Why no evidence of hacking in this story?

Does anyone have a good idea why there's no evidence of hacking happening with Kate and Gerry McCann, the rest of the tapas group or their extended families?

When Sue Akers gave further evidence the other day she said “The evidence suggests that such payments were being made to public officials across all areas of public life, the current assessment of the evidence is that it reveals a network of public officials.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/27/culture-of-illegal-payments-rampant-at-the-sun-says-top-cop-sue-akers.html

So, across all areas of public life and including celebrities and crime victims right down to some public figures l would think non-entities......

So why not the people involved in the biggest news story of a decade?

Hacking is only 'dialling in' to hear voicemails on someones phone.
As the McCanns and 'friends' had a PACT of silence in operation then presumeably they would not have left messages on each others phones.
imo they were probably hacked but as there were no voicemails to retrieve nothing would be garnered.
Also they , T9, changed their phones an awful lot at the time so they would have new numbers everyday, almost.
ETA also messages,texts were deleted by McS (and friends?) very rapidly.
So no messages to listen to.
_________________________________________
WHY hasn't Jes Wilkins SUED the McCanns for calling him a barefaced LIAR?

Slight correction - no Evidence that we, the great unwashed, for whom Law and Justice are actually supposed to exist, have been made party to (or at least given a hint of).

ie I find it hard to believe they weren't hacked, so there must be Evidence of that somewhere: The issue is why it hasn't been aired.

And what with all the other peculiarities surround the Healy/McCann merry-go-round, perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that the silence is deafening regarding hacking.

At the moment the only "hacking" evidence is derived from the papers of Mulcaire. Mulcaire was jailed in Jan 2007.

Chris wrote:At the moment the only "hacking" evidence is derived from the papers of Mulcaire. Mulcaire was jailed in Jan 2007.

Hacking was rife after that too, he wasn't the only journalist, or paper imo, doing it.

I take your points jeanmonroe but this is the biggest story of the late 2000's l still think there's information being withheld....

IMO, l think any information gleaned has been given from one Met department to another... the one doing the 'review'.

I agree with TEIN, the silence is deafening, IMO good news!

Clarrie has said that the McCanns phones weren't hacked but apparently he thinks his was. Which does make it odd why he wasn't at Leveson to spin about it - or perhaps he judged (wisely) that he may get tripped up giving evidence "under oath".

gillyspot wrote:Clarrie has said that the McCanns phones weren't hacked but apparently he thinks his was. Which does make it odd why he wasn't at Leveson to spin about it - or perhaps he judged (wisely) that he may get tripped up giving evidence "under oath".

Another great point gilly!

I think its because the mobiles which were hacked were ones the Mccann's did not wish to disclose they had.

Loopdaloop wrote:I think its because the mobiles which were hacked were ones the Mccann's did not wish to disclose they had.

Another great point LDL...

margaret wrote:

Loopdaloop wrote:I think its because the mobiles which were hacked were ones the Mccann's did not wish to disclose they had.

Another great point LDL...

Exactly!

keepingmum wrote:

margaret wrote:

Loopdaloop wrote:I think its because the mobiles which were hacked were ones the Mccann's did not wish to disclose they had.

Another great point LDL...

Exactly!

i agree

Well, if they were hacked the MET will know about it. Probably can't admit they know!

The secret service tapped there phones

kitti wrote:The secret service tapped their phones

Which Secret Service, exactly?

And what is the evidence/intelligence/source for this, please?

We know their mobiles were hacked by the Portugese when Madeleine disappeared, there is evidence in the Duarte Levy thread. Since the McCanns
were so pally with Murdoch would any hacking have been taboo for the Journalists.?

cass wrote:

keepingmum wrote:

margaret wrote:

Loopdaloop wrote:I think its because the mobiles which were hacked were ones the Mccann's did not wish to disclose they had.

Another great point LDL...

Exactly!

i agree

Yup! I agree too.

However, Fiona Payne does divulge in her rogatory interview (2008) about the portuguese mobile phones that they arranged to have sent to them from her brother in law Simon Oldridge (a very wealthy businessman) His name is mispelt as Aldridge in statements).

Both Fiona Payne & her mother Dianne Webster were questioned about telephone calls/texts sent/recieved on the 4th & 5th of May.There were lots of calls apparently made to/from Simon Oldridge on DP & DW's phones over these two days. Although there's more confusion here because the phone wasn't registered to Simon Aldridge but someone called Dave Middleton. (this is in Dianne Webster's statement, linked below).

Were they using the portuguese phones as early as the 5th of May? It certainly looks like it from this line of questioning.

Fiona Payne Interview snipped to relevant part (& just when she thought it was all over)

1485 “Okay. Alright. At this stage I have got nothing else to say to you”.
Reply “Umm”.
1485 “As you are aware, the interview is being monitored and it may well be that they have some further questions, but at this present moment, there are no more further questions”.
Reply “Okay”.
1485 “Alright. Actually there is. Sorry. Do you have your phone?”
Reply “Yeah”.
1485 “I just want to clarify your, did you take your mobile with you?”
Reply “I didn’t. My mobile had actually broken before we went on holiday, so we just had Dave’s mobile”.
1485 “Right. So did anybody use your mobile whilst you were away?”
Reply (shakes head)
1485 “No?”
Reply “They couldn’t have done, no”.
1485 “No. Could you just see if you have any of these numbers in your phone?”
Reply “Yeah”.
1485 “07XXX XXXXXX”.
Reply “07XX. I’ll look for 07XXX”.
1485 “The last digits are going to be XXX, that is going to be easiest”.
Reply “XXX”.
1485 “Sorry, you must have loads. Also look for one that ends in XXX as well”.
Reply “Ah XXX. Is it 07XXX XXXXXX?”
1485 “Yeah”.
Reply “That’s my, Simon XXXXXXXX, my brother-in-law”.
1485 “It is who, sorry?”
Reply “Simon XXXXXXX, he’s my brother-in-law”.
1485 “Is there any reason why he would have been called?”
Reply “We did speak, well it couldn’t have been off my phone, is this from my phone?”
1485 “Well it is possible that it, no, it wouldn’t have been off your phone”.
Reply “No”.
1485 “It would have been off”.
Reply “It would have been off Dave’s”.
1485 “Dave’s, yeah”.
Reply “We did speak to him, yeah”.
1485 “Did you actually make any calls yourself?”
Reply “Erm, I used, I Dave’s phone. I’m trying to think who phoned Simon. I think Dave phoned Simon the following morning, erm, just because he’s another pragmatic, sensible thinking person”.
1485 “Yeah”.
Reply “Erm, I mean, you know, we would have phoned all our family that following day anyway”.
1485 “Umm”.
Reply “But we had a lot of calls from him. Plus he’s, he was, erm, just wanting to be of help really, so he did phone a fair bit as well, just in terms of, he organised for, erm, mobile phones, erm, you know, Portuguese mobile phones to be sent out to use, he, you know, he runs a business in XXXXX, erm, and financially as well, he was offering help if we needed, you know, money”.
1485 “Is there anybody other than family that you rang then?”
Reply “Erm, I rang the Children’s Nursery, tut”.
1485 “Have you got that number in there?”
Reply “Erm, yeah. I think I might have texted them. Erm, XX, sorry, it’s 01XXX XXXXXX”.
1485 “Okay”.
Reply “What was the other ending that you wanted, XXX?”
1485 “XXX, yeah”.
Reply “Sorry, I didn’t get to the last ones. 07XXX XXXXXX?”
1485 “That is it, yeah”.
Reply “That’s Dave’s number”.
1485 “That is Dave’s number, is it?”
Reply “It’s his mobile number, yeah”.
1485 “Another one that ends in XXX?”
Reply “(inaudible). XXX. 07XXX XXXXXX, that’s Karen XXXXX, which is Dave’s sister”.
1485 “The next one is a Portuguese number, well it is a short number, it is 91XXXXXXX?”
Reply “I don’t, I wouldn’t have that in this phone, erm, it’s a Portuguese number. Is it a Portuguese mobile number?”
1485 “I don’t know. It is just too short for, because ours are normally eleven, aren’t they?”
Reply “Yeah, we, because, as I say, Simon did organise, erm, a Portuguese mobile phone for us to use out there, erm, which we’ve still got at home, I couldn’t tell you what the number was for that mobile, but I used that once I was out there, you know, to contact, you know, Dave or, or any of them, I’ve texted on it”.
1485 “Somebody would have rang it or texted it?”
Reply “Yeah, tut, I’m just trying to remember how much I used it, you know, every day. Again, I mean, if I had Dave’s mobile phone bills, which I think we did give to somebody actually, it might have been Kate and Gerry’s Lawyers actually, but we did use those. I can’t remember how much I used them and how much I used the Portuguese phone, but we certainly had a Portuguese mobile”.
1485 “Yeah. It sent a text to XXX, which is Dave’s phone”.
Reply “Uh hu”.
1485 “On the fourth of the fifth, so it is the following night”.
Reply “Yeah”.
1485 “At twenty-two zero two”.
Reply “So we would have been at the Police Station”.
1485 “And then twenty-two zero eight”.
Reply “Sorry, from which phone, because we wouldn’t have had the Portuguese phone by then?”
1485 “It would have sent, the Portu, well I’ve got the Port”.
Reply “I don’t know how quickly the phone arrived”.
1485 “Yeah”.
Reply “I can’t imagine it was that quick”.
1485 “The Portuguese phone, or that number, sent a text to Dave’s number at twenty-two zero two on the fourth, the following night?”
Reply “So it was when I was being interviewed that evening. I don’t think our phones came out that, I can’t imagine they would have been out by then, on the Friday night, so I don’t know. I’ll just check it isn’t, are you sure it’s a Portuguese number? Just read the number out again, I’ll just check it”.
1485 “It is 91XXXXXXX”.
Reply “Yeah, it is a funny number, isn’t it?”
1485 “It has only got nine digits as opposed to our eleven”.
Reply “Yeah. No, I haven’t got that number on and I can’t think, I can’t think who could have sent a Portuguese number at that point. Dave might recall when our

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id252.html

Snipped Dianne Webster Interview

PC: "Do you know a Dave MIDDLETON?"
DW: "Dave MIDDLETON? (Shakes head)."

PC: "No?"
DW: "No."

PC: "Do you know anybody in Doncaster?"
DW: "No, but Louise, my middle daughter, she's married to Simon ALDRIDGE who, his company Doncaster, I'm sure it's around Doncaster where his business is."
PC: "The person that's bought the phone or registered the phone must be called Dave MIDDLETON. Okay, so that's your son in-law then?"
DW: "Yeah. Well not the Dave MIDDLETON, he's not."...

PC: "No."
DW: "No. My son in-law's..."

PC: "Simon ALDRIDGE."
DW: "Yeah."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm

The End Is Nigh wrote:

kitti wrote:The secret service tapped their phones

Which Secret Service, exactly?

And what is the evidence/intelligence/source for this, please?

Mr amaral states it in his book BUT NO information was given to him regarding the tap and why.

The British secret service....he stated that they could tap the mccanns phones but the pj were not allowed to.


Gerry McCann rang gordon brown on 23rd may 2007......perhaps that is why they tapped his phone...it was to do with national security and the secret service may off been worried that SOMEONE has already hacked into the mccanns phones.