The Telegraph - 24 April 2012

mossman wrote:But he said if the case is to be reopened, it is up to the Portuguese police.

"It is a sovereign decision for the Portuguese authorities. But obviously what we seek to do is to bring them the best quality information to assist them in making that decision.


Ok, so is this good or bad.

Is this S Yard's way of passing the buck for when the case is re-opened and it will not seem as if it is they who are taking down the behind the scene string pullers and government contacts ?

Surely, surely Portugal would re-open if encouraged by SY, if for no other reason than to get rid of the McCann affair once and for all.

Is my optomistic hat too big ?

From another post (panorama post, a translation from AnnaEsse) :

AnnaEsse wrote:

The information disclosed by several British tabloids, also makes clear that Chief Inspector Andy Redwood's team anticipate that their report could lead to the reopening of the investigation in Portugal.

pennylane wrote:

MaryB wrote:Well I think a word of caution might be in order. Just becasue Mr Amaral has spoken to the programme's researchers doesn't mean that he will be actually appearing on it. Or even that the information he gave will be featured on the programme. I still think it will say absolutely nothing and be a complete waste of time. But then I'm not always right!!

I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB.

Why would Scotland Yard even touch anything collected by the McCanns own, private dicks??? Good grief, what an abuse of taxpayers money. I've never heard of anything so suspicious. Also we have to see how Amaral is portrayed.

Dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's' and the beginnings of the white wash (imo). I would bet money on it.

Still, it's lovely to see Amaral spoken of in a respectful manner for once in the UK!

I'm with both of you. I do hope they aren't wasting taxpayers' money going through the million and ten false sightings for one thing. I'm sure they're amongst the 40,000 pieces of information.

pennylane wrote:

MaryB wrote:Well I think a word of caution might be in order. Just becasue Mr Amaral has spoken to the programme's researchers doesn't mean that he will be actually appearing on it. Or even that the information he gave will be featured on the programme. I still think it will say absolutely nothing and be a complete waste of time. But then I'm not always right!!

I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB.

Why would Scotland Yard even touch anything collected by the McCanns own, private dicks??? Good grief, what an abuse of taxpayers money. I've never heard of anything so suspicious. Also we have to see how Amaral is portrayed.

Dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's' and the beginnings of the white wash (imo). I would bet money on it.

Still, it's lovely to see Amaral spoken of in a respectful manner for once in the UK!

"I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB."

Yes me too

dutchclogs wrote:

pennylane wrote:

MaryB wrote:Well I think a word of caution might be in order. Just becasue Mr Amaral has spoken to the programme's researchers doesn't mean that he will be actually appearing on it. Or even that the information he gave will be featured on the programme. I still think it will say absolutely nothing and be a complete waste of time. But then I'm not always right!!

I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB.

Why would Scotland Yard even touch anything collected by the McCanns own, private dicks??? Good grief, what an abuse of taxpayers money. I've never heard of anything so suspicious. Also we have to see how Amaral is portrayed.

Dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's' and the beginnings of the white wash (imo). I would bet money on it.

Still, it's lovely to see Amaral spoken of in a respectful manner for once in the UK!

"I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB."

Yes me too

I don't like it. It will be "when interviewed for the programme (because he won't be on it), Amaral admitted that the Portuguese made mistakes."

dazedandconfused wrote:

pennylane wrote:

MaryB wrote:Well I think a word of caution might be in order. Just becasue Mr Amaral has spoken to the programme's researchers doesn't mean that he will be actually appearing on it. Or even that the information he gave will be featured on the programme. I still think it will say absolutely nothing and be a complete waste of time. But then I'm not always right!!

I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB.

Why would Scotland Yard even touch anything collected by the McCanns own, private dicks??? Good grief, what an abuse of taxpayers money. I've never heard of anything so suspicious. Also we have to see how Amaral is portrayed.

Dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's' and the beginnings of the white wash (imo). I would bet money on it.

Still, it's lovely to see Amaral spoken of in a respectful manner for once in the UK!

I'm with both of you. I do hope they aren't wasting taxpayers' money going through the million and ten false sightings for one thing. I'm sure they're amongst the 40,000 pieces of information.

Surely they would have to go through those files, if for no other reason than in the event of them bringing a prosecution the first question that could be asked would be what about Mr A, Mr B, take your pick. In order for them to be able to discount the sightings and prove they were rubbish, they would have to investigate them first.

The official inquiry was formally shelved in July 2008 but Scotland Yard’s review of the case, called Operation Grange, was launched last year at the request of Theresa May, the Home Secretary, in response to a plea from the McCanns.

kitti wrote:The official inquiry was formally shelved in July 2008 but Scotland Yard’s review of the case, called Operation Grange, was launched last year at the request of Theresa May, the Home Secretary, in response to a plea from the McCanns.

I am not sure Operation Grange was quite the "independent, transparent and comprehensive review" they were "pleading" for. IIRC it took them at least a week or so to even acknowledge it being done

Justiceforallkids wrote:lol the ugly moronic blue forum is already bragging that GA admitted he may have made mistakes wlel so what police officers are NOT perfect they are human like everybody else i bet if they were in need of police they would beg for their help hypocrites

It's understandable. These are the kind of creatures who find it perfectly normal to go on holiday with 3 kids return with two because you lost one while you were busy eating and drinking and still call it responsible parenting. They are clearly not used to the concept of truth, honesty and acceptance of responsibility.

Claudia79 wrote:

Justiceforallkids wrote:lol the ugly moronic blue forum is already bragging that GA admitted he may have made mistakes wlel so what police officers are NOT perfect they are human like everybody else i bet if they were in need of police they would beg for their help hypocrites

It's understandable. These are the kind of creatures who find it perfectly normal to go on holiday with 3 kids return with two because you lost one while you were busy eating and drinking and still call it responsible parenting. They are clearly not used to the concept of truth, honesty and acceptance of responsibility.

agree and its very sad they dont care abour maddie

mossman wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

pennylane wrote:

MaryB wrote:Well I think a word of caution might be in order. Just becasue Mr Amaral has spoken to the programme's researchers doesn't mean that he will be actually appearing on it. Or even that the information he gave will be featured on the programme. I still think it will say absolutely nothing and be a complete waste of time. But then I'm not always right!!

I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB.

Why would Scotland Yard even touch anything collected by the McCanns own, private dicks??? Good grief, what an abuse of taxpayers money. I've never heard of anything so suspicious. Also we have to see how Amaral is portrayed.

Dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's' and the beginnings of the white wash (imo). I would bet money on it.

Still, it's lovely to see Amaral spoken of in a respectful manner for once in the UK!

I'm with both of you. I do hope they aren't wasting taxpayers' money going through the million and ten false sightings for one thing. I'm sure they're amongst the 40,000 pieces of information.

Surely they would have to go through those files, if for no other reason than in the event of them bringing a prosecution the first question that could be asked would be what about Mr A, Mr B, take your pick. In order for them to be able to discount the sightings and prove they were rubbish, they would have to investigate them first.

It's going to take them years in that case, the sightings are still coming, not exactly thick and fast, but in dribs and drabs. If they investigate every single one, which the Portuguese have already discounted, this could be a never ending task.

MaryB wrote:Well I think a word of caution might be in order. Just becasue Mr Amaral has spoken to the programme's researchers doesn't mean that he will be actually appearing on it. Or even that the information he gave will be featured on the programme. I still think it will say absolutely nothing and be a complete waste of time. But then I'm not always right!!

Agree.

dazedandconfused wrote:

mossman wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

pennylane wrote:

MaryB wrote:Well I think a word of caution might be in order. Just becasue Mr Amaral has spoken to the programme's researchers doesn't mean that he will be actually appearing on it. Or even that the information he gave will be featured on the programme. I still think it will say absolutely nothing and be a complete waste of time. But then I'm not always right!!

I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB.

Why would Scotland Yard even touch anything collected by the McCanns own, private dicks??? Good grief, what an abuse of taxpayers money. I've never heard of anything so suspicious. Also we have to see how Amaral is portrayed.

Dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's' and the beginnings of the white wash (imo). I would bet money on it.

Still, it's lovely to see Amaral spoken of in a respectful manner for once in the UK!

I'm with both of you. I do hope they aren't wasting taxpayers' money going through the million and ten false sightings for one thing. I'm sure they're amongst the 40,000 pieces of information.

Surely they would have to go through those files, if for no other reason than in the event of them bringing a prosecution the first question that could be asked would be what about Mr A, Mr B, take your pick. In order for them to be able to discount the sightings and prove they were rubbish, they would have to investigate them first.

It's going to take them years in that case, the sightings are still coming, not exactly thick and fast, but in dribs and drabs. If they investigate every single one, which the Portuguese have already discounted, this could be a never ending task.

I certainly feel they would have regard to the files already there. I think it would be remiss of them not to take them into account, or at least be seen to do this, in the event of wanting to prosecute. It would not necessarily be sit down and read every word, but we know they took the files so they must have wanted them for some reason.

If much of the information was useless and not factual as some believe, it could be used as another nail in the coffin for the prosecution.

All speculation on my part of course. But in the context of them looking at the information or paying it no regard at all, I would feel it more positive for them to have taken the files.

mossman wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

mossman wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

pennylane wrote:

I'm ultra cautious, and with you MaryB.

Why would Scotland Yard even touch anything collected by the McCanns own, private dicks??? Good grief, what an abuse of taxpayers money. I've never heard of anything so suspicious. Also we have to see how Amaral is portrayed.

Dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's' and the beginnings of the white wash (imo). I would bet money on it.

Still, it's lovely to see Amaral spoken of in a respectful manner for once in the UK!

I'm with both of you. I do hope they aren't wasting taxpayers' money going through the million and ten false sightings for one thing. I'm sure they're amongst the 40,000 pieces of information.

Surely they would have to go through those files, if for no other reason than in the event of them bringing a prosecution the first question that could be asked would be what about Mr A, Mr B, take your pick. In order for them to be able to discount the sightings and prove they were rubbish, they would have to investigate them first.

It's going to take them years in that case, the sightings are still coming, not exactly thick and fast, but in dribs and drabs. If they investigate every single one, which the Portuguese have already discounted, this could be a never ending task.

I certainly feel they would have regard to the files already there. I think it would be remiss of them not to take them into account, or at least be seen to do this, in the event of wanting to prosecute. It would not necessarily be sit down and read every word, but we know they took the files so they must have wanted them for some reason.

If much of the information was useless and not factual as some believe, it could be used as another nail in the coffin for the prosecution.

All speculation on my part of course. But in the context of them looking at the information or paying it no regard at all, I would feel it more positive for them to have taken the files.

I admire your optimism mossman. Wish I felt as confident. Do you think they'll be going after spottyman, eggman, George Harrison man with an aim to prosecute? I'd have more confidence in them doing that than for them to be building a case against the sainted pair.

At my most cynical I would say Amaral will be quoted saying he made mistakes - Redwood will say yes you did - we have seen a trail that was not followed up now that its so cold we have one last hope of tracing it.

For his part the Mc's will drop the libel case - Amaral will be allowed to walk away and Kates booik will become a best seller revealing the mistakes made and how hard done by they are.

I also think that this prog has been released early as someone had a tip-off that was heading for the Sunday papers so they have had to go early to pre-empt it. Just my thoughts!

dazedandconfused wrote:

mossman wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

mossman wrote:

dazedandconfused wrote:

I'm with both of you. I do hope they aren't wasting taxpayers' money going through the million and ten false sightings for one thing. I'm sure they're amongst the 40,000 pieces of information.

Surely they would have to go through those files, if for no other reason than in the event of them bringing a prosecution the first question that could be asked would be what about Mr A, Mr B, take your pick. In order for them to be able to discount the sightings and prove they were rubbish, they would have to investigate them first.

It's going to take them years in that case, the sightings are still coming, not exactly thick and fast, but in dribs and drabs. If they investigate every single one, which the Portuguese have already discounted, this could be a never ending task.

I certainly feel they would have regard to the files already there. I think it would be remiss of them not to take them into account, or at least be seen to do this, in the event of wanting to prosecute. It would not necessarily be sit down and read every word, but we know they took the files so they must have wanted them for some reason.

If much of the information was useless and not factual as some believe, it could be used as another nail in the coffin for the prosecution.

All speculation on my part of course. But in the context of them looking at the information or paying it no regard at all, I would feel it more positive for them to have taken the files.

I admire your optimism mossman. Wish I felt as confident. Do you think they'll be going after spottyman, eggman, George Harrison man with an aim to prosecute? I'd have more confidence in them doing that than for them to be building a case against the sainted pair.

Well they cannot go after them as they don't exist.

But what I was answering was your question about why would SY even touch the information and I still think if they were going ahead with a prosecution then they will only do so on the basis of being absolutely certain they have done everything right. They will not have a third bite at the cherry so they would have to make sure they have covered every angle. The defence will of course ask about those sightings, SY would have to descredit them. They cannot do that if they have not reviewed the information in relation to them.

Perhaps they have not looked at those files at all, but they have been "reviewing" for 12 months now, so they have to say they were reviewing someting !

I am not being optimistic about a prosecution nor do I think it is just around the corner or indeed if it will ever happen at all but if they even wanted to pretend they were doing something they would need to have those files.

Is there a statute of limitations on Portugal, if a crime was commited x years ago then that time has passed so you cant bring a prosecution i.e a lesser crime than murder or something like that where there is no time limit. It all seems too co-incidental to be happening at the time of am anniversary, or am I being too pessimistic. Still from my point of view it can only get better.

“We are here in terms of seeking to bring closure to the case,” he said. “That would be the ultimate objective and is our ultimate objective. Closure means establishing what has happened to Madeleine McCann.”

"closure to the case"... "what happened". They are sure M. is no more alive.

Sorry mossman. Wasn't trying to be argumentative. Just a bit down after watching the clip promoting the Panorama programme.

dazedandconfused wrote:Sorry mossman. Wasn't trying to be argumentative. Just a bit down after watching the clip promoting the Panorama programme.

No need for sorry, I did not think you were being argumentative. If I came across that way, I'm sorry.

Think we are all a bit stunned but who knows what will happen tomorrow, things might look brighter this time tomorrow.

frencheuropean wrote:“We are here in terms of seeking to bring closure to the case,” he said. “That would be the ultimate objective and is our ultimate objective. Closure means establishing what has happened to Madeleine McCann.”

"closure to the case"... "what happened". They are sure M. is no more alive.

This is EXACTLY what I think they are going to say..

The pj came to a closure in 2008 when they said she died in apt 3a and the mccanns hid the body.....you can't get any more closure than that.

Iris wrote:

I don't like it. It will be "when interviewed for the programme (because he won't be on it), Amaral admitted that the Portuguese made mistakes."

Of course he made mistakes. I bet Goncalo could write a big list of everything he would do differently if given the chance and if he could... Justice would have been done! It is def positive he is being included in this as they must do a background to explain why he is no longer 'disgraced'.

Just a thought....we know that Madeleine is still a Ward of Court and in Britain a "missing presumed dead " after 7 years can be applied for dealing with
the missing persons Estate etc. Obviously Madeleine does not have an Estate but the High Court is still obliged to keep a search going until Madeleine is 7 even if the PJ closes the case. What if Andy Redwood's remark about closure is to stop the McCanns from insisting the U.K. carry on the search.?

Not for want off trying panda......Madeleine does not have an estate....if the mccanns would off got there way and been allowed to add her in there libel case against mr amaral......and won.......guess where her 'estate' would off gone.

kitti wrote:Not for want off trying panda......Madeleine does not have an estate....if the mccanns would off got there way and been allowed to add her in there libel case against mr amaral......and won.......guess where her 'estate' would off gone.

Morning Kitty......what if the McCanns have been very astute, through their Tax advisors and had the £200,000 from the Sun, plus the Advance from
Transworld placed in a Bank Account for Madeleiene.? This way they can keep the case open and when the case is formally closed after 7 years
take over Madeleine's "Estate" and pay themselves and the twins £3000 every year as a gift which is not taxable.