The McCanns and CEOP

Kate and Gerry McCann work closely with CEOP according to their website Find Madeleine

Who is the CEOP?The following is taken from the CEOP website:

Jim Gamble is Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre and brings with him over 25 years in UK policing - from leading the fight against terrorism as the head of the Northern Ireland anti-terrorist intelligence unit in Belfast to most recently tackling organised crime as the Deputy Director of the National Crime Squad.

During his time in Northern Ireland he covered both uniform and detective roles in a rapidly changing and often volatile environment before leading anti-terrorist responses in both the UK and abroad. With the National Crime Squad he oversaw a complex and highly intricate portfolio ranging from firearm deployment to hi-tech crime and overall intelligence, professional standards and security as a central figure in the UK's fight against organised crime.

Jim's specialist achievements have most recently centred on the fight against child sex abuse. He led the work to set up the National Crime Squad's specialist response cell - the Paedophile Online Investigation Team (POLIT) - and was instrumental in forming the first international law enforcement partnership to combat child abuse online - the Virtual Global Taskforce (VGT).

Both POLIT and the VGT have acted as key forerunners to the creation of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre and today the VGT acts as the main focus for CEOP's international partnerships and global response.

"Every child matters everywhere. We all agree with that. Yet there are people out there who will prey on children and young people, who will look to exploit them for personal pleasure and who will distribute and publish images for their own illegal gain.

The CEOP Centre is saying enough is enough. We will link with partners on a national and international stage to deliver a cohesive and co-ordinated response with a very clear emphasis - protecting children whether they are online or the in the more real day to day environments of their everyday lives. The internet is after all an excellent and exciting place to be, so we will work to stay that vital one step ahead of the criminal mind, be holistic in our approach, bringing perpetrators to account and safeguarding and protecting vulnerable children from abuse wherever they may be."
Jim Gamble
-----
ETA - Jim Gamble wrote the The Home Secretary to offer his resignation following plans to merge the CEOP with SOCA and other agencies. He is no longer with CEOP

From The Jim Gamble Section - Jill Havern Forum

Remember the 'Minute for Madeleine' video which zipped around the world like lightning, courtesy of the internet?

It was distributed by the police - or rather by CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre) - and featured Madeleine McCann whom, said the CEOP video, had definitely been abducted.

Remember also the top secret CEOP manuals found in the McCanns' villa by the police in July. Who gave then those?

Now these two (Jim Gamble and Dr Gerald McCann) have teamed up again - see bolding in red below:

Sexually-motivated child abductions: A One Day Conference

Tuesday 26 January 2010

School of Oriental and African Studies, Bloomsbury, London

“The abduction of a child is a tragedy. No one can fully understand or appreciate what a parent goes through at such a time, unless they have faced a similar tragedy.”

John Walsh, father of six year old Adam Walsh who was abducted and murdered in 1981; co-founder of the US National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC); campaigner for ‘The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act’ passed in the USA in 2006.

Introduction

The stereotypical, high profile incidents of child abduction play into every parent’s worst nightmare and often result in media attention and public hysteria. Whilst the names of those children and offenders alike are engrained within our collective consciousness, these cases are mercifully very rare. Indeed, parental disputes resulting in the abduction of a child by one parent still make up the majority of abduction cases per se.

However, throughout the spectrum of child abduction cases, each presents unique challenges for the professionals involved in their investigation and the aftermath, particularly given the emotive nature of the crime and requirements to heavily invest resources (technical, personnel, financial and forensics) early in the investigation, which have the potential to overwhelm the best prepared investigator or agency.

Technology has opened up an exciting new world for children where they can escape the watchful eyes of the adults charged with their protection and indeed, the use of these technologies simultaneously brings both opportunity and risks for children.

Developments in technology have allowed children access to uncensored material and information that can influence their behaviour and there is growing evidence to suggest viewing certain types of material may influence their sexual developmental trajectories. Through a growing variety of technologies, children have begun to push boundaries as part of their natural social, emotional and sexual development.

Whilst the opportunities afforded by mobile and internet technology vastly outweigh these risks, they are nevertheless real. Indeed, as in the real, physical world, there are areas online that young people frequent, which will be attractive to those who seek to corrupt and exploit vulnerable children and young people for their own sexual gratification. Consequently, the online grooming of children became so concerning that new UK legislation had to be introduced in an attempt to protect them. Despite these preventative measures, offenders are still using an array of technologies and strategies to groom children with a view to abusing them virtually, by way of inciting a child to commit sexual acts to be captured on still images of webcam or indeed, to prepare children for an offline meeting.

This type of behaviour is becoming more common as a precursor to child abduction.

Conference objectives

This one day conference will explore the issues associated with a variety of child abduction cases, predominantly focussing on sexually motivated stranger abductions.

By using a combination of recent research, operational case studies and offender debriefs, this conference seeks to identify pertinent issues for any such investigation.

Benefits to the delegate

Delegates attending this conference will gain the following:

an understanding of the link between online grooming and child abduction;
an insight into how child abduction is dealt with by US law enforcement agencies; and
an insight into the UK perspective on dealing with child abduction.

Agenda
09:00 Registration
09:30 Welcome: Jim Gamble, Chief Executive, Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre
09.45 Multiple case research: Jim O. Beasley III, Supervisory Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation
10.30 An holistic approach: Adam Gregory, Senior Behavioural Investigative Adviser, National Policing Improvement Agency
11:00 Break
11.30 Operation Paris – the Shannon Matthews investigation: Detective Superintendent Andy Brennan, Detective Inspector Andy Walker, West Yorkshire Police
12:30 Lunch
13.30 False allegations of abduction: William Donaldson, Supervisory Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation
14:30 Break
14.45 Insight from the minds of child abductors: Detective Chief Superintendent Graham Hill, Dr Joe Sullivan, Consultant Chartered Psychologist, Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre
16.00 Closing speech: Gerry McCann
16.30 Questions and answers session: All speakers

Tony Bennetthttp:

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t134-the-continuing-love-affair-between-jim-gamble-of-ceop-and-dr-gerry-mccann

I think SY will need to look closely at this relationship on many levels and also why JG inviting GM to these conferences.

Everything is done for a reason

Pete Townsend case

Bearing in mind the missing wallet 'story', credit cards, CATS file, Gaspars, YM, etc......

11 April 2010

Paedophiles convicted of looking at child pornography should not necessarily go to prison, the police child protection chief said today.


Jim Gamble of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), told the BBC he believed some sex offenders should be encouraged to seek treatment rather than be threatened with jail terms.

Mr Gamble said answers needed to be found outside the criminal justice system and that some offenders should receive a police caution, then be managed within the community.

He said there were too many people being convicted of paedophilia to be dealt with in the criminal justice system.

Mr Gamble told the broadcaster: "We shouldn't be sending everyone that ever commits an offence - particularly of the viewing kind - to prison."

He said some offenders could be "managed" and dealt with by police caution in a way that allows them to maintain their lives and their families.

In another part of the interview, broadcast on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr Gamble said it was time to adopt a more "intelligent posture" in tackling the problem.

He said: "(If) someone is at the beginning of the spiral of abuse, where there is evidence to indicate during the investigation that this person may well benefit from a police caution and be managed, then of course that needs to be done."

Mr Gamble conceded that "we cannot protect every young person on the internet all the time", but said more work needed to be done to "educate and empower" youngsters.

He said people with a "deviant sexual interest in children" should get help before they "live out that fantasy" and are caught.

The CEOP was launched in 2006 to tackle child sex abuse in the UK.



Mr Gamble said there was a "need to engage with the predator" in a new way to divert them from offending.

He said: "If we are to say, just throw everybody in prison then, I think, we are missing the point."

Ultimately there would not be enough prison places, he said, and added: "We have to apply the law in a sensitive and sensible way."

He said the number of people accessing child pornography on the internet caused CEOP "significant concern".

Donald Findlater, of child protection charity the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, told Today: "We know the problem is of monstrous proportions and therefore requires really radical, and frankly, fairly new solutions.

"My interest is far more in preventing it happening in the first place than trying to sweep up some of the pieces after the harm has been done."

Sexual crime prevention expert Ray Wyre told Today: "There is a great deal of confusion in the way Mr Gamble has given these messages."

He said not all people accessing illegal images were paedophiles, and some users were motivated by anything from "stupidity to curiosity".

But he said Mr Gamble was wrong to talk about "predatory paedophiles" being given police cautions.

"Predatory paedophilia is often used to describe the very men who may have abducted Madeleine (McCann)," he said.

Mr Gamble's views on people who download illegal images were also attacked by Michelle Elliott, director of the charity Kidscape.

She told the BBC: "They are just as guilty as the people taking the photos.

"If they didn't view, the child wouldn't be abused. Therefore I think those people deserve prison."



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-chief-viewing-paedophiles-need-not-be-jailed-


http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t819-jim-gamble-viewing-paedophiles-need-not-be-jailed


.

Part of Article filed by Tony Bennett, Secretary, The Madeleine Foundation
10 October 2010

Jim Gamble, the Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), used the Madeleine McCann disappearance to highlight the danger of paedophiles

Despite the high degree of uncertainty about what really happened to Madeleine, highlighted by their own spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, saying in March 2010 that her disappearance was ‘a complete mystery’, Jim Gamble, head of CEOP, relentlessly associated Madeleine with CEOP. This was despite the obvious fact that the McCanns on their own admission had left three young children, all aged under four, in a vulnerable situation - for six nights in a row - and clearly failed to protect them. Many questioned why an organisation with the words ‘Child Protection’ in its title should feature the McCanns so heavily, given their failure of child protection.

Gamble, from 2007 onwards, heavily featured Madeleine on the CEOP website and in various CEOP publications. Around the time of the second anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance (17 months previous to the date of this article , he appeared together with the McCanns in a so-called one-minute ‘viral video’, strongly emphasising that Madeleine was still alive and needed to be found.

Later he also appeared on morning news shows side by side with the McCanns.

Still more significantly, he invited Dr Gerald McCann in January 2010 to be the keynote speaker at a conference on the abduction of children by paedophiles. Why Dr McCann was considered by Gamble to be qualified to contribute to that conference, never mind being the ‘keynote speaker’, given the raft of uncertainties about the circumstances in which Madeleine disappeared, has never been explained either by the McCanns or by Jim Gamble.

Furthermore, it was reported - and confirmed by a Home Office Freedom of Information Act request - that in October 2009, the McCanns had a private interview with the McCanns. Following that, several press reports (not denied) indicated that the Home Secretary asked Jim Gamble to recommend a new British police force to carry out a review and possibly a re-investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance.

Some reports suggested that he had recommended West Yorkshire Police to carry out such a review. But the Home Office was unwilling to confirm or deny this. It was baffling why the Home Secretary, knowing Jim Gamble’s extreme closeness to the McCanns, should choose him to recommend who should carry out any review into Madeleine’s disappearance.

8. In the days before this article was written, Jim Gamble told the Home Secretary, Theresa May, that he was resigning from his post as CEOP Chief Executive, a resignation she swiftly accepted. The McCanns put out statements strongly supporting him, thanking him for his work on their behalf, and querying the Coalition government’s decision to incorporate CEOP within the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA). They described his departure in graphic terms as ‘a huge loss to child protection’. These comments pointed inexorably, once again, to the conclusion that there was a very close ‘tie’ between the McCanns and Jim Gamble.

The McCann Team in conjunction with Jim Gamble of CEOP published a video about Madeleine and circulated it round the internet which many believed showed her inappropriately posed in heavy make-up

In 2010, Jim Gamble once again co-operated with the McCanns to make a another video about Madeleine. The video in question featured three images of Madeleine. One very striking one shows her in an unusual pose, shot by the photographer from well below her face, wearing make-up, including much blue eyeshadow, lipstick and jewellery, and looking unhappy.

The McCanns publicly claimed that ‘the photo shows her when she was three after a raid on the dressing box’. However, it is very unlikely that Madeleine could have put the necklace on herself, nor applied eyeshadow in the manner shown in the photograph, nor applied the pink bow to her hair.

The evidence from the photograph suggests that an adult made her up and of course an adult was on hand to take that particular image of her. The McCanns did not say who took the photograph. Even if Madeleine had ‘raided the dressing box’, as claimed, it is one thing to take a photo of something like that for your family photo album, but altogether another matter to release it for millions to see.

The McCanns explicitly approved the very public release of this video and the images on it. As one newspaper reported: “Parents of Madeleine McCann, who went missing three years ago, have released a new video and photo of their missing daughter to mark the third anniversary of the girl's disappearance”. The photo the McCanns specifically chose to highlight in the video was the one with Madeleine wearing heavy make-up, apparently applied by an adult and not by herself.

There was strong adverse reaction by many members of the public to this image being used in connection with a missing child. Not least was the opinion of Mr Mark Williams-Thomas, a former police detective and now leading criminologist and child protection expert, who has often in the past spoken with strong sympathy and understanding for the McCanns. His unambiguous reaction to this particular photograph, promoted on his ‘Twitter’ blog, was that it was ‘so inappropriate’ and ‘so damaging’. We agree with him.

The McCanns have from the day Madeleine was reported missing claimed explicitly and on many occasions that Madeleine must have been abducted by a paedophile, or paedophiles, often described by them as ‘predatory’, ‘evil’, or ‘ monsters’. Yet the photo of Madeleine featured by her parents shows a child looking much older than her actual three years, due to the make-up and jewellery, as all the news media quickly picked up the following day.

The McCanns said a number of times that they were advised by the police ‘not to show any emotion’ in front of the cameras. One newspaper reported, around the time the McCanns appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show: “The couple also admitted they had been advised not to show any emotion while in front of the media, because any potential abductor ‘may get a kick out of it’.” It was all the more surprising, therefore, that the McCanns should use this short video to project and promote an image of Madeleine which might well appeal to certain paedophiles, some of whom are unfortunately attracted to young children.

One person commented on ‘Twitter’ about the direct promotion of this video by CEOP Chief Executive Jim Gamble, writing: “If CEOP endorse this type of public relations for a supposed missing child, then their role in child protection has to be questioned!”

[quote="jd16"]Part of Article filed by Tony Bennett, Secretary, The Madeleine Foundation
10 October 2010

Furthermore, it was reported - and confirmed by a Home Office Freedom of Information Act request - that in October 2009, the McCanns had a private interview with the McCanns. Following that, several press reports (not denied) indicated that the Home Secretary asked Jim Gamble to recommend a new British police force to carry out a review and possibly a re-investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance.

WHICH MCCANNS DID THE MCCANNS HAVE A PRIVATE INTERVIEW WITH IN NOVEMBER 2009?

Badboy wrote:
WHICH MCCANNS DID THE MCCANNS HAVE A PRIVATE INTERVIEW WITH IN NOVEMBER 2009?

i saw this...think it a spelling mistake and probably should be jim gamble/CEOP

http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/2009/05/goncalo-amaral-appeal-for-photos-never.html

Gonçalo Amaral, the former PJ recalls that, with the consent from Portuguese authorities, an appeal was made for tourists to send in photos from the day and the night of Maddie’s disappearance. The purpose was “to identify anyone suspicious who might appear looking at the family”, he says.

But despite “much that arrived at the English police, none of those images ever reached us”.

The PJ have not received any photos at all resulting from the campaign launched by the Leicestershire police, asking tourists who were on holiday in Praia da Luz to send copies of photos taken during the two weeks preceding Madeleine McCann's disappearance.The appeal had been launched by Leicestershire police, in coordination with CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre) and the Association of Chief Police Officers. (ACPO)

According to a source close to the investigation in the United Kingdom, several hundred photos were sent to the British authorities, most of them downloaded via internet pages specially created for the occasion.

"We will then evaluate these images - at a rate of 1000 images an hour - so that before long we are sending the significant information to the Portuguese authorities. " Jim Gamble, head of CEOP had promised.

According to Jim Gamble, the official objective of this campaign was to make progress with the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance, using, notably, a programme of facial recognition for all the people "who might seem out of place or to be behaving strangely."

"Wondering what the real purpose was of launching the public appeal....We have not had access to those photos," one of the investigators confirms, stressing that the only photos the PJ were able to receive came to them directly from witnesses.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis


......LPP withhold all the other tourists pictures. LPP withhold the Gaspar statement. LPP DC Messiah makes sexual gestures to a jury member during a murder trial. The same LPP gordon brown makes a personal visit to. My god, talk about corruption!!! Instead of suing GA with their ridiculous claims of him stopping the search and investigation, they rather should be looking closer to home!

So these photos leading upto may 3rd could of potentially identified someone who did not want to be identified or placed someone at a time where they wern't supposed to be...dont know how you could find a photo with someone acting suspiciously in it

It has been said someone else was out there, any photos imo should have been sent
direct to the PJ, they were the force investigating.