The Met Police and Madeline Mccann

[Wurzel]

Publicly, Operation Grange always assumed abduction. Only discovered this today, but check this link out:-

 

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Operation-Grange/1400005508791/35434

 

Linked is a document entitled "Remit of investigation" - word format.

 

This paragraph here makes it pretty clear that abduction is the only thing in the investigation's remit:-

 

It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter. Whilst ordinarily a review has no investigative remit whatsoever- the scale and extent of this enquiry cannot permit for such an approach. It will take too long to progress to any “action stage” if activity is given wholly and solely to a review process.

 

I find this bit most interesting

The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);

 

The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies.

UK Law Enforcement agencies,

Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.

 

Bearing in mind the McCann's have paid a LOT of (donated to appeal?) money to private investigators who appear to have done little or nothing, I wonder what that may reveal.

[Viking Warrior]

Wurzel

 

Perhaps they will find a massive whole in the trouser pockets of the PI's

[aintforever]

Blimey. You waste one of your 3 a day on that?

 

Selective quoting. That'd be fair enough if I'd not provided the link to both the site and the document.

 

It'd also be fair enough if you grasped the part you quoted.

 

Whatever. I think it is pretty clear from the text that the Met has treated this as an abduction from day one. The remit says so, the Met chief is quoted as saying so. Unless this is a very nifty piece of media rope-a-doping, I think we can assume that an abduction is what is being investigated.

 

It's clear from this that the Met are doing all they can to find out what happened. The word 'abduction' does not appear once here...

 

http://content.met.police.uk/Appeal/Latest-update-on-Madeleine-McCann-case/1400018438045/1257246741786

 

They are also working closely with the Portuguese Police so if they did think the McCanns did it they would share their info/suspicions/theories with the Met.

 

If the forensic evidence you keep banging on about proves anything then the Met will be all over it like a rash - you can guarantee that.

[saintbletch]

I'm not sure that the use of the word abduction precludes this also being a murder. The fact that there is no body means that an abduction of some sort has taken place. That may take the form of a kidnapping, a kidnapping followed by murder, or a murder followed by the disposal of a body.

 

I think in this context the use of the word abduction only relates to the first two or the three examples you give.

 

Abduction to me suggests an act against someone else's will. i.e. they must be alive to be abducted.

 

I think pap's point is that they therefore were not investigating the possibility of your third example - a murder followed by the disposal of a body.

[pap]

I think in this context the use of the word abduction only relates to the first two or the three examples you give.

 

Abduction to me suggests an act against someone else's will. i.e. they must be alive to be abducted.

 

I think pap's point is that they therefore were not investigating the possibility of your third example - a murder followed by the disposal of a body.

 

Yeah, pretty much - although I make no pre-judgement on specific crimes.

 

The vast majority of child abductions happen when an estranged parent does the offs with a kid he or she doesn't have custody over. Stranger abduction is much rarer. Given that the former doesn't really apply in this case, it is reasonable to conclude that when the police say they're investigating an abduction, they mean stranger abduction.

[Wurzel]

It's clear from this that the Met are doing all they can to find out what happened. The word 'abduction' does not appear once here...

 

http://content.met.police.uk/Appeal/Latest-update-on-Madeleine-McCann-case/1400018438045/1257246741786

 

They are also working closely with the Portuguese Police so if they did think the McCanns did it they would share their info/suspicions/theories with the Met.

 

If the forensic evidence you keep banging on about proves anything then the Met will be all over it like a rash - you can guarantee that.

 

The word "abduction" may not appear but

Our review has sought to prioritise the material, ensuring we are doing everything possible to understand what happened to Madeleine. In the absence of any clear evidence to the contrary we maintain our belief that Madeleine may still be alive.

indicates they have gone into the investigation with a pre-conceived outcome in mind.

 

Further, if they are really investigating all possibilities then the McCanns have to be considered as possible suspects until categorically eliminated. So

"We remain in close contact with Kate and Gerry McCann and they are updated on our current position.

seems very strange.

[Torres]

Given that the McCann's are both the parents of the missing girl and the people closest to her and who probably know most aabout the events of the evening, it's not strange at all for the police to remain in close contact with them. It'd be strange if they didn't.

 

Our review has sought to prioritise the material, ensuring we are doing everything possible to understand what happened to Madeleine. In the absence of any clear evidence to the contrary we maintain our belief that Madeleine may still be alive.

 

Basic troubleshooting/problem solving. Start with the most likely solution and work from there. In the absence of clear evidence of a murder, ie a body, blood-splattered walls, a newly relaid patio, it makes perfect sense to work down the abduction route initially.

[pap]

Given that the McCann's are both the parents of the missing girl and the people closest to her and who probably know most aabout the events of the evening, it's not strange at all for the police to remain in close contact with them. It'd be strange if they didn't.

 

Basic troubleshooting/problem solving. Start with the most likely solution and work from there. In the absence of clear evidence of a murder, ie a body, blood-splattered walls, a newly relaid patio, it makes perfect sense to work down the abduction route initially.

 

For your analysis to hold, you pretty much have to ignore all the physical evidence that was found, which we have, so no real problem.

[aintforever]

The word "abduction" may not appear but indicates they have gone into the investigation with a pre-conceived outcome in mind.

 

Further, if they are really investigating all possibilities then the McCanns have to be considered as possible suspects until categorically eliminated. So seems very strange.

 

I think all missing child investigations they will assume they are alive unless there is clear evidence they are not and also remain in contact with the parents. I'm not sure what is strange about either.

[Verbal]

I think pap's point is that they therefore were not investigating the possibility of your third example - a murder followed by the disposal of a body.

 

But our little enthusiast himself has ruled out murder - it's too "extreme". And he should know, being on the inside as he is. He's only interested in the "parents-must have-drugged-and-accidentally-killed-her-and disposed-of-her-in-collusion-with-the-Tapas-7" line, although he lacks the courage to actually say so. Or the funds to pay the defamation lawsuit.

 

Abduction by strangers he also rules out on the absence of "physical evidence" (although he's admitted he doesn't actually know this, but it sounds nice to say it).

 

All of which makes me think that pap is actually part of a gigantic conspiracy. The real question is: who's pulling his strings? I suspect a former goalkeeper with a fetish for the reptilian.

[pap]

But our little enthusiast himself has ruled out murder - it's too "extreme". And he should know, being on the inside as he is. He's only interested in the "parents-must have-drugged-and-accidentally-killed-her-and disposed-of-her-in-collusion-with-the-Tapas-7" line, although he lacks the courage to actually say so. Or the funds to pay the defamation lawsuit.

 

Abduction by strangers he also rules out on the absence of "physical evidence" (although he's admitted he doesn't actually know this, but it sounds nice to say it).

 

All of which makes me think that pap is actually part of a gigantic conspiracy. The real question is: who's pulling his strings? I suspect a former goalkeeper with a fetish for the reptilian.

 

I haven't ruled out anything. Just making the point that once again, you're making the debate about extremes. In your original response to Window Cleaner, you set out two possible outcomes, one we're all familiar with (the abduction thesis), the other being the extreme case of the McCanns murdering their child and covering it up. For someone who complains about my points not taking ambiguity and contradiction into account, it's amusing that you set up such a black and white case, tragic that you expect people to argue it.

 

The PJ found no evidence of anyone else but the McCanns and their friends in that apartment. You can keep ignoring that fact and all the others. There's no physical evidence to support abduction. There is physical evidence that supports other hypotheses.

 

I do wonder if there is any disputed narrative where you aren't completely in lockstep with the "official position".

[aintforever]

The PJ found no evidence of anyone else but the McCanns and their friends in that apartment.

 

Have you got a link to the list of fingerprints and DNA found in the apartment?

[Torres]

The PJ found no evidence of anyone else but the McCanns and their friends in that apartment. You can keep ignoring that fact and all the others. There's no physical evidence to support abduction.

 

Which is odd, given the textbook way in which the crime scene was handled by. Oh, hang on, it's not....

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-494203/Madeleine-How-police-ruined-forensic-evidence-bedroom.html

Edited 24 October, 2013 by Torres

[WindsorSaint]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24655826

[aintforever]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24655826

 

So if Pap's theory is correct the McCanns have been actively involved in reopening an investigation into a crime they committed. Aided by the Met who are desperate to cover it up and pursue a false line of inquiries!

[Viking Warrior]

Two interesting statements. one a portugese police spokeman and the other from the mccanns parents

 

I wonder if Mrs Macann will return to Protugal , if the police want to speak to her and what will the paretns say if they find the mcanns had any involvement

Please be patient and respect the work of the police as they endeavour to find the answers we so desperately need

P

 

ortugal's public prosecutors approved the move after a request from officers in Porto who have identified new lines of inquiry, witnesses who were never questioned during the original probe, and several issues they want to clarify.

 

Madeleine McCann's parents Kate and Gerry said they were "very pleased" at the decision by Portuguese authorities and hoped that it would uncover "the answers we so desperately need".

 

"We hope that this will finally lead to her being found and to the discovery of whoever is responsible for this crime," the couple said in a statement.

 

"We once again urge any member of the public who may have information relating to Madeleine's abduction to contact the police in Portugal or the UK.

 

"Please be patient and respect the work of the police as they endeavour to find the answers we so desperately need."

[pap]

Have you got a link to the list of fingerprints and DNA found in the apartment?

 

The PJ's report in 2008 covers their investigation and its findings in their entirety. English translations here, including information on DNA

 

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm

 

Fingerprints:-

 

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FINGERPRINTS.htm

[Batman]

[egg]

The PJ found no evidence of anyone else but the McCanns and their friends in that apartment. You can keep ignoring that fact and all the others. There's no physical evidence to support abductionT".

 

Pap is right on this point. Starting with an open mind on what may have happened its right that no other prints were in the apartment.

 

It's equally right that there is no actual evidence either way of abduction or that her parents were involved in her disappearance.

 

The bottom line is that some people have pre judged views one way or the other. I'm in the "I ain't got a clue what happened cos there's no evidence to support any scenario". There's circumstantial stuff and oddities to argue either way but pap's position is no less credible than his opponents.

[saintbletch]

But our little enthusiast himself has ruled out murder - it's too "extreme". And he should know, being on the inside as he is. He's only interested in the "parents-must have-drugged-and-accidentally-killed-her-and disposed-of-her-in-collusion-with-the-Tapas-7" line, although he lacks the courage to actually say so. Or the funds to pay the defamation lawsuit.

 

Abduction by strangers he also rules out on the absence of "physical evidence" (although he's admitted he doesn't actually know this, but it sounds nice to say it).

 

All of which makes me think that pap is actually part of a gigantic conspiracy. The real question is: who's pulling his strings? I suspect a former goalkeeper with a fetish for the reptilian.

 

You don't need advice from me Verbal, and I'm sure you don't particularly care about my happiness, but as a huge fan of your posts on this site I just wish you'd remove a little of the personal attack. Oh and upgrade your membership too, I enjoy your jousts with pap and would like more than 3 per day.

 

I should stress that up until this point my contribution to this thread was semantic and focussed solely on the meaning of "abduction".

 

pap appears to have found a document that pre-dates other similar documents and suggests that the police were entering into the review of the case from a perspective of abduction.

 

Abduction here, to my mind, means a living person taken against their will. This therefore appears to discount the possibility of a dead body being disposed of, which in turn seems to close down the possibility that the parents were involved.

 

Pap, to my mind, is right on this point - the only caveat being that we might not have seen all of the terms of reference for the review.

 

Pap is right on this point. Starting with an open mind on what may have happened its right that no other prints were in the apartment.

 

It's equally right that there is no actual evidence either way of abduction or that her parents were involved in her disappearance.

 

The bottom line is that some people have pre judged views one way or the other. I'm in the "I ain't got a clue what happened cos there's no evidence to support any scenario". There's circumstantial stuff and oddities to argue either way but pap's position is no less credible than his opponents.

 

I'd like to associate myself with these comments.

 

I have to say that most of the "conspiracy" positions that pap takes I find difficult to understand. But I always see him trying to argue his position based on the evidence as he sees it. I'm not sure I always understand how he reaches the conclusions he does, but we're all wired differently.

 

Twice now pap has made me at least stop and re-think my position. This was over the twin towers and now the Madeleine affair.

 

On the twin towers I still believe it was a terrorist atrocity, but some of the video evidence pap put forward made me stop and think. I really didn't expect that to be the case when I started reading the thread.

 

On the Madeleine affair, I was firmly of the belief that Madeleine had been abducted, but I now find myself more agnostic.

[OldNick]

Has anyone yet come up with good reason why the twins were also not taken, and why Kate McCann went back to tell the group that Maddie was gone , instead of screaming for help from the room and staying with the twins protecting them from th abductor who would still be at large?

[aintforever]

Has anyone yet come up with good reason why the twins were also not taken

 

How do you kidnap 3 kids, a wheelbarrow?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Has anyone yet come up with good reason why the twins were also not taken, and why Kate McCann went back to tell the group that Maddie was gone , instead of screaming for help from the room and staying with the twins protecting them from th abductor who would still be at large?

 

I would think that it was probably because her intial thought would have been that the girl had wandered off, rather than been taken.

 

I've been reading all the stuff posted and nothing has changed my mind. I believe she was taken , but that the parents were seriously negligent in leaving her alone. I also feel very angry that instead of being racked with guilt, instead of asking for forgiveness, and being repentant and understanding that had they done what 99% of all decent people do, that little girl would be with them now, they try to make out they've done nothing wrong, that this could have happened to any reasonable parents. The seem to have no shame , and no guilt and that is unnatural in my opinion. Somebody in the media needs to grow a pair and tell them how it is.

[hypochondriac]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24650841

 

Good article for you Pap here.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I'm no expert in the fine details of this particular case and I'll leave the 'who done its' to others, but is it really such a terrible act of parental neglect to leave sleeping children (not babies) unattended for a short time while their parents eat a meal nearby? We must also take into account that the McCann's did take the trouble to come back to check on them. To me this is not exactly the model of good parenting, but neither is it the wanton case of dereliction of duty some on here seem to think either.

 

I grew up in a era when almost exactly the same thing would happen every single night at Butlins and no one would have thought anything of it. For that matter neither was it considered at all unusual, or out of order, for children to be left alone to play outside for hours on end and make their own fun when they were not at school.

 

Perhaps the widespread fear/paranoia about abduction and child abuse has led society to become over protective towards our children and we should endevour to return to that old style parenting of times gone past. It seems to me the (statistically very small) chance of something terrible happening is leading us to damage our kids by restricting the level of freedom they will require if they are develop into healthy and well balanced adults.

 

Hay there are no easy answers here, but is not doing our utmost to help our children towards that healthy adult future not the real model of what good parenting should be?

[um pahars]

A somewhat disconcerting story emerging from the Sunday Times today revealing that the new e-fit (and other evidence) being banded about is actually an old e fit put together by the private investigators hired by the McCanns years ago.

 

It had been suppressed by the McCanns and the Trust due to elements of the report being critical of the McCanns and their friends.

[Suhari]

A somewhat disconcerting story emerging from the Sunday Times today revealing that the new e-fit (and other evidence) being banded about is actually an old e fit put together by the private investigators hired by the McCanns years ago.

 

It had been suppressed by the McCanns and the Trust due to elements of the report being critical of the McCanns and their friends.

 

Yep, heard that before. Claims the new efits are from 2009.

[Viking Warrior]

Um pahars I mentioned this in an earlier post . I'm trying to understand why the mcanns and their pi's didnt release the efit pictures some 4 years later . Something is not right in this case and the mcanns .

[Guided Missile]

Today's Times comments on the subject:

 

Oakley’s e-fits have now become the centrepiece of Scotland Yard’s investigation. The Oakley report deduced that a sighting of Madeleine by Martin Smith from Drogheda, Co Louth, was credible. Mr Smith, returning to his apartment in Praia da Luz about 9.50pm, saw a British-looking man carrying a motionless, barefoot girl in pyjamas. Madeleine was noted to be missing by her mother at 10pm.The Oakley investigation concluded that an over-emphasis had been given to Ms Tanner’s account. She described seeing a man about 9.15pm. There was a potential difficulty with Mr Smith’s version. He estimated that he was 60 to 80 per cent certain that the man he saw was Mr McCann. Mr McCann’s movements for that time have been established: he was seen by witnesses to be in a tapas restaurant.

Mr Smith’s suggestion that he might have seen Mr McCann carrying Madeleine shortly before her disappearance was seized on by Gonçalo Amaral, the Portuguese detective leading the search. The McCanns are suing Mr Amaral for alleging in a book that they might have faked their daughter’s abduction.

An Oakley source told The Sunday Times that the Find Madeleine fund’s lawyers had required the report to remain confidential.

 

Can anyone explain why the lawyers of Gerry and Kate McCann required that a report, which included an e-fit of a potential suspect in the abduction of their daughter, should remain confidential....?

[Verbal]

Pap, just some friendly advice. Quoting articles in their entirety from behind paywalls is an open-and-shut case of breach of copyright. You might just get away with it if you had commented on the piece in your post, thereby claiming exemption under what's called "fair dealing".

 

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-other/c-exception/c-exception-review/c-exception-fairdealing.htm

 

It's probably worth editing your post with this in mind.

[ottery st mary]

Pap, just some friendly advice. Quoting articles in their entirety from behind paywalls is an open-and-shut case of breach of copyright. You might just get away with it if you had commented on the piece in your post, thereby claiming exemption under what's called "fair dealing".

 

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-other/c-exception/c-exception-review/c-exception-fairdealing.htm

 

It's probably worth editing your post with this in mind.

 

 

Nice to see you back Verbal.....

 

Still not willing to comment on your crass accusation against me:o

 

Cut out the nastiness fella:p

[pap]

Pap, just some friendly advice. Quoting articles in their entirety from behind paywalls is an open-and-shut case of breach of copyright. You might just get away with it if you had commented on the piece in your post, thereby claiming exemption under what's called "fair dealing".

 

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-other/c-exception/c-exception-review/c-exception-fairdealing.htm

 

It's probably worth editing your post with this in mind.

 

Given previous form, I have difficulty accepting that any advice from you falls under the friendly bracket.

 

Besides, the mods can delete the post if they feel I've breached it. In the meantime, I'll wait for those pipe-hittin' Sunday Times lawyers to sue me for publicising their works.

[pap]

The interesting thing about the Sunday Times article is that it is very much related to the court case the McCanns are pursuing against Goncalo Amaral, former lead investigator on the original PJ case. They claim that his actions hindered the search for Madeleine. It could be argued that by deliberately suppressing this e-fit information for a number of years, so have the McCanns.

[pap]

HuffPost article based off the Sunday Times work.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/27/madeleine-mccann-kate-gerry-mi5_n_4167645.html

[pap]

I am sure Verbal will comment on this article...very soon:)

 

I'm just pleased to have my arrest threat downgraded from "defamation" to "copyright infringement".

 

The Sunday Times will be pursuing a load of cases all over the Internet.

[ottery st mary]

The interesting thing about the Sunday Times article is that it is very much related to the court case the McCanns are pursuing against Goncalo Amaral, former lead investigator on the original PJ case. They claim that his actions hindered the search for Madeleine. It could be argued that by deliberately suppressing this e-fit information for a number of years, so have the McCanns.

 

As I have said before.....Hopefully Gerry and Kate will attend the civil court case in Portugal to give the court/jury their evidence/complaint in person.

 

Whilst they are there.. they can give the new Portugese investigators their full attention and answer many of the unanswered questions...

 

This would surely help make it a more thorough investigation this time.

 

As they say everything must be geared to finding Maddie..hopefully alive.

[Wurzel]

A somewhat disconcerting story emerging from the Sunday Times today revealing that the new e-fit (and other evidence) being banded about is actually an old e fit put together by the private investigators hired by the McCanns years ago.

 

It had been suppressed by the McCanns and the Trust due to elements of the report being critical of the McCanns and their friends.

 

This is not "new news". This is something the press have suddenly been brave enough to print after law suits and threats from the McCanns originally resulted in our "free press" all deciding to support the McCanns and their version of events in every way possible.

Why, NOW, are the e-fits suddenly being made public? Is the net closing in? Are they trying to force/panic the McCann's into a mistake?

 

I guess no-one knows for sure how they would react to any given situation till it happens, but I am 99.9% certain that if I had lost my daughter I would want every single snippet of info that might help trace her out there in the public eye immediately, not suppressed. I'm also pretty sure I'd want to be in the area of every possible reported sighting as soon as possible to help with any follow ups and be there if she was found, wherever in the world they came from and however tenuous the report sounds. I can't imagine for one minute I would consider any report not worth following up.

[aintforever]

It is odd, I would like to hear the McCanns explain why it was suppressed.

 

I guess they put too much weight into the sighting outside the apartment and only when the MET ruled that out did the other sighting become considered relevant.

 

Also as the bloke who saw her said it was 80% sure it was Gerry McCann, if you were McCann you wouldn't want it released wether you are innocent or guilty.

[Window Cleaner]

It is odd, I would like to hear the McCanns explain why it was suppressed.

 

I guess they put too much weight into the sighting outside the apartment and only when the MET ruled that out did the other sighting become considered relevant.

 

Also as the bloke who saw her said it was 80% sure it was Gerry McCann, if you were McCann you wouldn't want it released wether you are innocent or guilty.

 

 

Well you'd have to surmise that the earlier "sighting" was supposed to be one of their Tapas friends so they'd give it more weight than that of an unknown.

[Verbal]

In the meantime, I'll wait for those pipe-hittin' Sunday Times lawyers to sue me for publicising their works.

 

As usual, your bravado is misplaced - it would be the site owners that would take most of the hit. But I see you've deleted your post. Or had it deleted for you.

[ottery st mary]

As usual, your bravado is misplaced - it would be the site owners that would take most of the hit. But I see you've deleted your post. Or had it deleted for you.

 

 

Verbal...Still waiting for you to apologise:rolleyes:

[pap]

As usual, your bravado is misplaced - it would be the site owners that would take most of the hit. But I see you've deleted your post. Or had it deleted for you.

 

Think the mods erred on the side of caution. Can't blame them for that, but if mumsnet are doing it...

 

Anyway, the story has since spread beyond the paywall, a few links:-

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10407664/Madeleine-McCann-critical-new-evidence-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-5-years.html

 

 

http://www.anorak.co.uk/372377/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-the-private-detectives-secret-e-fits.html/

[aintforever]

Think the mods erred on the side of caution. Can't blame them for that, but if mumsnet are doing it...

 

Anyway, the story has since spread beyond the paywall, a few links:-

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10407664/Madeleine-McCann-critical-new-evidence-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-5-years.html

 

 

http://www.anorak.co.uk/372377/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-the-private-detectives-secret-e-fits.html/

 

 

"Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects."

[Guided Missile]

"Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects."

So, no reason for the McCanns via their lawyers to suppress the e-fit Mr. Smith constructed 5 years ago, then.

[aintforever]

So, no reason for the McCanns via their lawyers to suppress the e-fit Mr. Smith constructed 5 years ago, then.

 

It appears they thought the first sighting was most likely the abductor and releasing the e-fit would be distracting.

 

"A source close to the fund said the report would have been ‘completely distracting’ if it had become public."

 

The thing is, if the McCanns had killed their own daughter and Jerry had strolled down the road with her corpse and dumped her in the sea, why would they hire a team of ex-MI5 investigators to find out what happened?

[View From The Top]

So something that may of helped them to find their daughter was suppressed by them?

 

They certainly haven't got anything to hide have they.

[Guided Missile]

It appears they thought the first sighting was most likely the abductor and releasing the e-fit would be distracting.

 

"A source close to the fund said the report would have been ‘completely distracting’ if it had become public."

 

The thing is, if the McCanns had killed their own daughter and Jerry had strolled down the road with her corpse and dumped her in the sea, why would they hire a team of ex-MI5 investigators to find out what happened?

One day, when the truth is known, you will stand back and realise how unlikely the abduction story of the child was and easy it will be to understand why this scenario has been peddled by so many people from the instant the child went missing. Personally, I don't think the abduction scenario will ever be proven and we will be left with suspicion, innuendo and no guilty party, which will suit a number of people.

[pap]

This blog post seems to suggest that the PJ are pursuing similar lines of enquiry as they did in 2007.

 

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/10/pj-searches-for-maddies-body-again.html

 

Based off the following Portuguese article.

 

http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/exclusivo-cm/pj-volta-a-procurar-corpo-de-maddie

[pap]

More from Portugal (via Daily Mirror):-

 

Disgruntled (and now deceased) former Ocean Club employee in frame.

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-kidnapper-hotel-worker-2655757

[Guided Missile]

More from Portugal (via Daily Mirror):-

 

Disgruntled (and now deceased) former Ocean Club employee in frame.

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-kidnapper-hotel-worker-2655757

 

New Maddie Suspect: Amazing twist in investigation as cops hunt for suspect with a grudge

 

The News of the World

Lucy Panton, Crime editor

30 September 2007

 

* Sacked worker in 'revenge plot'

 

* Anonymous tip to Prince Charles

 

BRITISH cops launched an urgent hunt for a new suspect in the Maddie McCann case-after an astonishing tip-off from the PRINCE OF WALES.

 

An anonymous email sent to the prince's official website insists three-year old Madeleine was kidnapped from the Mark Warner Ocean Club holiday resort in Portugal by a disgruntled ex-employee.

 

The informant named a maid who was sacked from the apartment complex in Praia da Luz and claimed she snatched the child in a crazed revenge plot.

 

British police are now liaising with Portuguese detectives over the dramatic new twist which is revealed 150 days after Maddie vanished.