"Red tape hampering search for Madeleine McCann" (Express)

Red tape hampering search for Madeleine McCann Daily Express

THE parents of Madeleine McCann want police to form a joint British and Portuguese task-force to find their daughter.

By: David Pilditch
Published: Thu, February 20, 2014

Missing Madeleine McCann was abducted from her parents holiday apartment in 2007 [PA]
The couple are said to be frustrated that the level of co-operation between the two forces "isn't as it should be".

I.e. the sardine munchers won't play ball and do as they're bloody well told.

It comes amid growing concerns that investigators are conducting separate inquiries instead of pooling resources.

Last night a friend of the couple said they were worried that a potential conflict will hinder the search for Madeleine, abducted in May 2007.

The source said: "It is obvious that the co-operation between Britain and Portugal isn't as it should be.

"There are two police inquiries going on in two different countries trying to find out what happened to Madeleine and you would want and hope that they would work together."

British investigators are focusing on three local burglars blamed for a string of break-ins at the Algarve holiday resort of Praia da Luz, where Madeleine was staying with her family. In what could be a breakthrough, Scotland Yard honed in on the three men after a painstaking trawl through mobile phone records.

It is understood there was significant phone traffic between them around the time Madeleine, then aged three, vanished.

Portugal's Policia Judiciaria are concentrating their efforts on a theory that a sacked resort worker abducted Madeleine. Heroin addict Euclides Monteiro, 40, was killed in a tractor accident four years ago, but mobile phone analysis placed his handset near the McCanns' apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

There have also been concerns Scotland Yard's Operation Grange investigation has been caught up in red tape.

British police have to send international letters of request to Portugal via the Crown Prosecution Service each time they want officers to carry out investigative work on their behalf.

Last night the source close to the McCanns said: "Kate and Gerry hope, for the sake of Madeleine, the two countries' forces can work together in a joint investigation."

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has also called for senior detectives from both countries to conduct a single inquiry.

No,he hasn't.  He said that they needed to "work together".  It was on 5 Live, in his own words.

Last night the McCanns' spokesman said: "Kate and Gerry remain very pleased with the work Scotland Yard continue to do in the search for Madeleine."

Doesn't he have some litter to pick up on a beach or something?

There is another article in the Express, Page 5 , heading 'Madeleine Police to join forces in hunt'. He is being interviewed on the Radio and Nicky Campbell says ' you have lines of enquiry, you have suspects, you have names? 'That's right' replies Sir Bernard.


Rather going out on a limb wouldn't you say???

'Authorities in London and Lisbon are working to set up a joint squad to take advantage of European Law to speed up cross border enquiries' this from John Twomey the Express Reporter. According to the Portugese Press, as at 15th February the Letters had not been signed.

With what is going on in the World right now you have to wonder why the Press deem it necessary to keep the Madeleine case alive when they are reporting rubbish.....are they being manoevred by Clarence???

Panda wrote:
'Authorities in London and Lisbon are working to set up a joint squad to take advantage of European Law to speed up cross border enquiries' this from John Twomey the Express Reporter.

Speed up ? If this is fast track I dread to think of the slow way.   

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:
'Authorities in London and Lisbon are working to set up a joint squad to take advantage of European Law to speed up cross border enquiries' this from John Twomey the Express Reporter.

Speed up ?  If this is fast track I dread to think of the slow way.     

The wheels of justice grind very slowly in Portugal mossman, look how long it is taking for the Trial to be concluded.! I bet the Portugese people are sick to death of the name McCann and will be glad when this case is over and they can get back to some kind of normality in PDL.

Panda wrote:

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:
'Authorities in London and Lisbon are working to set up a joint squad to take advantage of European Law to speed up cross border enquiries' this from John Twomey the Express Reporter.

Speed up ?  If this is fast track I dread to think of the slow way.     

The wheels of justice grind very slowly in Portugal mossman, look how long it is taking for the Trial to be concluded.! I bet the Portugese people are sick to death of the name McCann and will be glad when this case is over and they can get back to some kind of normality in PDL.

Hi Panda, welcome back. .   

I have no difficulty with the Portuguese and their methods. I believe they have a system which at the heart of it has justice and an outcome in mind (sorry Claudia, I'm not discounting or forgetting your thoughts but I need to have confidence in somebody).

It seems to me though, SY are now focusing on the different country/jurisdiction excuse and are trying to use that as a get out clause. We all know once you start dealing with that kind of thing, everything goes around in circles.

I don't know what's going on with the libel trial. I know they are two, separate, completely different issues. However, the fact that the status of the investigation was changed in Portugal during the trial niggles at me. Given that the case has been re-opened, there needs to be new information. So there was a significant change to the file during the course of the libel trial. It was taken out, dusted down and re-opened.

Hypothetically speaking, what if there is new information to support Amaral's theory and this is the basis on which the case was re-opened, then there would be no case to answer. Until such time as this is proven, or otherwise, how can a judge make a decision ? Neither can she throw the case out because of it. To do so she would have to give reasons, which I'm assuming goes against the judicial secrecy rules of the investigation.

The trial started out based on the information available at that time. Now, there could be new, significant information. In the interest of fairness, how can a decision be made now ? If I were a party to the trial I would be asking that question of the judge.

I find the silence from the court very interesting.

Morning Mossman, thanks, I spent 2 weeks in Lanzarote , first week the weather was great, second it was cold , coming home was a nightmare....things happen to me I tell you.  

Regarding the Trial, if the McCanns had not first of all tried to reach an out of Court agreement , then wanted access to info by asking to be 'assistentes', this case would have been over by now. As I have said before, I think it is being held up while SY continues to find 'persons of interest' . Because SY have said they are following up these suspects, how can the Judge rule on whether Madeleine is alive or dead???

Good to have a break though Panda.

They have not, as far as I know, applied for the assistentes status.  

I don't believe SY would have any input into what happens in the libel trial.  They can run around paying keystone cops all they want, Portugal is none of their business.

I just wonder if the Portuguese having their own live investigation has had an impact on the trial being decided.  It would seem to me to be a fair approach, but of course the law is not always fair.  I might start to study Portuguese law, I fear I will have plenty of time to learn a new language and obtain a new degree, all the while SY will be still going around in circles looking for burglars.    

To me sceptic that I am, if CdeM are right and the letters had not been delivered to the Portugese as at 15th February, what exactly are SY up to??? These Burglers first of all have to be traced once the Portugese O.K. the letters, they will be questioned and if there is no evidence they were involved , does Redwood pull another Hat out of the bag and we all go on another wild goose chase???

I do think the Trial is affected by all this :- Amaral suggests that Madeleine died in 5a, one of the decisions the Final Report contains. The McCanns say there is no evidence to suggest this and Amaral's Book hinders the search for Madeleine. The Judge would normally make a decision in favour of the Plaintiff or Defendant .....how can she without proof???

The request to becomes 'assistentes' has absolutely nothing to do with the libel trial. It is related to the reopening of the investigation and has no effect whatsoever on the libel trial.

Last night a friend of the couple said they were worried that a potential conflict will hinder the search for Madeleine, abducted in May 2007.


Pity they weren't worried about that a few months after the disappearance, when madeleine might have been found alive - if ever.

The last time the two forces worked together (UK & PJ) dogs were sent over, DNA was collected and we saw what happened there. Parents exit stage left, rogatory interviews were compelled, due to lack of willing cooperation - DNA and dog evidence rubbished, case shelved.

Now we have SY who are only allowed to review this AS IF it were a kidnapping and PJ working away at their own ideas which are also underpinned by Pat Brown, Amaral, and many independent cops in the UK and elsewhere who believe the parents were involved-

and we have TM rubbishing the findings SY HAS found, such as the Tannerman being an innocent tourist and the lack of any checks worth counting between 9 and ten - which TM clearly do not believe.

Why not just put TM in charge of the investigation and allow them to clear themselves? Cameron can put his stamp on it.

The media won't be happy but we can't have everything - some cases simply do not clear, and that is because there isn't enough hard evidence to bring anyone to trial. Happens all the time.

When's the next election?