Sky news at 7pm

frencheuropean wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/01/british-police-competition-harmed-madeleine-mccann-investigation-home-office-report?CMP=twt_gu

Some interesting sentences, among them :"In the first instance, the parents should be your number one suspects," he told Sky"



What is he trying to do? Have a better position in case of lost election for Cameron, or in case the revue is a total fiasco, or if it's proved the McCanns are involved?

Leaving aside the specific case for the moment - what exactly is JG saying. Not enough is being done under the present arrangements to combat child abuse? But some of the cases hitting the headlines (eg Rotherham) were happening when CEOP under his leadership was operational.

This will come as no surprise to those who saw the Sky/Gamble/Summers/Swan fest:

Robbyn Swan, co-author of the book - due to be serialised this weekend in The Sun on Sunday - added: "The problems that grew out of the race to help… those things have not been fundamentally addressed."

http://news.sky.com/story/1328374/madeleine-secret-report-on-police-probe

KERCHING! KERCHING! KERCHING!

Poor Madeleine ......

"The race to help"??  Just exactly who were they racing to help?  By all accounts it was never about Madeleine.  The McCanns were the only ones to benefit from the help they received from the British government.

It was also Gamble who said those downloading abusive images of children should be given a caution and treated in the community rather than go to jail. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/jun/01/prisonsandprobation.ukcrime

Who is Jim Gamble? Is he so mportant that his opinions/utterances motivate Clarence Mitchell someone to write a book - a book that is so important that it immediately gets serialized in the Sun? IMO the official whitewash goes something like this. "The original Madeleine investigation was inadvertently torpedoed by too many "well-meaning" Brit agencies falling over each trying to 'help'. This conveniently lets them all off the hook without blaming the Portuguese doesn't it? Indeed the Portuguese are now seen as good guys whose efforts to find Madeleine were frustrated by the well-meaning Brits other good guys. Enter the 'good guys' from Scotland Yard who are now free to come out and 'admit' defeat due to the length of time that has elapsed etc. etc. blah blah blah. So at the end of the day - Madeleine was abducted, the Portuguese investigation was good but was frustrated by well-meaning Brit agencies, Scotland Yard have tried their best to solve the abduction but with the best will in the world are unable to come up with the answers, we will never know what happened, the parents couldn't have had anything to do with it whatsoever ...

Watch out for Jim Gamble's rehabilitation during the next few months. Watch out for calls for a public inquiry into how the well-meaning British made such a cock-up. Public inquiries are the favoured establishment tool for putting uncomfortable affairs to bed.

And how much public money will be spent on an enquiry....for all the good it will do they might just as well set fire to a huge pile of £50 notes and save everyone the time and trouble

Will we end up seeing a National Centre for Missing People with Gamble as Director and the following Patrons?

Kate and Gerry McCann
Lorraine Kelly
Esther Rantzen
Nick Ross
Clarence Mitchell

almostgothic wrote:I bet the report won't tell us anything about CEOP's profiling of Robert Murat, which declared him The Man Most Likely To ...
One man's life ruined forever ...

Or what happened to all those holiday snaps which CEOP asked to be sent to THEM (why not send them directly to the police?)

Or how Gerry McCann mysteriously acquired those in-house CEOP manuals.

Jims doings should be investigated.
Incl. Operation ORE and Cambodia trip..top to his meddling with mccanns case.

T4two wrote:Who is Jim Gamble? Is he so mportant that his opinions/utterances motivate Clarence Mitchell someone to write a book - a book that is so important that it immediately gets serialized in the Sun? IMO the official whitewash goes something like this. "The original Madeleine investigation was inadvertently torpedoed by too many "well-meaning" Brit agencies falling over each trying to 'help'. This conveniently lets them all off the hook without blaming the Portuguese doesn't it? Indeed the Portuguese are now seen as good guys whose efforts to find Madeleine were frustrated by the well-meaning Brits other good guys. Enter the 'good guys' from Scotland Yard who are now free to come out and 'admit' defeat due to the length of time that has elapsed etc. etc. blah blah blah. So at the end of the day - Madeleine was abducted, the Portuguese investigation was good but was frustrated by well-meaning Brit agencies, Scotland Yard have tried their best to solve the abduction but with the best will in the world are unable to come up with the answers, we will never know what happened, the parents couldn't have had anything to do with it whatsoever ...

Watch out for Jim Gamble's rehabilitation during the next few months. Watch out for calls for a public inquiry into how the well-meaning British made such a cock-up. Public inquiries are the favoured establishment tool for putting uncomfortable affairs to bed.

I think you are right.

I must admit I had never thought of that as a convenient way out: a way to close the case without any blame on anyone specific, but blame on everyone (mostly in the UK too) just a little bit, for tripping over each other, and for being too keen to 'participate'. It would avoid the international bad feeling which would come from blaming the Portuguese, and it requires only a minimal mea culpa' for over keenness from any particular British organisation.

What it does NOT do is explain WHY all these agencies and persons were so keen to pile into this case in the first place.

What it does NOT do either is focus on the child who disappeared, or what really happened to her. Madeleine is lost in all this.

Numerous British agencies impeded Madeleine search
by Brendan de Beer, in News · 04-09-2014 14:31:00 ·

http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/numerous-british-agencies-impeded-madeleine-search/32642

Some observations:

Interesting that this article refers to Alan Johnson as the commissioner of the report, but does not mention its author (Jim Gamble) by name.

Meanwhile, a source close to the case this week told The Portugal News that the tension referred to back in 2007 and 2008 to some extent still persists in the on-going investigation.
Does it, Mr Source? Well I'm sure it's nothing that can't be overcome, in the search for truth and justice ...

“At times we have experienced some tension between the two forces which was completely unnecessary”, the source said, adding: “We found one or two members of the Metropolitan police to be rather stubborn and resistant to recommendations made by Portuguese police.
Well never mind eh? That leaves almost forty others who aren't stubborn and resistant .
(Also note the use of 'we' - who are 'we'? It is 'we' who experienced the tension between the two forces, therefore 'we' are not members of either of the forces).

“Also the fact that they promised to deliver results might to some degree have conditioned the manner in which their investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann was conducted.”[/i]
What does that sentence even mean? Do you want them to carry out the investigation believing that they won't be able to deliver results?

We could be forgiven for thinking that Mr Source doesn't want them to succeed.
Indeed, there have been so many articles of late insinuating that the Met and the PJ aren't getting along - all doom and gloom and all provided of course by the ubiquitous Mr Source ...

almostgothic wrote:Numerous British agencies impeded Madeleine search
by Brendan de Beer, in News · 04-09-2014 14:31:00 ·

http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/numerous-british-agencies-impeded-madeleine-search/32642

Some observations:

Interesting that this article refers to Alan Johnson as the commissioner of the report, but does not mention its author (Jim Gamble) by name.

Meanwhile, a source close to the case this week told The Portugal News that the tension referred to back in 2007 and 2008 to some extent still persists in the on-going investigation.
Does it, Mr Source? Well I'm sure it's nothing that can't be overcome, in the search for truth and justice ...

“At times we have experienced some tension between the two forces which was completely unnecessary”, the source said, adding: “We found one or two members of the Metropolitan police to be rather stubborn and resistant to recommendations made by Portuguese police.
Well never mind eh? That leaves almost forty others who aren't stubborn and resistant .
(Also note the use of 'we' - who are 'we'? It is 'we' who experienced the tension between the two forces, therefore 'we' are not members of either of the forces).

“Also the fact that they promised to deliver results might to some degree have conditioned the manner in which their investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann was conducted.”[/i]
What does that sentence even mean? Do you want them to carry out the investigation believing that they won't be able to deliver results?

We could be forgiven for thinking that Mr Source doesn't want them to succeed.
Indeed, there have been so many articles of late insinuating that the Met and the PJ aren't getting along - all doom and gloom and all provided of course by the ubiquitous Mr Source ...

Well said almostgothic. Everybody has an opinion on this case, each one purporting to represent one side or the other. But these people on the fringes just like to stir things up. On the fringes of the PJ the official line is that the Met do not have a clue and on the fringes of the Met it is that the PJ have dismissed too many theories without looking into them sufficiently. And yet the PJ are carrying out their own re-investigations so what does it matter what they think about what the Met are doing with theirs? If the Met do not have a clue surely the PJ will show them up by finding the answer? Or will it be the Met who get first to the finish line? Or, are they in fact really working together better than we think? And if they are working together, how can one side or the other produce a patsy to take the blame?

The sad truth is that whilst Madeleine remains missing, authors will earn money from her, journalists will earn back-handers and TV stations can compete against each other for viewers. Long may it continue is what I imagine they must be saying and the only people not actually saying anything are the PJ and the Met.