspired me to call when you said to that gentleman what did the Police do all day that's a really good question because I know from what I found out they do for myself the remit was set by the McCanns so all the terms of reference of what the Police were allowed to investigate were set by them and they also enjoy peer status of the Met Police themselves which means they are able to access the Police files as the case progresses and I think that is really limited what the Police have been allowed to do, they have not been allowed for instance to re-interview the McCanns as either witnesses or dare I say it suspects, they have not been allowed to do a reconstruction in situ so they could examine the time line and when people left the table to do checks on the children or whatever and I just think for that reason it's been very very limited when they have been allowed to only investigate an abduction theory its kind of fallen down from the beginning in my opinion.

Mo wrote:I understand it is an ongoing investigation but It was this section that disturbed me.

This is a phone in:

Sarah -  You inspired me to call when you said to that gentleman what did the Police do all day that's a really good question because I know from what I found out they do for myself the remit was set by the McCanns so all the terms of reference of what the Police were allowed to investigate were set by them and they also enjoy peer status of the Met Police themselves which means they are able to access the Police files as the case progresses and I think that is really limited what the Police have been allowed to do, they have not been allowed for instance to re-interview the McCanns as either witnesses or dare I say it suspects, they have not been allowed to do a reconstruction in situ so they could examine the time line and when people left the table to do checks on the children or whatever and I just think for that reason it's been very very limited when they have been allowed to only investigate an abduction theory its kind of fallen down from the beginning in my opinion.

Unless she has inside knowledge, which I doubt, Sarah has absolutely no idea what the Met have and have not done, or who they have interviewed.

Clearly the Met have not "been allowed to only investigate an abduction theory", or they would not have bothered digging in several places in Portugal, would they?

It amazes me how people claim to know exactly what the police are doing  !!!

ETA: And they don't need to do a physical reconstruction, they can do a computer simulation from witness statements etc.

Of course they've bloody looked at the time line! They said in their statement that they now had a good idea of what happened the night that Madeleine disappeared, or words to that effect. How do you think they got that? Made something up? God give me strength.

Apologies for language, but I just despair sometimes.

If you're looking in Sarah, please come and tell us how you know all this!

Freedom wrote:If you're looking in Sarah, please come and tell us how you know all this!

Yes! Exactly!

nobodythereeither wrote:

Walt wrote:

margaret wrote:But the evidence couldn't have led them to conclude an abduction anymore, and they now say disappeared.

That is their get out,its why its a smaller team,over to you PJ we're done with our remit.
One thing is certain there are no imminent arrest of the t7,four officers wont go into 7.

Of course there is no imminent arrest, the investigation hasn't finished yet, and in any case the case is led by the Portuguese police.

Walt, you seem to be very negative about these latest developments. I can't help wondering why on earth you think SY would have spent all this time and money and energy to work towards a "get out"?

I've said I think they were investigating an abduction as per their remit,they cannot go any further,they need a get out now,over to you PJ.

A couple of points/questions I'd like to raise/make.

GA made (harsh) comments about the OG dig in Luz in 2014. Nothing much since. Has GA had contact and/or reassurances from the PJ that all this is legit since the dig?

GA's Gofundme closes the day of? this OG press release. Coincidence?

One of the biggest issues I have with those that are saying this is obvious proof that this has been a whitewash is that GA, one of the only outspoken people involved in this case, is saying nothing.

The bloke has literally nothing to lose by calling OG out if what we're seeing is a whitewash. Is it really believable GA would just sit back and say nothing after all he's been through?

nobodythereeither wrote:
Walt, you seem to be very negative about these latest developments.

Clarence Mitchell told us,"Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view that some one got into the apartment and took Madeleine out of the window as their means of escape" can you point to any thing that leads you to believe that OG have been investigating any thing other than this.

Officers have investigated more than 60 persons of interest. A total of 650 sex offenders have also been considered,

why would OG be investigating this lot if they didn't believe an abduction took place.Why the need to eliminate them if they didn't think they could be involved in some way.