Trial by media?

ShabbyTiger wrote:

I'm very sorry if I am being all negative but I just think that this thing is rotten to the core, corruption all the way up to the top and there is not a single thing that we can do to stop it.

Of course you're right.. It's obvious for all to see.

BUT, maybe.. just maybe some people out there are going to do the right thing.. There are some bad apples but there are also genuine people..

kathybelle wrote:Maybe DCI Redwood is giving the McCanns enough rope to hang themselves. However, he should not have said it was a privilege to help the McCanns, I can imagine Ben Needhams mum and mums of other missing children, whose children have not gone missing because of their neglect, being really upset. Especially when they haven't had the help the "gruesome twosome have had."

In my opinion, DCI Redwood was bang out of order when he made that crass statement. It was unprofessional conduct from a police officer, who has almost reached the top of his profession. I hope his superior carpets him for making that statement.

I believe that Dead Wood didn't actually mention the MCCs..... he said something like it was a privelege to be leading the case. Could someone confirm?

Your other points are excellent, kathybelle - spot on!

ShabbyTiger wrote:

kathybelle wrote:Maybe DCI Redwood is giving the McCanns enough rope to hang themselves. However, he should not have said it was a privilege to help the McCanns, I can imagine Ben Needhams mum and mums of other missing children, whose children have not gone missing because of their neglect, being really upset. Especially when they haven't had the help the "gruesome twosome have had."

In my opinion, DCI Redwood was bang out of order when he made that crass statement. It was unprofessional conduct from a police officer, who has almost reached the top of his profession. I hope his superior carpets him for making that statement.

I believe that Dead Wood didn't actually mention the MCCs..... he said something like it was a privelege to be leading the case. Could someone confirm?

Your other points are excellent, kathybelle - spot on!

I cannot repeat his sentance for you but when I heard it I took the context to mean the case. The it was a privelege as a police officer to be asked to head a team on such an important/high profile case. I did not take it to be a compliemntary towards the McCanns. Just my opinion though.

Hi ShabbyTiger,

I believe his words were along the lines that it was a huge privilege for the Met to be part of the investigation, then he kind of corrected himself and referred to it as a review. i don't think he referred to it being a privilege to help the parents.

Now, I may be catching some of TEIN's contagious optimism, but I believe that could be taken to imply that any copper would like to take part in solving one of the most niggling puzzles in recent years, even if it takes a few unexpected arrests close to home to achieve 'closure'.

Alfiefinn wrote:Hi ShabbyTiger,

I believe his words were along the lines that it was a huge privilege for the Met to be part of the investigation, then he kind of corrected himself and referred to it as a review. i don't think he referred to it being a privilege to help the parents.

Now, I may be catching some of TEIN's contagious optimism, but I believe that could be taken to imply that any copper would like to take part in solving one of the most niggling puzzles in recent years, even if it takes a few unexpected arrests close to home to achieve 'closure'.

That's more like it - I shall plough on relentlessly until the war is won.

Whatever facts remain to be uncovered, they remain constant regardless of what is said outside a Courtroom.

Is there something positive to be found in the appearance of the detective in charge of Scotland Yard's McCann case activities in a TV programme biased towards the McCanns, their story and against Dr Amaral and the Portuguese police? Yes - the information that all Scotland Yard's attempts to find something which supports the parents' and their accomplices' story of abduction have led nowhere. Is there anything else? No! What the hell is Redwood doing appearing on a TV discussion programme in the first place? Was it necessary? Do Scotland Yard detectives leading investigations into ongoing cases appear on TV discussions biased towards people who have yet to be eliminated as suspects (see quote: Assistant chief Constable of Leicestershire)? Answer - no they don't - ever! I hope that at least the Portuguese stay true to their principles and demand that Scotland Yard come up with new evidence and stop playing PR games together with the McCanns' team.

Thanks folks I can't bring myself to watch a repeat of Panorama, if I had I would have realised that Redwood didn't say what I thought he said. I'm glad I was wrong, the thought of Redwood being privileged to help the McCanns is too much to bear.

I think we're all with you there, KB.

marxman wrote:What if, and its a big if, the NSY and the PJ have
united together with one common goal, which is to
bring closure to this case without any potential
legal hurdles or obstructions in the future?
The BBC may have been advised to construct a
semi-fair perspective without stating material facts
or forensic evidence which may scupper a future
court case.
If Panarama had clearly illustrated guilt, or reported
actual forensic evidence to support a guilty verdict
towards any suspect, I believe that this may be
viewed as 'Trial by Media' with a certainty that NO
fair trial could be held in the future, and NO fair and
independent jury could be found either.
With this as a possibility, it may explain a lot of the
crucial facts missing from programme and the reasoning
behind Redwood's plea for an opening to the case.
This, I believe maybe away of the mark, but it does,
I think, view circumstances behind the scene in a
different light.
I would welcome your views. Thanks.

'

I used to hope that this was the case, but have been disillusioned so many times. I think the purpose of the review is simply to caste doubts on Amaral's opinion and then claim that, as Portugal see no need to reopen the case, it will remain a mystery. I often wonder about the true state of public opinion though...

kathybelle wrote:Thanks folks I can't bring myself to watch a repeat of Panorama, if I had I would have realised that Redwood didn't say what I thought he said. I'm glad I was wrong, the thought of Redwood being privileged to help the McCanns is too much to bear.

'

I have rewatched it and Redwood talks about solving the case and bringing closure, not about helping the McCanns. Maybe there is hope for justice, though, after 5 years of thinking we were on the verge of seeing this happen, I just find it hard to be optimistic...

i ve noted all thats said and agree with a many of the points raised, just wanted to say I have always had faith in the PJ, i do not think they are the people the McCs would like to think they are. jimo

everyone,
i like the tone of this thread...mainly..
i feel that all this neutral publicity is being put out for a reason,
i agree totally with marxman.
there can be no mishaps with this high profile case from either police force,
karma won't be cheated....i have believed this since day 1 of my lightbulb moment,
i have never once wavered.

I hate to be negative but if, and its a big if, the McCanns were ever charged, their teams of lawyers would argue that it would be impossible for them to have a fair trial anywhere due to the worldwide publicity over the past 5 years.

How easy would it be to find a jury who hadn't read about the case, or who had, and had formed an opinion, either way?

Most of that publicity has been favourable to them.

Certainly, claiming "no fair trial" would be de rigeur in such a Case, but the Case is tried on Evidence, not Hearsay, and there are a great many precedents for dealing with such matters - but I agree it is a thorny issue.

Still, their reputation and future lies would be destroyed anyway.

But I'd prefer it if they were locked up (Having been properly found to be Guilty).

James wrote:I hate to be negative but if, and its a big if, the McCanns were ever charged, their teams of lawyers would argue that it would be impossible for them to have a fair trial anywhere due to the worldwide publicity over the past 5 years.

How easy would it be to find a jury who hadn't read about the case, or who had, and had formed an opinion, either way?

I believe, and i could be mistaken, but in Portugal they do not have juries as we do.

It is a panel of Judges or something.

Anyone able to confirm? thanks

IIRC there are jury trials in Portugal, but they are not very common - mainly just judges.