What Conclusions will the Scotland Yard Review Come Up With?

I've just been thinking about what the SY review results will be.

Bearing in my I was informed by someone high up in the Home Office that I am going to have to ask for an FOI to find out (or NOT - far more likely) how the results were obtained. Are they going to try and come up with a compromise conclusion?

1) As there is absolutely no evidence of an actual "abduction" how are they going to come up with a result that suits the McCanns & justifies spending over £3 million?

2) The Portuguese investigation may have been flawed but as far as I can see they came to the correct conclusion based on the evidence we can see. So are Scotland Yard going to insult them by saying they got it totally wrong?

3) It is clear from reading the files that the FSS, Home Office & Leicestershire Police weren't entirely helpful to the Portuguese investigation and they certainly won't want that to come out.

What do you all think?

I have to say that I don't think it will produce anything at all. I think it's an exercise in paper shuffling at a price. Keeping senior officers on active duty until retirement. As far as a result is concerned it will probably be something along the lines of "move along, nothing to see here".

Sad but I wish it were otherwise. :(

I can't believe that there will ever be a official release from the SY review. We shouldn't forget Brown put a D notice/gagging order on Madeleine's disappearance, stating something along the lines of; " public knowledge of Madeleine's disappearance could endanger National Security", or something like that. I think it's a complete load of tosh, but as far as I'm aware the gagging order has never been lifted.

However, considering the vast sums of money donated by the public to enable the McCanns to search for Madeleine, plus the huge amounts paid out in compensation by the media, there should be a very open and very full in depth inspection of the McCanns accounts, if only to put to rest the minds of those thousands of pensioners and school children, who willingly gave their money to search for Madeleine... Not provide a cash cow for Lawyers and Mortgage brokers.

totally agree.
still in shock that the government is prepared to give three million pounds to open what is basically a cold case.
Cant help but compare it to the help given to the little boy whose parents had to take him to Germany for a life saving operation
and had to pay for it...........no three milion for them, not even three thousand.

amber wrote:totally agree.
still in shock that the government is prepared to give three million pounds to open what is basically a cold case.
Cant help but compare it to the help given to the little boy whose parents had to take him to Germany for a life saving operation
and had to pay for it...........no three milion for them, not even three thousand.

Quite obviously the fault of the little boy's parents...... they're plainly not neglecting him enough.

I can't see how SY can come up with nothing, we have cadaver, dna and fluids in that apartment, if SY come back with an abduction and the McCanns are whiter then white, then I for one will give up on this case.

But I say the average man on the street who knows nothing about this case, don't believe the McCanns turn of events, never mind us nutters, I honestly believe that Cameron has ordered this review to shut the McCs up because they were imo getting out of control they way they were so verbal against the UK Government, WHY would you do that if they were protecting you, you wouldn't, why didn't the McCanns show the letter that they recieved from Teressa May? they were quick to show the one from Cameron.
The protection doesn't come from the Government its coming from all the money in the fund that is keeping Carter Ruck busy, Ive been thinking lately that the "Book" Gerry and Kate released was planned knowing they would have enough in the fund to fight Amaral in Feb, aimo.

Hasn't it already been said that the results of the review will not be made public? If that is so then obviously there could never be any charges brought otherwise we would all hear about it.

Is there really a D notice,or is that a forum myth ?

Lioned wrote:Is there really a D notice,or is that a forum myth ?

hi Lioned,
I remember it being spoken of, perhaps on 3As, but there is little on google other than:-

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/09/d-notice-5.html

malena stool wrote:

Lioned wrote:Is there really a D notice,or is that a forum myth ?

hi Lioned,
I remember it being spoken of, perhaps on 3As, but there is little on google other than:-

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/09/d-notice-5.html

Thanks malena,

Angelina wrote:Hasn't it already been said that the results of the review will not be made public? If that is so then obviously there could never be any charges brought otherwise we would all hear about it.

From what I can gather its a case of we are not going to tell you all whats going on with the review, obviously if they are arrest then we would all hear about it, SY wouldn't be able to stop that been known if any arrest were made imo.

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:Hasn't it already been said that the results of the review will not be made public? If that is so then obviously there could never be any charges brought otherwise we would all hear about it.

From what I can gather its a case of we are not going to tell you all whats going on with the review, obviously if they are arrest then we would all hear about it, SY wouldn't be able to stop that been known if any arrest were made imo.

Quite so but could it also mean that there has never been any intention to find evidence against the McCanns and if they do then it will be hushed up.

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:Hasn't it already been said that the results of the review will not be made public? If that is so then obviously there could never be any charges brought otherwise we would all hear about it.

From what I can gather its a case of we are not going to tell you all whats going on with the review, obviously if they are arrest then we would all hear about it, SY wouldn't be able to stop that been known if any arrest were made imo.

Quite so but could it also mean that there has never been any intention to find evidence against the McCanns and if they do then it will be hushed up.

I really do have full confidence in SY I know a lot of posters will say NO CHANCE as far as the review is concerned, but I just can't understand why SY would be prepared to protect these two child neglectors when the majority of the UK dont believe a word of what the Mcs say, so why should clever SY detectives do so.

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:Hasn't it already been said that the results of the review will not be made public? If that is so then obviously there could never be any charges brought otherwise we would all hear about it.

From what I can gather its a case of we are not going to tell you all whats going on with the review, obviously if they are arrest then we would all hear about it, SY wouldn't be able to stop that been known if any arrest were made imo.

Quite so but could it also mean that there has never been any intention to find evidence against the McCanns and if they do then it will be hushed up.

I really do have full confidence in SY I know a lot of posters will say NO CHANCE as far as the review is concerned, but I just can't understand why SY would be prepared to protect these two child neglectors when the majority of the UK dont believe a word of what the Mcs say, so why should clever SY detectives do so.

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:Hasn't it already been said that the results of the review will not be made public? If that is so then obviously there could never be any charges brought otherwise we would all hear about it.

From what I can gather its a case of we are not going to tell you all whats going on with the review, obviously if they are arrest then we would all hear about it, SY wouldn't be able to stop that been known if any arrest were made imo.

Quite so but could it also mean that there has never been any intention to find evidence against the McCanns and if they do then it will be hushed up.

I really do have full confidence in SY I know a lot of posters will say NO CHANCE as far as the review is concerned, but I just can't understand why SY would be prepared to protect these two child neglectors when the majority of the UK dont believe a word of what the Mcs say, so why should clever SY detectives do so.

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

I wouldn't let the SY team anywhere near the withheld files.... Whatever these files contain would be fed straight back to the McCanns, which is what the McCanns and their backers have been trying to get hold of since day one.

malena stool wrote:

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

From what I can gather its a case of we are not going to tell you all whats going on with the review, obviously if they are arrest then we would all hear about it, SY wouldn't be able to stop that been known if any arrest were made imo.

Quite so but could it also mean that there has never been any intention to find evidence against the McCanns and if they do then it will be hushed up.

I really do have full confidence in SY I know a lot of posters will say NO CHANCE as far as the review is concerned, but I just can't understand why SY would be prepared to protect these two child neglectors when the majority of the UK dont believe a word of what the Mcs say, so why should clever SY detectives do so.

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

I wouldn't let th SY team anywhere near the witheld files.... Whatever these files contain would be fed straght back to the McCanns, which is what the McCanns and their backers have been trying to get hold of since day one.

And without those files SY won't have the full picture so the review is pointless.

Yes Angelina it's my view, for what it's worth, the whole review experience is futile and was started purely to shut the McCanns up and get them out of Theresa May's and Cameron's faces.

On the other hand it would be nice to think that SY did find something which placed the McCanns firmly and irrefutably in the picture for being responsible for Madeleine's disappearance. Although such things only happen in Hollywood movies, so I wouldn't take odds on that happening.

Very unlikely to come up with anything new,but surely they would be negligent not to at least consider the parents involvement if only to dismiss the 'evidence' against them,and that takes some doing.If they are to be critical then they will surely point to a reconstruction.

Angelina wrote:

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

Whoever will be giving the orders on what steps to take regarding the Review, would they really take the chance of telling his Officers to ignore serious evidence and to lie, just to help out Cameron et al and cover the neglecting backsides of 2 Doctors, when any day the trith could come out and YET AGAIN Scot Yard could be seen to be carrupt, at this moment in time they are fighting for their reputation, why lose it for good on this case, I can't even see Cameron wanting to risk that.
If it comes back a whitewash, imo this will just give the ok for Team McCann to make even more of a furtune out of this case, they will be in our faces for years to come and probably still blaming the UK Government for not finding Maddy, I for one couldn't stomach it................all for what neglecting your kids while you go out and party, no they imo need shuting up once and for all and I believe between SY, The PJ and Amaral they will do it.

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

Whoever will be giving the orders on what steps to take regarding the Review, would they really take the chance of telling his Officers to ignore serious evidence and to lie, just to help out Cameron et al and cover the neglecting backsides of 2 Doctors, when any day the trith could come out and YET AGAIN Scot Yard could be seen to be carrupt, at this moment in time they are fighting for their reputation, why lose it for good on this case, I can't even see Cameron wanting to risk that.
If it comes back a whitewash, imo this will just give the ok for Team McCann to make even more of a furtune out of this case, they will be in our faces for years to come and probably still blaming the UK Government for not finding Maddy, I for one couldn't stomach it................all for what neglecting your kids while you go out and party, no they imo need shuting up once and for all and I believe between SY, The PJ and Amaral they will do it.

I doubt there has been or will be any direct orders to ignore evidence...it really all depends on how things are worded and what these detectives have been told to do. Just supposing a detective finds that things are pointing towards some of the Tapas lot, passes his thoughts on to senior officers and nothing happens...with retirement looming and his pension to think of is he really going to rock the boat over one case?

Is there actually enough evidence available to charge anyone or was it all lost/destroyed by the FSS? If there is evidence why hasn't it already been used, or was it just not good enough in the first place?

It really all depends on why the review is taking place. I can't help feeling it will end up being inconclusive and, assuming it is made public knowledge, that result will be splashed all over the UK press, 90% of the population will believe it.

SY, The PJ and Amaral......depends on what SY is doing the review for, how much info is released by Pt and how much, if any, influence Amaral still has on the case. Personally I don't believe we'll ever have any answers.

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

Whoever will be giving the orders on what steps to take regarding the Review, would they really take the chance of telling his Officers to ignore serious evidence and to lie, just to help out Cameron et al and cover the neglecting backsides of 2 Doctors, when any day the trith could come out and YET AGAIN Scot Yard could be seen to be carrupt, at this moment in time they are fighting for their reputation, why lose it for good on this case, I can't even see Cameron wanting to risk that.
If it comes back a whitewash, imo this will just give the ok for Team McCann to make even more of a furtune out of this case, they will be in our faces for years to come and probably still blaming the UK Government for not finding Maddy, I for one couldn't stomach it................all for what neglecting your kids while you go out and party, no they imo need shuting up once and for all and I believe between SY, The PJ and Amaral they will do it.

I doubt there has been or will be any direct orders to ignore evidence...it really all depends on how things are worded and what these detectives have been told to do. Just supposing a detective finds that things are pointing towards some of the Tapas lot, passes his thoughts on to senior officers and nothing happens...with retirement looming and his pension to think of is he really going to rock the boat over one case?

Is there actually enough evidence available to charge anyone or was it all lost/destroyed by the FSS? If there is evidence why hasn't it already been used, or was it just not good enough in the first place?

It really all depends on why the review is taking place. I can't help feeling it will end up being inconclusive and, assuming it is made public knowledge, that result will be splashed all over the UK press, 90% of the population will believe it.

SY, The PJ and Amaral......depends on what SY is doing the review for, how much info is released by Pt and how much, if any, influence Amaral still has on the case. Personally I don't believe we'll ever have any answers.

A few months ago, I read an article online where the BMA said, that if a doctor was charged with a serious offence, such as paedophilia rape and murder, they wanted the prosecution and the outcome of the prosecution, to remain private. I don't know if the BMA got their wish, but if they did and the McCanns were to be prosecuted, I wonder if the McCanns could insist they were prosecuted in England, because Madeleine was a British citizen.

kathybelle wrote:

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

Whoever will be giving the orders on what steps to take regarding the Review, would they really take the chance of telling his Officers to ignore serious evidence and to lie, just to help out Cameron et al and cover the neglecting backsides of 2 Doctors, when any day the trith could come out and YET AGAIN Scot Yard could be seen to be carrupt, at this moment in time they are fighting for their reputation, why lose it for good on this case, I can't even see Cameron wanting to risk that.
If it comes back a whitewash, imo this will just give the ok for Team McCann to make even more of a furtune out of this case, they will be in our faces for years to come and probably still blaming the UK Government for not finding Maddy, I for one couldn't stomach it................all for what neglecting your kids while you go out and party, no they imo need shuting up once and for all and I believe between SY, The PJ and Amaral they will do it.

I doubt there has been or will be any direct orders to ignore evidence...it really all depends on how things are worded and what these detectives have been told to do. Just supposing a detective finds that things are pointing towards some of the Tapas lot, passes his thoughts on to senior officers and nothing happens...with retirement looming and his pension to think of is he really going to rock the boat over one case?

Is there actually enough evidence available to charge anyone or was it all lost/destroyed by the FSS? If there is evidence why hasn't it already been used, or was it just not good enough in the first place?

It really all depends on why the review is taking place. I can't help feeling it will end up being inconclusive and, assuming it is made public knowledge, that result will be splashed all over the UK press, 90% of the population will believe it.

SY, The PJ and Amaral......depends on what SY is doing the review for, how much info is released by Pt and how much, if any, influence Amaral still has on the case. Personally I don't believe we'll ever have any answers.

A few months ago, I read an article online where the BMA said, that if a doctor was charged with a serious offence, such as paedophilia rape and murder, they wanted the prosecution and the outcome of the prosecution, to remain private. I don't know if the BMA got their wish, but if they did and the McCanns were to be prosecuted, I wonder if the McCanns could insist they were prosecuted in England, because Madeleine was a British citizen.

I had not heard of the BMA asking for that. Do you know when they asked for it?

if the BMA did ask for it that is digusting. why should it be hidden that a doctor was a paedophile or murderer. It makes me wonder what if anything the people who ask for this have got to hide themselves. Why should anyone just by dint of studying medicine who has committed a heinious crime not get the prosecution and verdict published. jimo

seems this has moved a bit off topic from the SY Review should it be separate. jimo

jodel wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Angelina wrote:

I think it all depends on what they have been ordered to do, whether they get all the information that is contained in the withheld files etc. Have they been told to purely look for oversights on the part of the PJ and have they been told to investigate anything which points towards the McCanns or just to look for an abductor etc etc. We don't really know what their instructions are so I don't see how we can be that confident about it all.

Whoever will be giving the orders on what steps to take regarding the Review, would they really take the chance of telling his Officers to ignore serious evidence and to lie, just to help out Cameron et al and cover the neglecting backsides of 2 Doctors, when any day the trith could come out and YET AGAIN Scot Yard could be seen to be carrupt, at this moment in time they are fighting for their reputation, why lose it for good on this case, I can't even see Cameron wanting to risk that.
If it comes back a whitewash, imo this will just give the ok for Team McCann to make even more of a furtune out of this case, they will be in our faces for years to come and probably still blaming the UK Government for not finding Maddy, I for one couldn't stomach it................all for what neglecting your kids while you go out and party, no they imo need shuting up once and for all and I believe between SY, The PJ and Amaral they will do it.

I doubt there has been or will be any direct orders to ignore evidence...it really all depends on how things are worded and what these detectives have been told to do. Just supposing a detective finds that things are pointing towards some of the Tapas lot, passes his thoughts on to senior officers and nothing happens...with retirement looming and his pension to think of is he really going to rock the boat over one case?

Is there actually enough evidence available to charge anyone or was it all lost/destroyed by the FSS? If there is evidence why hasn't it already been used, or was it just not good enough in the first place?

It really all depends on why the review is taking place. I can't help feeling it will end up being inconclusive and, assuming it is made public knowledge, that result will be splashed all over the UK press, 90% of the population will believe it.

SY, The PJ and Amaral......depends on what SY is doing the review for, how much info is released by Pt and how much, if any, influence Amaral still has on the case. Personally I don't believe we'll ever have any answers.

A few months ago, I read an article online where the BMA said, that if a doctor was charged with a serious offence, such as paedophilia rape and murder, they wanted the prosecution and the outcome of the prosecution, to remain private. I don't know if the BMA got their wish, but if they did and the McCanns were to be prosecuted, I wonder if the McCanns could insist they were prosecuted in England, because Madeleine was a British citizen.

I had not heard of the BMA asking for that. Do you know when they asked for it?

It was early in 2011, when I read the article, I'll try and find it. Right Tanzi I've found 2 links, unfortunately they are both newspaper links, so I'll put the links on here and try to find some more information about this. Also I made a mistake, I should have said the G.M.C. not the B.M.A.

Here is the first link, which is in the Daily Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8463932/Secret-disciplinary-hearings-to-reduce-doctors-stress.html

The second link is from the Daily Mail. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1379115/A-sad-day-press-freedom--Incompetent-doctors-secret-GMC-hearings.html

The Daily Mail link mentions murder, rape or child abuse, which is what I said in my previous post.

kathybelle wrote:

jodel wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Angelina wrote:

Lillyofthevalley wrote:


Whoever will be giving the orders on what steps to take regarding the Review, would they really take the chance of telling his Officers to ignore serious evidence and to lie, just to help out Cameron et al and cover the neglecting backsides of 2 Doctors, when any day the trith could come out and YET AGAIN Scot Yard could be seen to be carrupt, at this moment in time they are fighting for their reputation, why lose it for good on this case, I can't even see Cameron wanting to risk that.
If it comes back a whitewash, imo this will just give the ok for Team McCann to make even more of a furtune out of this case, they will be in our faces for years to come and probably still blaming the UK Government for not finding Maddy, I for one couldn't stomach it................all for what neglecting your kids while you go out and party, no they imo need shuting up once and for all and I believe between SY, The PJ and Amaral they will do it.

I doubt there has been or will be any direct orders to ignore evidence...it really all depends on how things are worded and what these detectives have been told to do. Just supposing a detective finds that things are pointing towards some of the Tapas lot, passes his thoughts on to senior officers and nothing happens...with retirement looming and his pension to think of is he really going to rock the boat over one case?

Is there actually enough evidence available to charge anyone or was it all lost/destroyed by the FSS? If there is evidence why hasn't it already been used, or was it just not good enough in the first place?

It really all depends on why the review is taking place. I can't help feeling it will end up being inconclusive and, assuming it is made public knowledge, that result will be splashed all over the UK press, 90% of the population will believe it.

SY, The PJ and Amaral......depends on what SY is doing the review for, how much info is released by Pt and how much, if any, influence Amaral still has on the case. Personally I don't believe we'll ever have any answers.

A few months ago, I read an article online where the BMA said, that if a doctor was charged with a serious offence, such as paedophilia rape and murder, they wanted the prosecution and the outcome of the prosecution, to remain private. I don't know if the BMA got their wish, but if they did and the McCanns were to be prosecuted, I wonder if the McCanns could insist they were prosecuted in England, because Madeleine was a British citizen.

I had not heard of the BMA asking for that. Do you know when they asked for it?

It was early in 2011, when I read the article, I'll try and find it. Right Tanzi I've found 2 links, unfortunately they are both newspaper links, so I'll put the links on here and try to find some more information about this. Also I made a mistake, I should have said the G.M.C. not the B.M.A.

Here is the first link, which is in the Daily Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8463932/Secret-disciplinary-hearings-to-reduce-doctors-stress.html

The second link is from the Daily Mail. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1379115/A-sad-day-press-freedom--Incompetent-doctors-secret-GMC-hearings.html

The Daily Mail link mentions murder, rape or child abuse, which is what I said in my previous post.

The GMC is very good at protecting doctors, moving them to a different part of the country when there is a whiff of untoward things having happened.