Review Into Madeleine's Disappearance

As we all know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review into Madeleine's disappearance. I am wondering why the McCanns have never protested at these murder detectives being involved with the review.

One of the reasons they are suing Goncalo Amaral, is because he believes that Madeleine died in the McCanns holiday apartment. They say his belief is stopping people from looking for Madeleine. Couldn't the same be said of these murder detectives? They must think there is a possibility Madeleine has been murdered, otherwise they wouldn't be involved with the review.

If people aren't going to look for Madeleine, because of what Goncalo Amaral believes, they aren't going to look for Madeleine, now they know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review. Or is my mind working overtime.

And also when Andy Redwood said, she could still be alive, or sadly dead.
I agree with you, how can they now claim only Snr Amaral is stopping people looking for Madeleine when the top cop says it too?

The most important people who could and should search for Madeleine have, in fact, never done so.

As for Murder Squad Detectives, it rather depends upon whom it is assumed might have committed the putative Murder.

Healy & McCann have no choice and no voice in the Review, despite the incorrect presumption by some that it was their own pleadings that helped create the Review - the timings are all wrong for that and they slipped up because their letter to DC actually provided ammunition to justify (in some people's eyes) something that was already on the cards.

kathybelle wrote:As we all know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review into Madeleine's disappearance. I am wondering why the McCanns have never protested at these murder detectives being involved with the review.

One of the reasons they are suing Goncalo Amaral, is because he believes that Madeleine died in the McCanns holiday apartment. They say his belief is stopping people from looking for Madeleine. Couldn't the same be said of these murder detectives? They must think there is a possibility Madeleine has been murdered, otherwise they wouldn't be involved with the review.

If people aren't going to look for Madeleine, because of what Goncalo Amaral believes, they aren't going to look for Madeleine, now they know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review. Or is my mind working overtime.

So why, when they were still arguidos (1/08) and the Arade Dam search (set up by their own detectives although allegedly by Correia) resulted in small bones found as well as a rope, why was their first reaction 'that's wonderful news'????? You've just learned - allegedly - that your child's remains have been found together with the rope with which she was bound - most members here would have to be scraped off the floor if they'd have been in the McCanns' shoes.

It was wonderful news because it would let them off and also because they knew full well that it wasn't Maddie. (turned out to be cat's bones)

So - the point is - at that time it was good news to hear that the child was dead because it would be the end of their arguido status and in January of 2008 they were negotiating contracts for a feature film, a second documentary and in a bidding war between Oprah and another US talk show. A million pounds was mentioned for the last one alone.

wjk wrote:And also when Andy Redwood said, she could still be alive, or sadly dead.
I agree with you, how can they now claim only Snr Amaral is stopping people looking for Madeleine when the top cop says it too?

IMO that is the reason Redwood said "alive" Maddy, is to stop the McCanns and their threats.

I should have thought it was even simpler than that: ie He merely presented a balanced and non-committal point of view in keeping with the promise not to release details of the Review until its completion. A very hard thing to do under the Panorama spotlight and he wasn't as fluent as perhaps he might have been.

I doubt very much whether the former Arguidos are any the wiser than us, although I suspect they have secretly been buying brown trousers of late.

The End Is Nigh wrote:I should have thought it was even simpler than that: ie He merely presented a balanced and non-committal point of view in keeping with the promise not to release details of the Review until its completion. A very hard thing to do under the Panorama spotlight and he wasn't as fluent as perhaps he might have been.

I doubt very much whether the former Arguidos are any the wiser than us, although I suspect they have secretly been buying brown trousers of late.

And brown knickers as well.

I don't think Mr Redwood had any other option than to go down the Schrodinger road.

What's the betting they already know which far-flung non-extradition country to head for if they get as much as a whiff of what he really thinks?

And more importantly, I'm sure he is very mindful of the twins' situation.
We've already had dark mutterings from KM about car crashes and pressing buttons.
There has already been one 'moment of madness'.
Heaven forbid that there should be another.

It's one heck of a responsibility on his shoulders. He's a cop walking on eggshells.

almostgothic wrote:I don't think Mr Redwood had any other option than to go down the Schrodinger road.

What's the betting they already know which far-flung non-extradition country to head for if they get as much as a whiff of what he really thinks?

And more importantly, I'm sure he is very mindful of the twins' situation.
We've already had dark mutterings from KM about car crashes and pressing buttons.
There has already been one 'moment of madness'.
Heaven forbid that there should be another.

It's one heck of a responsibility on his shoulders. He's a cop walking on eggshells.

Hello almostgothic. The dark mutterings are either a genuine unbalanced mind or false to raise sympathy imo. Either way they are public knowledge and the twins are still with the parents, so take heed Social Services. On the other hand they could be just part of the script and really the four of them have a lovely family life and the twins are in no danger whatsoever.

The miserable amount revealed via Leveson has not inspired any hope in me. I think it most likely as "almostgothic" has said that the destination should the need arise has already been arranged. A slick operation would have already organised this and any other scenario.

I doubt very much that it would come to this though - as I have no hope regarding SY and the Review. But I think they will ultimately disappear to another country.

Why so pessimistic about SY and the Review ??

I regularly swing between the two. When I hear so many bigwigs so sure of their McCannfacts, I think how could all this possibly unravel? Too much egg on too many faces. Then I think... I simply do not believe that the majority of SY detectives have been nobbled, and why would such a very long and expensive review be set up in hard financial times, if some conclusion was not supposed to be reached. Then I come down in the middle. The likelihood of what happened will be discovered to SY's as well as the PJ's satisfaction... such that they will not feel the need to look for anyone else... or in another direction... but there will not be quite enough evidence to stand up in court, and the Crime Prosecution Service (if in the UK) or the Portuguese equivalent will say the case should be dropped/shelved again (though not I think 'closed'.) I don't think the case of a missing child can or should be permanently closed in either country. Oh dear... We have all been here before... and just about everyone has said the same thing before... Round and round in circles we go...

Nicely put, comperedna.

Something needs to prick the bubble and give the status quo the heave-ho.

kathybelle wrote:As we all know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review into Madeleine's disappearance. I am wondering why the McCanns have never protested at these murder detectives being involved with the review.

One of the reasons they are suing Goncalo Amaral, is because he believes that Madeleine died in the McCanns holiday apartment. They say his belief is stopping people from looking for Madeleine. Couldn't the same be said of these murder detectives? They must think there is a possibility Madeleine has been murdered, otherwise they wouldn't be involved with the review.

If people aren't going to look for Madeleine, because of what Goncalo Amaral believes, they aren't going to look for Madeleine, now they know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review. Or is my mind working overtime.

Correct me if I am wrong, there is no such thing as Murder Detectives. All detectives have a rank, Det. Con, Det. Sergenat, Det. Inspector and so on. Detectives, by their very nature, investigate the most serious of crimes, murder being amongst one of them. They also investigate abductions, frauds, armed robberies and anything else deemed serious enough. Detection means they do behind the scenes work. Within this there are various squads to whom detectives are attached, amongst them murder squads but these detectives have probably had experience on drug squads, fraud squads etc as well.

I think in the case of Madeleine we are looking at something very complex here, it may indeed be a murder, it may be an abduction, it may be both. SY would not get very far if they did not use the best detectives they have to hand

LJC wrote:

kathybelle wrote:As we all know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review into Madeleine's disappearance. I am wondering why the McCanns have never protested at these murder detectives being involved with the review.

One of the reasons they are suing Goncalo Amaral, is because he believes that Madeleine died in the McCanns holiday apartment. They say his belief is stopping people from looking for Madeleine. Couldn't the same be said of these murder detectives? They must think there is a possibility Madeleine has been murdered, otherwise they wouldn't be involved with the review.

If people aren't going to look for Madeleine, because of what Goncalo Amaral believes, they aren't going to look for Madeleine, now they know a team of murder detectives are involved with the review. Or is my mind working overtime.

Correct me if I am wrong, there is no such thing as Murder Detectives. All detectives have a rank, Det. Con, Det. Sergenat, Det. Inspector and so on. Detectives, by their very nature, investigate the most serious of crimes, murder being amongst one of them. They also investigate abductions, frauds, armed robberies and anything else deemed serious enough. Detection means they do behind the scenes work. Within this there are various squads to whom detectives are attached, amongst them murder squads but these detectives have probably had experience on drug squads, fraud squads etc as well.

I think in the case of Madeleine we are looking at something very complex here, it may indeed be a murder, it may be an abduction, it may be both. SY would not get very far if they did not use the best detectives they have to hand

If it helps I'll rephrase my post.

A murder team, within the Homicide and Serious Crime Command, was asked to conduct the review and is lead by Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood acting to Chief Superintendant Hamish Campbell and Commander Simon Foy. I used the word murder instead of homicide because I was under the impression that we all knew that the words murder and homicide, both relate to the killing of a human being.

By the way I was married to a police dog handler in the 1960's and 70's. We had friends in all departments of the police force, some were lower rank uniformed police officers and some were lower rank detectives. So I had a good idea of what kind of departments there were within the police force.

I would imagine that the murder/homicide detectives would have been asked to conduct the review, alongside the PJ, because of the report of the Portuguese Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida. He concluded that Madeleine died in the McCanns apartment and the McCanns covered up the cadaver scent. He also concluded that the McCanns and their friends, lied from day one of the investigation.

In fact Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida came to the same conclusion as Dr Amaral. I wonder why the McCanns aren't suing him?

There's also Helen Monteiro, at the Pt end. Another detective in charge of a homicide squad, another specialist in finding dead bodies. The message couldn't be clearer.

If SY are doing their job properly, we should have no idea what they are doing........if that makes sense.

mossman wrote:If SY are doing their job properly, we should have no idea what they are doing........if that makes sense.

Makes sense to me, a review, not a preview!

kathybelle - In fact Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida came to the same conclusion as Dr Amaral. I wonder why the McCanns aren't suing him? .


A very poignant point.

If people genuinely wanted to get to the bottom of what happened to Madeleine, they should be
willing to look at all angles, strange that some Mccann supporters totally dismiss the Report of Ch.Inspector Tavares de Almeida. One would think that with this report, Amarals conclusions, the dogs findings, etc. that anyone genuinely interested in the case would be questionning the Mccanns behaviour.

mossman wrote:If SY are doing their job properly, we should have no idea what they are doing........if that makes sense.

And we don't do we.....interesting times to come imo
I'm sure when Amaral has his say in the future McCann Court Case he will be using this against the McCanns......hopefully.
Kathbelle I understand your post perfectly
In fact Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida came to the same conclusion as Dr Amaral. I wonder why the McCanns aren't suing him?
I wonder Kathbelle

So sorry, I didn't mean to come across the way it sounded kathybelle. I too have strong family links to a police officer, in fact a high ranking CID officer within my family (just about to retire) and I myself used to work for the police in administration.

The McCanns asked for a review and by golly they got it, so I doubt they can show any upset at the fact it is to be carried out by those with expertise in murder and homicide investigations. At the end of the day any officer who has the ability to investigate a murder finds him or herself working in one of the most complex of investigative areas. However, if you want the best, which I believe the McCanns do (at least they say they do) then that is the sort of officer you want on the review. I just think at the end of the day abductions of children of this type are so rare that the nearest you are going to get, experience wise, are police officers with expertise is solving the most serious of all crime, murder.

LJC wrote:So sorry, I didn't mean to come across the way it sounded kathybelle. I too have strong family links to a police officer, in fact a high ranking CID officer within my family (just about to retire) and I myself used to work for the police in administration.

The McCanns asked for a review and by golly they got it, so I doubt they can show any upset at the fact it is to be carried out by those with expertise in murder and homicide investigations. At the end of the day any officer who has the ability to investigate a murder finds him or herself working in one of the most complex of investigative areas. However, if you want the best, which I believe the McCanns do (at least they say they do) then that is the sort of officer you want on the review. I just think at the end of the day abductions of children of this type are so rare that the nearest you are going to get, experience wise, are police officers with expertise is solving the most serious of all crime, murder.

Thanks for your apology LJC.

Regarding the McCanns wanting a review, they didn't want the PJ involved with the review or Scotland Yard, they wanted David Cameron to conduct the review. Gerry McCann spoke to the media, about the request he and his wife had made to David Cameron, to conduct a review. His exact words were "He knows what it's like to lose a child."

I can only imagine how David and Samantha Cameron felt, when they heard Gerry McCann use their deceased son Ivan, in the same way as Madeleine. Especially as Madeleine is missing, because of the McCanns behaviour.

When Gerry discovered that David Cameron had asked Scotland Yard to assist the PJ with the review, he said they only partially got what they asked for. If Gerry had wanted Madeleine to be found, he wouldn't have cared who conducted the review.

According to Goncalo Amaral, Kate and Gerry McCann demanded the archiving of the process, while they were still arguidos. Again they only partially got what they demanded, because the case has only been shelved.

The McCanns shouldn't have been allowed to make these demands because they were and still are unconvicted criminals. They broke the Portuguese law, when they left their children unsupervised each time they went out for the evening. The friends who left their children in a similar situation to the McCanns children, are also unconvicted criminals. The PJ couldn't prosecute the McCanns mates for their offences, because they were not going to prosecute the McCanns, due to the McCanns having Government connections.

However, if it had been one of the children of the McCanns friends who had gone missing, instead of Madeleine, the parents of the missing child would have been banged up in prison. Always assuming they didn't have the same contacts as the McCanns.

This case stinks.

Given all the information we have mused over during the course of the last five years then i would have to say that Scotland Yard and their vast array of dedicated and skilled officers are certainly taking their time,at great cost to the tax payer i should add.
I remain more than a little sceptical,more so because their track record at solving any kind of crime has never been that good.

That's okay kathybelle, no offence meant.

My point of view when you say they asked David Cameron to do the review, however, will differ. Yes, they asked David Cameron to carry out a review, meaning, I beleive, that they asked him to put the wheels in motion and instruct those capable of carrying out a review, which he did. David Cameron himself is not capable of carrying out a review. What experience has he? What time has he? I doubt, as Prime Minister, he can even fit in a full 8 hours sleep most nights without being disturbed by phone calls. All he can do, as Prime Minister, is either authorise or turn down specific requests and if he grants such requests he would, in turn, instruct another organisation to do the necessary work involved. I thought, at some point in time, that I had read that West Yorkshire Police were going to either re-investigate or do a review, but, following the McCanns request now, Cameron has authorised SY to do this.

We should not expect this to come to a conclusion any time soon I think. Such reviews can take months, years and even more years. Any review is a huge task, and this one especially. Can you imagine the bundle after bundle and box after box of paperwork, all to be read through, perhaps more than once. It is huge, enormous and painstaking. I doubt we will even know its conclusion when it is eventually reached, although would not be surprised if this was not leeked.

As for what would happen if it were one of the other tapas friends whose child went missing, I doubt it would be much different to be honest, depending on their personalities. The McCanns, I think, have nerve in plentiful supply and they are in this for the long haul. I do not think it would have been any different whoever of them had lost their child in terms of the initial police investigation and how the PJ handled it, but whether any of the others would have had the fight in them that the McCanns have, I am not so sure, but saying that, none of them have buckled under up until now, so who knows. I personally do not think there has been any sort of protection, just lack of enough proof up until now for this case to go to Court with. Court cases are very costly, costs can be awarded to the prosecution if they fail to persuade a judge and jury and, in my opinion, better to wait 20 years and get it right than go with what we have to date and see them walk out of Court talking about compensation and selling even more stories to the press. Oh I would hate that. This has got to be as water-tight as it can be or, if not, I would prefer they spend a lifetime with everyone pointing fingers at them still, anything but to see them walk out of Court as free people and immediately start to sue all and sundry again.

But surely on going over the initial statements of the T7 is enough to bring them in for questioning again and again and again?? This has to be where the answers lay. There timeline just doesnt add up. Neither does the abduction theory - we only have JT word for it. Surely this can be gone over again. Reviewing after the initial couple of days should come after - surely? I am no policeman but I would have thought a start at the very beginning is the place to start?
Unless they are properly interviewed in a correct manner how is this going to draw conclusion?