Lord Toby Harris Blog about the Review

Vigil for missing children outside City Hall as Metropolitan Police Authority meets

• Author: Toby
  
• Filed under: Conservative Party, Criminal justice, Culture media and sport, Education and young people, Europe, Liberal Democrats, London, Policing
  

Wednesday
May 25,2011
The Metropolitan Police Authority meets tomorrow at City Hall for the first time since the Prime Minister instructed/encouraged/invited/asked the Commissioner to consider a review of the Madeleine McCann case. And outside there will be a vigil to remember all missing children attended by relatives and campaigners. Several MPA members (including Jenny Jones AM and Jennette Arnold AM) have already announced they will be joining them.
I am sure that those campaigners and relatives will be asking whether the cases in which they are concerned can be reviewed by the Metropolitan Police in the same way that the Madeleine McCann case is to be. And this is hardly surprising.
The Commissioner will no doubt tonight be polishing up his answers as to why he made the operational decision (without being pressurised by a politician, of course) that the McCann case should be reviewed and whether the same factors will apply to the other cases.
He will also no doubt remind the Authority that the Home Office has offered to pay for the costs of the investigation. This is, I am sure, a welcome contribution to the Met’s budget, but will this cover only the additional costs of the investigation or will it cover the costs of the salaries of the detectives engaged in the review and, if so, where will the replacement detectives be found to cover the work that those detectives would otherwise have done?
And was this offer of financial assistance a factor in the operational decision that the Commissioner made to have this review? And, if it was a factor, does the offer to pay guarantee anyone else a Metropolitan Police case review? Might be a nice little earner.
I am sure the Commissioner has also given thought to what will happen after the review has been concluded. Will the review be shared with the McCann’s? And, if not, what is the purpose of the review? I am confident that all will be made clear tomorrow.


Share:

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

• RSS feed for comments on this post
  
• TrackBack URI
  

5 Responses for "Vigil for missing children outside City Hall as Metropolitan Police Authority meets"

1. R MoatMay 25th, 2011 at 20:46Compare & contrast with the Ben Needham case. Nuff said.
   
2. linda gunninghamMay 26th, 2011 at 15:26Perhaps now “the MaCaans fund” is once again replenished with the Sun and book monies,the decent thing would be for the parents to pay for this review ,after all the fund was set up with the supposed purpose of enabling them to “leave no stone unturned” in their search for Madeleine!!!!! Why they NEVER ask for the case to be re-opened is beyond most parents comprehension,but then again,theyve dictated what does and doesn,t happen FROM DAY ONE,WHY IS THAT ???? lies and cover ups abound,and why did Clarence Mitchell get involved in this missing child ,has any other parent of a missing child had that support??? I,m ashamedto say the “cover-ups” point to people in “high places” having more than one finger in this debacle,Please please make them answer how Mr Cameron can possibly jusitfy spending “our” money on this “reveiw”,when the police cuts are as bad as they are being threatened with. PS Is the fund actually “legal” ????
   
3. JefferyMay 26th, 2011 at 15:39Interesting… now that a precedent has been set for ‘the Met Police to take the liberty, and without invitation, to review the work of another police force in another country where the Met Police have absolutely no authority’.. how can we ordinary members of the public put in an application for such a request… let me know… you see there’s a few police forces out there who are not playing by the rules…
   
4. DavidMay 30th, 2011 at 0:34It’s glaringly obvious how the McCanns’ fund will be used now that profits from the book are starting to flow in and the “search” will be handed over to the Met. It will be used to pay the substantial legal fees to be incurred in pursuit of libel damages from Sr Goncalo Amaral, the Portuguese detective who published his analysis which conflicts with the McCanns’ version of events. Do donors to the fund and purchasers of the book expect their money to be used by the McCanns for this purpose?
   
5. AlexandraJune 8th, 2011 at 22:07Why are McCanns writing books to tell their version of the truth and getting money to keep the search of their daughter active if they can do it for free?
   They just need to ask the Portuguese police to reopen the investigation files (where the truth is already in, isn’t it?) and I’m sure Portuguese and British police can go, again, to the field to find what is still missing to solve this case for good.
   McCanns do not need to have fresh evidence to ask the reopening of the process. They just have to ask and cooperate with the police.
   This familiar search company “leaving no stone unturned” did not produce any results. In fact has raised many doubts because there is not one single positive sightseeing of Madeleine – the most advertised missing girl in the world and there is not a SINGLE evidence of abduction either. No trace was left behind. That goes against police guidelines when a crime occurs… So, McCann’s duty is to full cooperate with the police. Asking the reopening of the police investigation, not a review. Review is not good enough. Madeleine deserves much more. McCanns can start with the reconstitution of the night that their daughter has
   ==================
   Several good points raised here , especially the comments.
   

=

So many good points. But Clarence was such a charitable chap that he just had to help the McCannes. (If you believe that you will believe anything!)

SteveT wrote:So many good points. But Clarence was such a charitable chap that he just had to help the McCannes. (If you believe that you will believe anything!)

Precisely SteveT and these days he is conspicuous by his absence . When was the last time he "spoke" for the McCanns and commented on these
sightings.? Rats deserting the sinking ship comes to mind.
I also think that judging by the comments the Public is far more critical of the McCanns.

Panda,

I think his paymasters have made that decision.

SteveT wrote:Panda,

I think his paymasters have made that decision.

I think the McCanns miss him because he was the one who protected them from the Press.

Panda wrote:

SteveT wrote:So many good points. But Clarence was such a charitable chap that he just had to help the McCannes. (If you believe that you will believe anything!)

Precisely SteveT and these days he is conspicuous by his absence . When was the last time he "spoke" for the McCanns and commented on these
sightings.? Rats deserting the sinking ship comes to mind.
I also think that judging by the comments the Public is far more critical of the McCanns.

Agreed Panda. I think its all starting to unravel....
IMHO their action against Tony Bennett was a bullet in the foot for them. So many Twitterers making it known to the general population, FB too. Put it on mine about the court case and it was the first time I got more than one 'like' for a McCann status... Our Press may be gutless, but the word is getting out...

rainbow-fairy wrote:

Panda wrote:

SteveT wrote:So many good points. But Clarence was such a charitable chap that he just had to help the McCannes. (If you believe that you will believe anything!)

Precisely SteveT and these days he is conspicuous by his absence . When was the last time he "spoke" for the McCanns and commented on these
sightings.? Rats deserting the sinking ship comes to mind.
I also think that judging by the comments the Public is far more critical of the McCanns.

Agreed Panda. I think its all starting to unravel....
IMHO their action against Tony Bennett was a bullet in the foot for them. So many Twitterers making it known to the general population, FB too. Put it on mine about the court case and it was the first time I got more than one 'like' for a McCann status... Our Press may be gutless, but the word is getting out...

Hi rainbow-fairy, I don't think any of us liked Clarence, but he WAS very effective at shielding the McCanns. Now they are on their own , they are making a pigs ear of PR, upsetting the Press by siding with Leveson, no asking what they think of these "sightings", no T.V. interviews where Kate could plug her new Book and most damning of all showing they can't take criticism without suing people and using Carter Ruck at £600 per hour, although they might have a discount for all the money they have paid the Lawyers and got them free publicity by having their name in the Press.

agree panda clarrie did shield them -- well did their spinning -- but he made a lot of cock up s too there was many a post saying why do they need a pr man -all over the net -- maybe by letting clarrie go they think that they are looking after other peoples money they are spending

cass wrote:agree panda clarrie did shield them -- well did their spinning -- but he made a lot of cock up s too there was many a post saying why do they need a pr man -all over the net -- maybe by letting clarrie go they think that they are looking after other peoples money they are spending

I know Clarence started a new job , not with the Company that had that Cruise Ship run aground, but really he had no choice although he might have been nervous about what the SY Review (if we ever get to know what it contains) might reveal. Also, the NSU search, I use the word loosely of course, has not been necessary for the past couple of years . I think the Fund will be closed if SY find no evidence of PJ negligence because the McCanns must know now Madeleine will not be found and the Public know it too so they will not donate. I wonder if the McCanns will have access to the Report , the public won't that's for sure.

It does seem strange that nobody is speaking out for the McCanns, imo Clarry is long gone I no he was supposed to have spoke about the recent Bennet Court case but no one actually saw him, he probably just called the newspaper as a favour, but he jumped ship along time go, remember the fund was so low....

I think it's more to do with funds, just shows what a good caring chappy Clarry is, they do say birds if a feather flock together....they all deserve each other imo.