The truth is the Portuguese police have the most to lose if Madeleine McCann ever turns up

Since the 20,000 page dossier on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has been released by the Portuguese police, it is clear that to describe the investigation as incompetent would be an injustice to incompetent police forces around the world.

The usual method of enquiry by police forces is to ensure that all leads are checked up on quickly and that proper forensic evidence is searched for and used as quickly as possible.

It is also incumbent on police not to ignore lines of enquiry just because they are obsessed with their own theories or are stuck on one particular hunch.

The Portuguese police ignored collecting forensic evidence, they failed to follow up e-mails from the British police who gave them important possible leads based on hi-tech intelligence. They refused to allow the British police to do a mobile phone investigation looking at phone records used in the location until it was too late and they did not even bother to follow up an important lead about a possible sighting in Holland just days after the disappearance.

The truth is the Portuguese Police became obsessed with the idea that it was Maddie's parents or Robert Murat, both accusations that the police files show hold no water at all, that the police failed in their duty to do a proper investigation and look in to all possibilities.

Sadly, it would be convenient for the Portuguese police if Maddie never turned up because it would mask their utter incompetence.


jailhouselawyer said...

What xenophobic gush!

Bob Piper has some advice for you:
"Don't confuse the news with what you read in the newspaper".

If you are looking for the truth there are some very good blogs and forums which cut through the Mainstream Media bullshit in the McCann case.

The truth is the McCanns have the most to lose if Madeleine never shows up.

Whether it is your ignorance or you have conveniently forgotten, the McCanns lied about a break in at Apartment 5A. They claimed that an abductor damaged the shutters with a jemmy. John Hill, the manager of the Mark Warner complex, stated that there was no damage or sign of a break in. The police stated likewise, and the PJ said there was no evidence of a break in. Much later, Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for the McCanns, admitted that there was no evidence of a break in. Make of that what you will, but it remains that the McCanns have so far failed to offer an explanation why they lied.

Jane Tanner claimed to have seen an abductor walking off with Madeleine. At the same time and place, Gerry McCann and Jeremy Wilkins were stood in conversation, and neither saw either Jane Tanner nor the so-called abductor. The PJ, with good reason, stated that Jane Tanner is not a credible witness.

When the hue and cry went up, a neighbour offered to call the police, but the McCanns refused this offer stating that they had already alerted the police. This was a lie, because it was not until 40 minutes later that the McCanns called the police. Meanwhile, the McCanns had allowed between 20-50 people to enter the apartment effectively contaminating the crime scene.

The McCanns claimed to have assisted the PJ in the investigation, and answered all the questions put to them. The truth is the McCanns have used everything in their power to interfere with the investigation and refused to answer 48 questions.

At 11.50pm on May 3 2007, Gerry McCann phoned an adviser to Gordon Brown. By 12.30am on 4 May 2007, the Foreign Office had contacted the British Embassy in Portugal and political pressure started to be applied.

By 5 May 2007, Clarence Mitchell, the then head of the Media Monitoring Unit was seconded to the Foreign Office and dispatched to Portugal to assist the McCanns. The PJ had the McCanns and the other members of the Tapas 9 subject to electronic surveillance. The PJ complained about political interference in the police inquiry, subsequently Clarence Mitchell was forced to resign from HMG, and was offered a job by the McCanns. The PJ had caught Clarence Mitchell tipping off the McCanns to the phone tapping. But, for this interference, the inquiry might well have been long over instead of being drawn out.

True the PJ has not shown fully the competence I would like in all aspects. However, their job has been made difficult by political interference and shabby reporting in the British press. On the other hand, our police are so competent that poor old innocent Barry George was locked up for 8 years for a murder he did not commit.

Norfolk Blogger said...

You can question my arguments, but please do not call me xenophobic.

I raised the Barry George issue myself, in some depth, whilst other stayed silent.

I don't believe everything I read in the press, but for anyone to suggest the Prtuguese police was anything less than inept and based on hunches, not evidence is living in cloud cuckoo land.

I made no comment on who did the crime, I know you have your theories, but there is little doubt that had the police in Portugal carried out a proper enquiry then we'd have a much clearer idea than we have now about who did it.

jailhouselawyer said...

I didn't call you xenophobic, I accused you of spouting xenophobic gush. I have seen the same if not worse in the Sun. My initial reaction was that the PJ were like the Keystone Cops. However, I moderated this view after seeing and hearing the McCanns and their family and friends and media spokesman. If I hold a criticism of the PJ it is that they should have made the McCanns arguidos from the outset and not wait until September. The McCanns have been very adept at covering their tracks.

I used that opening to provoke a response. It succeeded. You say question your arguments, but fail to put forward any. Your criticisms are without merit, had you read either the mccannfiles or Joana Morais blogs, they are covering in depth the released police files and showing that the investigation did actually cover those aspects which the British Mainstream Media are unfairly accusing them of not doing. I also note you failed to answer my points that I raised. This is a specialised area, and I am glad that you are dipping your toes into the water.

The statements I made are not theories but based upon evidence. I do have theories but because I cannot prove them I pretty much keep them to myself. For example, who killed Madeleine and how she died. The evidence for these is distinctly lacking or the case would have been over.

You have totally missed the political interference. Examples over here are WMD and dodgy dossier, BAE/Saudi Arabia, Cash for honours. Did those inquiries go anywhere? By the same token, the PJ were frustrated by political interference. Why did the British government interfere with this process? It is one thing to assist British citizens abroad, and quite another to interfere with an ongoing judicial process. The PJ were leant on from above. It is not surprising so few results have been disclosed.

I expect once this media storm of irrelevant stories burns out, perhaps the new media will get more attention and the right questions are asked.