£11 Million spent - time to end?

Andrew wrote:ITV are reporting it now. Although more or less word for word as the others.

http://www.itv.com/news/central/2015-09-17/madeleine-mccann-investigation-has-cost-more-than-10-million/

Snipped:
"The level of funding provided to the Metropolitan Police in relation to this investigation is reviewed regularly and will continue to be monitored."


So OG are answerable to the Home Office on a regular basis. Surely they wouldn't regularly be saying we haven't found anything yet - no leads etc.

Was this recent then do you know, Mo.

Has she just posted that comment somewhere then...

Andrew wrote:Was this recent then do you know, Mo.

Has she just posted that comment somewhere then...

Yesterday at 22:33pm -sorry I can't copy over this info as I'm working on my iPad which is useless at times!

Thanks Mo.

Interesting stuff then.

Just wondering, although this is a Portuguese case with the assistance of OG, can OG make arrests in this Country relating to this case does anybody know?

Mo wrote:Just wondering, although this is a Portuguese case with the assistance of OG, can OG make arrests in this Country relating to this case does anybody know?

I don't know on the disappearance of Madeleine but if the "Fund" was registered in the UK then it would be dealt with by UK investigators I would have thought and anyone arrested here who was involved with operating the "Fund" and as to where all the money went, that's if it's under investigation of course.

If any money was paid to Medoto 3 and others in Portugal out of the "Fund" I expect OG would have to look into that with cooperation from the PJ.

I'm only guessing though, someone with legal experience may know more exactly.

I'm not sure about the 'funds' they seem to be upfront telling the world that they are moving money into a special account. Nobody has questioned them about it so I am assuming everything is above board although it doesn't seem that way to us.

Mo wrote:I'm not sure about the 'funds' they seem to be upfront telling the world that they are moving money into a special account.  Nobody has questioned them about it so I am assuming everything is above board although it doesn't seem that way to us.

I doubt anyone would mention it if it is known by certain people what OG are looking in to (I don't mean the McCanns), I'm sure the press know a lot but aren't allowed to print anything they know. The press may have been asked to keep a lid on everything, as they have been asked to in the past when the police have been looking into certain crimes and didn't want the details to come out until they were ready.

It's all opinion really, but hopefully one day it will all be clear.

The fund itself I should imagine is operating legally. Within the bounds of reasonable accounting.

They will have good accountants on board who will make sure they don't get unstuck with any transfer of monies etc, and will exercise all known and hidden loopholes (legally) to be able to do that.

However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

Complex and that's where the bulk of the money is being spent on.

Imo etc.

Just to add the bbc who felt left out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34278538

Andrew wrote:The fund itself I should imagine is operating legally. Within the bounds of reasonable accounting.

They will have good accountants on board who will make sure they don't get unstuck with any transfer of monies etc, and will exercise all known and hidden loopholes (legally) to be able to do that.

However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying  to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

Complex and that's where the bulk of the money is being spent on.

Imo etc.

That's what I meant, but you put it in a much better form than I could. I'm not very good at expressing myself.

Andrew wrote:However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

And therein lies the problem. If all the other directors/shareholders are entirely innocent and have been duped just like the rest of general public, then the fund isn't fraudulent at all.

I find it very difficult to believe that the Met would spend so much time and money trying to prove that the fund is fraudulent until such a time as it has been established that the Mcs were actually involved in Madeleine's disappearance. That they would spend such vast sums attempting to prove the Mc's involvement when they have no jurisdiction is, to coin a phrase, ludicrous. Surely they'd just wait until the Portuguese finished their investigation? To do otherwise requires them to start from the assumption that the Mc's are guilty and I don't believe they have any such assumption.

candyfloss wrote:@5haronl they will spend endless money on this #McCann case to ensure the truth is never known. Why is that UK Government?


The tweet above appeared on McCann hashtag 2 hours ago in reply to a tweet giving link to the 'expensive charade continueth' thread elsewhere.

So according to the title of that thread Operation Grange is a charade, therefore my first question is............  err, how do you know this, do you know what Op Grange are doing, the answer is of course you don't.  I also ask the question, why would any Government spend 'endless money' to ensure the truth is never known.............. what are they doing all these years to ensure that? Why open up the case after the 'review' stage.  Why spend millions when they could have just closed down the investigation years ago, and said they have done all they could and the trail was now cold.  Even whitewashing it now would not have the desired effect as people would still have the files and their opinion so things would not change.  This is the beauty of this case the files are out there for all to see, they know this, and I believe are working with the PJ to bring the people responsible to justice.

Governments spend endless millions of our money on covering up many things to ensure that we never find out the truth about what they've been up to. (Such as raping children). We only get to find out about the very tip of the iceberg. Don't forget that the truth of what happened to Madeleine was effectively buried years ago. The only thing that has caused what I believe to be an attempt at putting the genie back in the bottle is that the Portuguese did something that no-one had even considered when the investigation over there was shelved: They published the majority of the case files. It is that and that alone that has caused Grange. Had the Portuguese not published the files, none of us would be here now and the name Madeleine McCann would be long forgotten. We all know that the full might of the British state was brought to bear in what has all the hallmarks of a major diplomatic incident. We don't know why but it is my belief that, whatever the reason, TPTB are trying very hard, in the form of Operation Grange, to make sure we don't find out.

AndyB wrote:

candyfloss wrote:@5haronl they will spend endless money on this #McCann case to ensure the truth is never known. Why is that UK Government?


The tweet above appeared on McCann hashtag 2 hours ago in reply to a tweet giving link to the 'expensive charade continueth' thread elsewhere.

So according to the title of that thread Operation Grange is a charade, therefore my first question is............  err, how do you know this, do you know what Op Grange are doing, the answer is of course you don't.  I also ask the question, why would any Government spend 'endless money' to ensure the truth is never known.............. what are they doing all these years to ensure that? Why open up the case after the 'review' stage.  Why spend millions when they could have just closed down the investigation years ago, and said they have done all they could and the trail was now cold.  Even whitewashing it now would not have the desired effect as people would still have the files and their opinion so things would not change.  This is the beauty of this case the files are out there for all to see, they know this, and I believe are working with the PJ to bring the people responsible to justice.

Governments spend endless millions of our money on covering up many things to ensure that we never find out the truth about what they've been up to. (Such as raping children). We only get to find out about the very tip of the iceberg. Don't forget that the truth of what happened to Madeleine was effectively buried years ago. The only thing that has caused what I believe to be an attempt at putting the genie back in the bottle is that the Portuguese did something that no-one had even considered when the investigation over there was shelved: They published the majority of the case files. It is that and that alone that has caused Grange. Had the Portuguese not published the files, none of us would be here now and the name Madeleine McCann would be long forgotten. We all know that the full might of the British state was brought to bear in what has all the hallmarks of a major diplomatic incident. We don't know why but it is my belief that, whatever the reason, TPTB are trying very hard, in the form of Operation Grange, to make sure we don't find out.

There you have it the words in bold, we never know what they are up to.........

If this was to be covered up we would never have known about it anyway, or it would have been done right at the start.  To wait 4 years after they came out to start a cover up, is that what you are saying?  Sorry, I don't buy it.

And if it is a cover up why the frantic activities recently,spamming,newspaer articles,calls for OG to end....they didn't seem like the Zen like actions of the unworried.....even Clarence came back! What for ,old times sake?
All still to be played for....they would like to bury it!!!!

Exactly, OG was set up to help with the PJ investigation.... let them work away.

AndyB wrote:

Andrew wrote:However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

And therein lies the problem. If all the other directors/shareholders are entirely innocent and have been duped just like the rest of general public, then the fund isn't fraudulent at all.

I find it very difficult to believe that the Met would spend so much time and money trying to prove that the fund is fraudulent until such a time as it has been established that the Mcs were actually involved in Madeleine's disappearance. That they would spend such vast sums attempting to prove the Mc's involvement when they have no jurisdiction is, to coin a phrase, ludicrous. Surely they'd just wait until the Portuguese finished their investigation? To do otherwise requires them to start from the assumption that the Mc's are guilty and I don't believe they have any such assumption.

So people put their names to a "Fund/Limited Co" as directors started by parents who say their child has been "abducted", and have been made arguidos by the PJ, and the people helping with the Fund just blindly help out without any qualms or think "hmmm this may not be right, perhaps I shouldn't get involved" but don't bother to do any research into their statements or anything else and believe every word the parents say.

I don't think it's rocket science and most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.  What would the directors get out of it anyway, only a load of trouble and no gold stars against their reputations in the future.

Wasn't GM's boss a director at one time but he pulled out?

ETA: My elderly aunt was approached by her son a few years ago who wanted to go into business with a friend, her son asked if his friend could put £20,000 into her bank account for "safe keeping", she may be in her 80s but she's as sharp as a needle and told her son and his friend "to do one", and how dare he treat her as if she's an imbecile.

candyfloss wrote:

AndyB wrote:

candyfloss wrote:@5haronl they will spend endless money on this #McCann case to ensure the truth is never known. Why is that UK Government?


The tweet above appeared on McCann hashtag 2 hours ago in reply to a tweet giving link to the 'expensive charade continueth' thread elsewhere.

So according to the title of that thread Operation Grange is a charade, therefore my first question is............  err, how do you know this, do you know what Op Grange are doing, the answer is of course you don't.  I also ask the question, why would any Government spend 'endless money' to ensure the truth is never known.............. what are they doing all these years to ensure that? Why open up the case after the 'review' stage.  Why spend millions when they could have just closed down the investigation years ago, and said they have done all they could and the trail was now cold.  Even whitewashing it now would not have the desired effect as people would still have the files and their opinion so things would not change.  This is the beauty of this case the files are out there for all to see, they know this, and I believe are working with the PJ to bring the people responsible to justice.

Governments spend endless millions of our money on covering up many things to ensure that we never find out the truth about what they've been up to. (Such as raping children). We only get to find out about the very tip of the iceberg. Don't forget that the truth of what happened to Madeleine was effectively buried years ago. The only thing that has caused what I believe to be an attempt at putting the genie back in the bottle is that the Portuguese did something that no-one had even considered when the investigation over there was shelved: They published the majority of the case files. It is that and that alone that has caused Grange. Had the Portuguese not published the files, none of us would be here now and the name Madeleine McCann would be long forgotten. We all know that the full might of the British state was brought to bear in what has all the hallmarks of a major diplomatic incident. We don't know why but it is my belief that, whatever the reason, TPTB are trying very hard, in the form of Operation Grange, to make sure we don't find out.

There you have it the words in bold, we never know what they are up to.........

If this was to be covered up we would never have known about it anyway, or it would have been done right at the start.  To wait 4 years after they came out to start a cover up, is that what you are saying?  Sorry, I don't buy it.

I agree that your thesis is equally valid, and sometimes I come to the same conclusion. However....
We know that the police are corrupt and will willingly conspire to pervert the course of justice if the criminal is a member of the establishment up to and perhaps including the rape and murder of children.

We know that the state was involved very very quickly, even while a missing child could still be found alive and that the state's involvement involved breaking all sorts of protocols such as interrupting the Portuguese ambassador at dinner, not informing the Portuguese of the presence of British Police in Portugal and failing to pass on evidence to Portugal.

Given the two facts above, irrespective of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, which is almost incidental, to believe that Grange is an honest investigation that will allow misbehaviour (at least) by the British state to come to light is a leap of faith that I find very difficult

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Andrew wrote:However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

And therein lies the problem. If all the other directors/shareholders are entirely innocent and have been duped just like the rest of general public, then the fund isn't fraudulent at all.

I find it very difficult to believe that the Met would spend so much time and money trying to prove that the fund is fraudulent until such a time as it has been established that the Mcs were actually involved in Madeleine's disappearance. That they would spend such vast sums attempting to prove the Mc's involvement when they have no jurisdiction is, to coin a phrase, ludicrous. Surely they'd just wait until the Portuguese finished their investigation? To do otherwise requires them to start from the assumption that the Mc's are guilty and I don't believe they have any such assumption.

So people put their names to a "Fund/Limited Co" as directors started by parents who say their child has been "abducted", and have been made arguidos by the PJ, and the people helping with the Fund just blindly help out without any qualms or think "hmmm this may not be right, perhaps I shouldn't get involved" but don't bother to do any research into their statements or anything else and believe every word the parents say.

I don't think it's rocket science and most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.  What would the directors get out of it anyway, only a load of trouble and no gold stars against their reputations in the future.

You say that most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole yet literally millions gave money to it. I'm not saying that they are definitely innocent but highlighting the difficulty in proving that they're not. I'm suggesting that the burden of that proof is too high for Grange to spend millions on in the absence of definite proof of the parents involvement of Madeleine's demise

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Andrew wrote:However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

And therein lies the problem. If all the other directors/shareholders are entirely innocent and have been duped just like the rest of general public, then the fund isn't fraudulent at all.

I find it very difficult to believe that the Met would spend so much time and money trying to prove that the fund is fraudulent until such a time as it has been established that the Mcs were actually involved in Madeleine's disappearance. That they would spend such vast sums attempting to prove the Mc's involvement when they have no jurisdiction is, to coin a phrase, ludicrous. Surely they'd just wait until the Portuguese finished their investigation? To do otherwise requires them to start from the assumption that the Mc's are guilty and I don't believe they have any such assumption.

So people put their names to a "Fund/Limited Co" as directors started by parents who say their child has been "abducted", and have been made arguidos by the PJ, and the people helping with the Fund just blindly help out without any qualms or think "hmmm this may not be right, perhaps I shouldn't get involved" but don't bother to do any research into their statements or anything else and believe every word the parents say.

I don't think it's rocket science and most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.  What would the directors get out of it anyway, only a load of trouble and no gold stars against their reputations in the future.

You say that most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole yet literally millions gave money to it. I'm not saying that they are definitely innocent but highlighting the difficulty in proving that they're not. I'm suggesting that the burden of that proof is too high for Grange to spend millions on in the absence of definite proof of the parents involvement of Madeleine's demise

Many people most probably gave in small amounts £10, £20, £50, before the McCanns were made arguidos and they haven't been told the full story by the Press, but people being made directors of a "Fund/Limited Co" and don't ask questions is a very different thing.

Would you accept being a director of a company/Fund started by people who were under the suspicion of police and you don't ask questions, you just take their word for it and go along with whatever they tell you without looking further into the details of what you're getting in to.

The ambassador would have to be involved pretty quickly, a child was missing in a foreign country, the media had been notified, therefore it seems perfectly feasible that the ambassador would be informed immediately, he would no doubt have the press etc. on his doorstep, he needed to be kept up to speed, with the press being notified so very early on. All perfectly normal to me.

It is something I do not recall about the British police not informing the Portuguese police?? Do you have a link for that please. I may have read it a long time ago and perhaps forgotten. (Are you meaning CRG? that the McCann's called in? ) Sorry memory is not so good these days

As for the evidence not being passed on, (do you mean the Gaspar statement) yes they were slow on that it seems, but it was passed on, but I expect there was a lot of work and enquiries to make around that.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Andrew wrote:However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

And therein lies the problem. If all the other directors/shareholders are entirely innocent and have been duped just like the rest of general public, then the fund isn't fraudulent at all.

I find it very difficult to believe that the Met would spend so much time and money trying to prove that the fund is fraudulent until such a time as it has been established that the Mcs were actually involved in Madeleine's disappearance. That they would spend such vast sums attempting to prove the Mc's involvement when they have no jurisdiction is, to coin a phrase, ludicrous. Surely they'd just wait until the Portuguese finished their investigation? To do otherwise requires them to start from the assumption that the Mc's are guilty and I don't believe they have any such assumption.

So people put their names to a "Fund/Limited Co" as directors started by parents who say their child has been "abducted", and have been made arguidos by the PJ, and the people helping with the Fund just blindly help out without any qualms or think "hmmm this may not be right, perhaps I shouldn't get involved" but don't bother to do any research into their statements or anything else and believe every word the parents say.

I don't think it's rocket science and most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.  What would the directors get out of it anyway, only a load of trouble and no gold stars against their reputations in the future.

You say that most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole yet literally millions gave money to it. I'm not saying that they are definitely innocent but highlighting the difficulty in proving that they're not. I'm suggesting that the burden of that proof is too high for Grange to spend millions on in the absence of definite proof of the parents involvement of Madeleine's demise

Many people most probably gave in small amounts £10, £20, £50, before the McCanns were made arguidos and they haven't been told the full story by the Press, but people being made directors of a "Fund/Limited Co" and don't ask questions is a very different thing.

Would you accept being a director of a company/Fund started by people who were under the suspicion of police and you don't ask questions, you just take their word for it and go along with whatever they tell you without looking further into the details of what you're getting in to.

I don't know if any of us know how we'd react if we were in that situation. If it was (say) my sister and her child had gone missing I'd want to do anything I could to help and if that included being a director/shareholder in a limited company then sobeit.

I think we're rather drifting from the point though, which was my suggestion that Grange aren't investigating the fund because proving fraud would require proof of foreknowledge by the various share holders and directors. IMO that's almost impossible to prove if they say they were innocently duped, which they would only need to say if its proven that Madeleine died and her parent's hid her body. As things stand they can just say that the fund is what it purports to be - a means to help the search for Madeleine

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Andrew wrote:However if it can be proved that the Mc's were involved in the death and cover up of poor Madeleine, then of course the fund is now fraudulent and has been since its incorporation date.

Then it would be trying to prove that everyone ever associated with said fund knew this was the case. (conspiracy)

And therein lies the problem. If all the other directors/shareholders are entirely innocent and have been duped just like the rest of general public, then the fund isn't fraudulent at all.

I find it very difficult to believe that the Met would spend so much time and money trying to prove that the fund is fraudulent until such a time as it has been established that the Mcs were actually involved in Madeleine's disappearance. That they would spend such vast sums attempting to prove the Mc's involvement when they have no jurisdiction is, to coin a phrase, ludicrous. Surely they'd just wait until the Portuguese finished their investigation? To do otherwise requires them to start from the assumption that the Mc's are guilty and I don't believe they have any such assumption.

So people put their names to a "Fund/Limited Co" as directors started by parents who say their child has been "abducted", and have been made arguidos by the PJ, and the people helping with the Fund just blindly help out without any qualms or think "hmmm this may not be right, perhaps I shouldn't get involved" but don't bother to do any research into their statements or anything else and believe every word the parents say.

I don't think it's rocket science and most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.  What would the directors get out of it anyway, only a load of trouble and no gold stars against their reputations in the future.

You say that most people wouldn't touch it with a barge pole yet literally millions gave money to it. I'm not saying that they are definitely innocent but highlighting the difficulty in proving that they're not. I'm suggesting that the burden of that proof is too high for Grange to spend millions on in the absence of definite proof of the parents involvement of Madeleine's demise

Many people most probably gave in small amounts £10, £20, £50, before the McCanns were made arguidos and they haven't been told the full story by the Press, but people being made directors of a "Fund/Limited Co" and don't ask questions is a very different thing.

Would you accept being a director of a company/Fund started by people who were under the suspicion of police and you don't ask questions, you just take their word for it and go along with whatever they tell you without looking further into the details of what you're getting in to.

I don't know if any of us know how we'd react if we were in that situation. If it was (say) my sister and her child had gone missing I'd want to do anything I could to help and if that included being a director/shareholder in a limited company then sobeit.

I think we're rather drifting from the point though, which was my suggestion that Grange aren't investigating the fund because proving fraud would require proof of foreknowledge by the various share holders and directors. IMO that's almost impossible to prove if they say they were innocently duped, which they would only need to say if its proven that Madeleine died and her parent's hid her body. As things stand they can just say that the fund is what it purports to be -  a means to help the search for Madeleine

Directors can resign at any time and say they made a mistake and should not have got involved as they didn't know the full facts at the time, I would think most people now have scrutinised the McCann case from top to bottom and inside out, especially those with their names down as directors of the Fund/Limited Co.

To most people with an ounce of common sense would say that the EVRD dogs put an end to searching for a live Madeleine and please don't start with all the BS about cadaver odour being rotting meat etc.

You don't know what OG are investigating, whether it's the Fund or anything else, we can all have our say without being shut up by other posters if it's a subject that seems to get certain people jumpy.

candyfloss wrote:The ambassador would have to be involved pretty quickly, a child was missing in a foreign country, the media had been notified, therefore it seems perfectly feasible that the ambassador would be informed immediately, he would no doubt have the press etc. on his doorstep, he needed to be kept up to speed, with the press being notified so very early on.  All perfectly normal to me.

It is something I do not recall about the British police not informing the Portuguese police??  Do you have a link for that please.  I may have read it a long time ago and perhaps forgotten. (Are you meaning CRG? that the McCann's called in? )  Sorry memory is not so good these days

As for the evidence not being passed on, (do you mean the Gaspar statement) yes they were slow on that it seems, but it was passed on, but I expect there was a lot of work and enquiries to make around that.  

Sorry but its very far from normal for an ambassador to get involved personally that early and out of hours, particularly when one of his first acts is to breach protocol not only to contact his counterpart directly but to interrupt him at dinner. If there needed to be any sort of consular help or press liaison, there are many much more junior staff there for precisely that purpose. There was absolutely no reason for the ambassador to get involved over a missing child that could be found at any time so that suggests to me that there was another reason for his involvement

I can't find a link to the Portuguese not being informed of a British police presence, but I seem to recall reading that when they first went over, it was several days before the Portuguese authorities were notified. It doesn't matter though, even without that my point is still valid: There is evidence of UK establishment initially massively over-reacting to a missing child in a way that it had never done before or since, then there is evidence of the UK establishment's tardiness when the Portuguese were investigating. Is this not exactly what you'd expect if there was some sort of nefarious activity going on that TPTB wished to keep hidden? I think it is.

As for the forgiving way in which you see the failure to hand over the Gasper statements: Its good that you only want to see the best in people but please remember that some of the people in charge are utter psychopaths and are capable of raping children and keeping that hidden. While they and the kind that protect them are still around I think we need to take a much more cynical viewpoint.

You make some interesting points, AndyB. However I (personally) can't see how they can whitewash this. To think that part of OG is not looking into the fund and the connections, would in my view be 'ludicrous'.

I don't think that OG originated because the files were released and they wanted to get this genie back in the bottle.

Again (to me), that makes no sense. The OG remit is not to bury the truth and spend squillions covering up and assisting a couple of Leicestershire Doctors.

Said doctors have intentionally created an absolute spiders web. Yes, I can forsee issues in trying to prove who was in the know and who wasn't. Time consuming and expensive working that one out.

The difficulty is that everything has to be absolute watertight because if it isn't then it might collapse.

They won't /can't allow (or afford) for it to collapse.

They have to get it right and I genuinely believe they're working well with the PJ, quietly and efficiently.

Both forces will know more or less what happened and it's about making charges stick in court. For all associated too.

My thoughts and opinion.