Police jurisdiction in the U K and Portugal

Walt wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

Should also add, lets not forget that officers from the British CPS flew out for a meeting with the Portuguese Attorney General a couple of years ago.  That's pretty significant.  I doubt they were discussing the prosecution of Portuguese citizens.

Crown prosecution can only prosecute in this country,why was she out there? interfering?

Heavies from the UK have pushed, prodded, bullied, intimidated and tried everything to meddle in the Portuguese investigation from the get go, whilst at the same time refusing to supply them with the most basic information necessary to move the investigation forward and solve the crime.   Blatant hypocrisy and evidence of a dodgy agenda (imho).    

My money's on CPS interference!

I highly doubt it, they have zero jurisdiction in Portugal, also I would imagine that if the UK wanted the case closed down, they would hardly have opened their own investigation.

I always remember the anniversary picture that year, it was the first time I have ever seen Gerry looking totally distraught, then of course we found out that the CPS had been in Portugal the month before, which tells me that something was worrying him imo

pennylane wrote: Heavies from the UK have pushed, prodded, bullied, intimidated and tried everything to meddle in the Portuguese investigation from the get go, whilst at the same time refusing to supply them with the most basic information necessary to move the investigation forward and solve the crime.   Blatant hypocrisy and evidence of a dodgy agenda (imho).    

My money's on CPS interference!

Me too pennylane, I have read tweets from N.M@Adiren  in the Algarve more or less stating similar to what you have posted.

Interesting, thank you costello x

susible wrote:I highly doubt it, they have zero jurisdiction in Portugal, also I would imagine that if the UK wanted the case closed down, they would hardly have opened their own investigation.

I always remember the anniversary picture that year, it was the first time I have ever seen Gerry looking totally distraught, then of course we found out that the CPS had been in Portugal the month before, which tells me that something was worrying him imo

I think their devastation on the anniversary picture is down to them finally allowing raw emotion through. In the past they didn't dare (imo).

My question about the CPS going over there to interfere is why haven't Portugal complained loudly if that was the case? (please don't mention secrecy laws!) Plus it is public record AS/CPS went over there and I don't think if they were there to bully Portugal they would do it so obviously.

Reason I think it is above board is that they did go over there physically and in a overt way. They could easily have done it via video chat. Making a statement I think.

Well I for one have been longing for Portugal to put the UK firmly in their place. It's been frustrating watching the Brits ride roughshod over them so blatantly (imo).  

Still I think their quiet dignity is to be commended in some ways, and perhaps they weren't playing ball at all behind the scenes!

I agree about that and if I'm right with what I say it could be argued that the CPS going over there physically is step 1 in showing good faith to Portugal.

Also having the benefit of showing those responsible for disappearing Madeleine that this isn't over.

I would love that to be so TTWO.  However, the Home Office intentionally scuppered the investigation in its infancy by not turning over basic information on the McCanns, and Stuart Prior went from saying they've arrested people for less, to suddenly pushing forward the abduction theory and suspiciously digging around for information (as told by Goncalo Amaral), and let's not forget the Birmingham FSS mighty U-turn! And what of Clarence Mitchell, Head of MMU, working for the gruesomes 24/7.  I could go on and on, the list is endless of UK government interference and assistance in getting them off the hook.  (imho)

I know all that pennylane. Given all that Portugal have had to deal with in your list do you think they would go for round two including entertaining the CPS at the AG's office?

Frankly if you are right about this then I personally would equally blame Portugal as the UK for this on-going mess. That is how strongly I feel about this.

We don't know if Portugal is playing ball do we?  

It still seems to me that the UK is pulling out all the stops to control things that have nothing to do with them! We shouldn't even know that CPS went over to Portugal if (as some believe) this is about investigating the mccanns.  To me it still seems like the same old same old from the UK.   I hope I'm wrong, but I just can't get my head around their dubious role.  Time will tell I guess.

jmho

Posts transferred here from the Mark Souster topic.

Freedom wrote:Posts transferred here from the Mark Souster topic.

Thank you Freedom xxx

Taken from the CPS website.

The Crown Prosecution Service is responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales.

pennylane wrote:We don't know if Portugal is playing ball do we?  

It still seems to me that the UK is pulling out all the stops to control things that have nothing to do with them! We shouldn't even know that CPS went over to Portugal if (as some believe) this is about investigating the mccanns.  To me it still seems like the same old same old from the UK.   I hope I'm wrong, but I just can't get my head around their dubious role.  Time will tell I guess.

jmho

We do in so far as the CPS crew were allowed to meet with the AG. If the UK were bullying and interfering do you think that meeting would have been entertained?

Do you not think that Portugal would or should have called them out publicly if they were trying to do another number on them?

This issue goes beyond any secrecy laws. For me all that we have (and have not) seen between the two countries law enforcement over the last 2-3 years tells me it must be a legit cooperative effort.

I'm sure Portugal were very skeptical to begin with and made sure they had cast iron guarantees this wasn't another stitch up. It is fair to say they'll never be best buddies but professionally they seem to be getting on with it albeit slowly.    

Anything else will paint both sides as bad guys wasting a lot of time and taxpayers money in both countries.

*Sorry mods for taking the other thread off-topic!*

Actually yes I do think that meeting would be entertained if the CPS wished to meet with AG, whether Portugal trusted their motives or not!   Every move Operation Grange makes is shouted from the rooftops.  'An official letter has been sent to Portugal requesting such and such.'  'Operation Grange still waiting for a reply,' CPS to visit, etc etc. A dubious way to conduct an investigation (imo).   Always another stick to beat the Portuguese with, and show how the Brits are on top of their game, and the Portuguese are lagging or disinterested. That's how it looks from where I'm sitting anyway.

They were never given the forensics, were they? I heard they asked, but refused as it wasn't allowed?

I think that is just a difference in how the police deal with the media here, pennylane. Of course the media put their spin/slant on how they report it.

I hope you're wrong about the AG agreeing to the meeting knowing it was a farce and just more bullying. Like I said that would paint the Portuguese just as bad for me.

TheTruthWillOut wrote:I think that is just a difference in how the police deal with the media here, pennylane. Of course the media put their spin/slant on how they report it.

I hope you're wrong about the AG agreeing to the meeting knowing it was a farce and just more bullying. Like I said that would paint the Portuguese just as bad for me.



 

Not sure on that,I think the PJ have SY by the short and curly's,I take Amaral's words,the digs were a show off,the PJ have let SY have their head and its got them no where,it seems to me at least that SY aren't following any thing the PJ did.
How can a foreign police force if not based in the actual country of where the crime was committed really be on top of it.
One thing's for certain they are not in any hurry,so no live person search.

dogs don't lie wrote:They were never given the forensics, were they? I heard they asked, but refused as it wasn't allowed?

My take on it,posted on another thread.

Walt wrote:
The only thing lacking is evidence,or that should be concrete evidence,it wasn't there in 2007 why should it be there now?

SY to the Pj,we want to look at the forensics again.
PJ to SY we want who ever is being protected.
SY no
PJ F off then.
Never the twain shall meet.

There seems to be a popular misconception that the reach of the British police extends far beyond our shores. As one person put it to me recently on Twitter, irrespective of what happened to Madeleine, the Met could investigate because “it would be classed as a crime against a British person by another British person”. Nothing could be further from the truth.

To paraphrase the CPS website: Generally, an offence will only be triable in the country in which the offence takes place, unless there is a specific provision to try it in the UK. The full list of offences committed abroad that are triable (i.e. can be prosecuted) in the UK are at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmquad/419/41920.htm (I'll post the list below for those that don't like following links)

I think most people will be quite shocked at some of the things that are missing from that list. Things, for example, like rape and attempted murder. To be absolutely clear about it, if you as a British citizen are raped by another British citizen while on holiday in Spain, the rapist could only be prosecuted in Spain NOT the UK.

Of greater significance, is that also missing from the list are the offences that are most often ascribed to madeleine’s disappearance; Abduction, neglect, failure to report a death, unlawful disposal of a body. The significance of this is, of course, that it constrains what Grange can investigate.

Grange themselves seem to have accepted this with their original remit, which was to assist the Portuguese by reviewing the evidence as if  the abduction as if it had occurred in the UK. Clearly, if they were investigating an abduction – and I believe that’s all they were interested at the time – then they could do no more than help the PJ, because abduction isn’t on the list and cannot therefore be prosecuted in the UK.

But then Grange was upgraded to a full-blown investigation with the Met taking the lead and sending rogatory letters to the PJ. The intriguing question is what did they find in the files that caused the change of tack? Perhaps more importantly, what offence are they investigating? Whatever it is, it *must* be one from the list and from this point on can no longer be them just investigating the circumstances of Madeleine’s disappearance

This all supposes that Grange is a genuine investigation. The possibility remains that it has entirely different, probably political, purposes altogether, but I’d be interested to know from people that believe Grange to be genuine, which of the crimes on the list do they think Grange are investigating?

Offences committed abroad that can be prosecuted in the UK

i. Sexual offences committed against children and young people under the age of 16 (Sexual Offences (Conspiracy and Incitement) Act 1996 and Sexual Offences Act 2003 s.72 and Schedule 2);

ii. Trafficking for sexual exploitation under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, ss.57-60;

iii. Offences of dishonesty and blackmail where property is despatched from, or received at, a place in England and Wales; or where there is a communication of information etc. sent by any means from a place in England and Wales to a place elsewhere, or from a place elsewhere to a place in England and Wales (Criminal Justice Act 1993 ss.1-6);

iv. Offences connected with aircraft (Civil Aviation Act 1982 s.92);

v. Homicide (Offences Against the Person Act 1861 s.9-10);

vi. Offences in connection with taxation etc. within the European Community (Criminal Justice Act 1993, s.71);

vii. Offences by servants of the Crown (Criminal Justice Act 1948 s.31(1);

viii. Offences in connection with the slave trade (Slave Trade Act 1873);

ix. Offences under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (Merchant Shipping Act 1995 ss.279-281) offences committed by British seamen (Merchant Shipping Act 1995 s.282) and offences in the Admiralty jurisdiction;

x. Offences on offshore installations (Petroleum Act 1998 s.10);

xi. Bribery and corruption committed outside the UK (Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, s.109)

xii. Torture (Criminal Justice Act 1988, ss.134-135);

xiii. International Criminal Offences (International Criminal Court Act 2001);

xiv. Offences against the Geneva Convention (Geneva Convention Act 1957);

xv. Explosives offences (Explosive Substances Act 1883 ss.2-3);

xvi. Treason

xvii. Offences under the Terrorism Act 2000:

xviii. Offences under the Terrorism Act 2006:

xix. Offences against United Nations personnel (United Nations Personnel Act 1997)

xx. Offences against the safety of Channel Tunnel trains and the tunnel system (Channel Tunnel (Security) Order 1994 [S.I.1994/570])

xxi. Offences against the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870

xxii. Offences against the Official Secrets Acts 1920 and 1989

xxiii. Fraudulent evasion of duty etc. (Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 s.170(2) (b))

xxiv. Bigamy (Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.57)

xxv. Offences covered by the War Crimes Act 1991

xxvi. Offences involving the supply or delivery of restricted goods without a licence from the Secretary of State (Trade in Goods (Control) Order 2003 SI 2003/2765)

xxvii. Corporate manslaughter (Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007, s28)

xxviii. Trafficking or labour and other exploitation under the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004, s.4; and

xxix. Hijacking or endangering the safety of aircraft under the Aviation Security Act 1982, ss 1-3.

Long time no visit AndyB?

There is already a thread started way back in 2015 on this very subject......


https://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/t1020-police-jurisdiction-in-u-k-and-portugal

I will merge the two in a while.

Yeah - nowt was happening so i took a sabbatical. Still nowt happening but this was prompted by a discussion on twitter. I wanted to reply in the vain above but it kind of breaks twitter's character limit a bit. Thought if I posted something here I could link to it

AndyB wrote:
This all supposes that Grange is a genuine investigation. The possibility remains that it has entirely different, probably political, purposes altogether, but I’d be interested to know from people that believe Grange to be genuine, which of the crimes on the list do they think Grange are investigating?

I've long said that Op Grange is genuine is so much as investigation an abduction,their problem now lies with not being able to find evidence of such,where now for them? whats their get out.