Madeleine McCann

[dougie]

everybody here is trying to figure out the times crossword, with only a quarter of the clues available.My opinion is,in a case such as this,listen and observe,make no judgements.There are agencies out there paid to come to conclusions,and even though they are in possession of ten times the facts that we are,they cant find THE answer....how can we "armchair criminologists" expect to?
The comments made earlier about someones book made me recall a humouros statement I heard once regarding an authors "self love". Someone remarked "A first edition of that guys book is a rarity.......but a second edition is even rarer" its ok you gotta think about it.

[anna]

Here we go again...part 2.

When is Monty going to get this into his head....

Monty...this discussion,before you returned to it,was equally balanced...
The thread contained FACTS from SIGNED STATEMENTS,DOCUMENTED FACTS,VIDEO EVIDENCE FROM THE MOUTHS OF THOSE INVOLVED...

*************WE WERE NOT DISCUSSING GOSSIP*****

Whenever there was a discussion those believing the McCanns were trying to just discuss facts....with the excuse that they didn't know any explanation for what was shown without doubt to be dodgy goings on concerning this case.We on the other hand,were more interested in those goings on and concentrated on those.
If you think people were speculating.......hello....we do this every day with Jack....and nobody bothers about that....
Tell you what...just out of speculation,and just for the hell of it,later on,let's put the so called "dodgy dealings" clearly out on show...and let's see you all offer up a speculative explanation for them....that's if you think you can.
ANNA.

[anna]

Dougie......many facts were posted,and many have sidestepped them.

Let's see if they can put their money where their mouth is,and offer up some ideas...that's all...

This should be interesting,folks.
ANNA.

[Monty]

Anna,

Back in the day it was my job to investigate and evidence gather. And the difference between this case and Jack is that we have direct access to the remaining police files regarding the Whitechapel Murders and not to the McCann case.

Monty

[Monty]

And Anna

Please refrain from demanding I should get things in my head.

As Ive stated, investigation was a living. Ive been trained on law, legistlation, disclosure, IUC, PACE, Surviellance and Court procedure to name but a few. Ive prepped more cases than I care to remember and not one failed.

My head is not the issue.

[dougie]

Dougie......many facts were posted,and many have sidestepped them.

Let's see if they can put their money where their mouth is,and offer up some ideas...that's all...

This should be interesting,folks.
ANNA.

Anna
Many facts of one kind or another have been posted,some of those "facts" might be questionable.Nonetheless for that there are facts we know not of,without them its impossible to come to a conclusion.Myself I think the public"trial" of the MCcanns has been little short of disgusting,because of it,even if the mccanns are exonerated the mud will stick.its gonna follow them for the rest of their lives..they made a bad mistake for sure,leaving their child unattended,but thats not the same as being implicit in the childs murder..if inded there has been one.
The old "motive,means and opportunity" cliche has been raised in some quarters,that of itself has never been reason to convict anyone.Would you value a plumbers opinion on whether your pc was working correctly? or an accountants opinion on whether or not your varicose veins needed attention? if not why value know it all-know nothing journeymens opinions on the mc canns guilt? This case has things in common with the Salem witch craft hysteria.............
regards

[anna]

Hi Dougie,
An interesting post,and thanks for that....
I actually disagree that there has been a "witch hunt" concerning the McCanns...ordinary folk probably thought they might have acted better considering their status in life....but whatever feelings people do have that are in the negative,have been put there by this couple themselves.If mud sticks to them,it is only because they have jumped in it.
I think it is fair to say,that we have exhausted the discussion of the circumstances of the crime...they seem quite well documented,apart from the grey area's provided by the others in the group.
However,not once during discussions on the odd behaviour of the McCanns which hinders and doesn't help the investigation...did one poster put "I'd have done that".....and it is those bits which bring about the "suspicious"
feelings that have been shown by some people here.
You can really lift this whole thing away from the McCanns as people,doesn't include Maddie either,so it doesn't show any disrespect to her,infact quite the opposite.It's about time someone asked what the hell these two people were up to,when they should have been out searching for their daughter,instead of leaving it to the nannies,and spending the entire night on the phone,plus lots of other actions that were not natural.But looked at what happened around the crime,just purely as some actions in a set of circumstances...which is all we have been looking at it as in anyway.It is only others that have seen it differently.
If anyone at all could explain them as something they would do,it would be most interesting to read why.
Nothing more,nothing less....simple really,without all the emotional stuff,pointing fingers etc that has gone on so far
ANNA.

[anna]

OK folks....here is why I feel is "dodgy" behaviour,IMHO....
1)Why did this couple wipe their phone records,including those around the time just after discovering their daughter had gone.
2)Kate said she had the feeling the abductor had been watching and following her family closely....and yet she still leaves them alone at night.
3)Both have credit and debit cards..which they deny owning.They also deny taking photo's at the Tappas bar which have a date,time and location printed on them,despite many seeing the group snapping away prior to Kate's discovery.Only daytime snaps were handed over.The cards and the photo's are tracking devices and would help police locate who was where and eliminate the McCanns also.Remember,these would have stopped them from being considered suspects,so it is very odd that they did not co-operate.
I think it is fair to say,that while I was on middle ground,I was trying to think of explanations,to convince myself I was mistaken.
Like Suzi,I became uncomfortable with this case.
ANNA.

[Maria]

Anna,

Back in the day it was my job to investigate and evidence gather. And the difference between this case and Jack is that we have direct access to the remaining police files regarding the Whitechapel Murders and not to the McCann case.

Monty

Monty:

Very impressive ! So you should know a thing or two about evidence gathering rather than just idle speculation.

Anna
Many facts of one kind or another have been posted,some of those "facts" might be questionable.Nonetheless for that there are facts we know not of,without them its impossible to come to a conclusion.Myself I think the public"trial" of the MCcanns has been little short of disgusting,because of it,even if the mccanns are exonerated the mud will stick.its gonna follow them for the rest of their lives..they made a bad mistake for sure,leaving their child unattended,but thats not the same as being implicit in the childs murder..if inded there has been one.
The old "motive,means and opportunity" cliche has been raised in some quarters,that of itself has never been reason to convict anyone.Would you value a plumbers opinion on whether your pc was working correctly? or an accountants opinion on whether or not your varicose veins needed attention? if not why value know it all-know nothing journeymens opinions on the mc canns guilt? This case has things in common with the Salem witch craft hysteria.............

Dougie:

Correct. The newspapers at one point were saying that the McCann´s had hidden their little girl in the fridge, on the same day, another newspaper was claiming that they buried her in the cemetery plot where they worshiped, ehem... without a car, and the whole media having their eyes on them...no impossible, the same newspaper was saying they had dragged her through the stairs. Well... the truth of all this, is that the McCann´s were during the whole time with their friends having dinner only 40 yards away and checking on their sleeping children every 10 minutes. This is where they were, not buryi
regards

Dougie:

Correct. The newspapers at one point were saying that the McCann´s had hidden their litlle girl in the fridge for 25 days, on the same day, another newspaper was claiming that they buried her in the cemetery plot at the church they worshiped, ehem... without a car ? and the whole media having their eyes on them ? No, impossible. The same newspaper was saying they had dragged Madeleine through the stairs. Well... the truth is, that the McCann´s were having dinner when allegedly they were burying their little girl in a shallow grave like someone buries a pet. The McCann´s are Catholic I very much doubt that they would bury anyone like a dog, let alone their darling little girl without the church rituals and with the certainty of never being able to visit their grave again. The truth is that they were having dinner only 40 yards away a fact for which they have been critized here, not burying anyone, at what point did they get the shovels ? there simply is not enough time between the time they were checking on the children and the little girl´s disappearance. There isn´t. Nothing fits about this ludicrous scenario. Not a shred of evidence either. In fact, that is what the prosecutors said and they lifted the McCann´s status of suspects their reason was: There is no evidence against them, there never was....

Maria

[anna]

Hi all,
Hmmm.....couple of things...
It was Kate who told the police Maddie was buried on the beach...evidently a psychic told her so...and....
The McCanns could never have been watching their appartment...as both sat with their backs to it!!!....I expect now you'll argue that they have eyes in the back of their heads!!
The constant evasive action of this pair of doctors would ring warning bells with a chimp...how people can dismiss them here so lightly,brushing them aside...excusing them as speculation.."so we'll just forget they exist" shall we???..priceless!!
You know what,...as far as I am concerned,people are welcome to go on championing them as long as the cows come home...
A statement I had not read previously,about this bunch,made me feel sick..
I noted a "home video" of Maddie scrambling up the steps of the plane with Ella by her side...and then Gerry,sitting in the bus,looking miserable as sin,with his friends goading him,reminding him that he was on a holiday.....hmmmm
I'd be sure of what you are actually approving of here.
Monty...as far as I am concerned now,I am glad that many miles seperate me from these individuals.
Bestest to you all,
ANNA.

[anna]

As people have pointed out,we can only speculate,and do not have the full facts as yet....so,

As Suzi says...one day we shall know the truth.

Love to you all,

ANNA.

[Bob Hinton]

The Final Chapter

Monty,

This is going to be my last word on the matter as I’m afraid I am falling behind with my other work.

I've got absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make. You keep saying that speculation is wrong and that we should not do so because we don’t have all the facts, therefore such speculation could be incorrect.

What I’m saying is that you should at least admit that such speculation could be correct. But you seem to be saying that no such possibility exists.

I’ve no idea what occupation you followed in a previous life, but it has little relevance here.

Let me put it another way. What you appear to be saying is that every time a coin is tossed it must come down heads, you don’t allow that there is a chance that it might one day come down tails.

When you first visit a crime scene the police try and discover what occurred. They will speculate on the events. You appear to be saying that it is totally wrong to speculate until all the facts are known. In that case no investigation would ever take place. Now you cannot say that your utterances only apply to the McCann case and no other, either your theory holds water or it doesn’t.

I can recall three cases where I didn’t have the full facts, yet I speculated and my speculations proved to be absolutely correct. One was on the Jill Dando murder, another was on the Shannon Matthews case and the other I can’t for the life of me remember her name. It concerned a girl who was in a car when her boyfriend was stabbed to death. She told the police an unknown attacker had done it, yet later was shown to have committed the murder herself. I first saw her on TV making an appeal, and after watching it with the sound turned down knew or speculated if you will that she had done it.

You object to people speculating about the McCanns because they don’t have access to the police files and yet it’s ok to speculate about JTR because we have a few files left over. I would maintain there is far more evidence available on the McCann case than on JTR. Just because it’s in a paper doesn’t make it wrong and just because it’s in a police file doesn’t make it right.

Finally I really do find you harping on about Court Clerks and Magistrates rather offensive, not only to me personally but my colleagues on the bench.

they don’t need the Clerk to guide them..…and we all know who really runs the beaks

I can assure you no one ‘ran’ me or the Justices I sat with!

Or, alternatively, would you sooner be guided by the Court Clerk, as are most Magistrates

The vast majority of magistrates I know personally look upon court clerks as solicitors who couldn’t make it in real life. As for being ‘guided’ by them – what nonsense! Clerks are there to advise Magistrates on matter of law only; they are not there to influence their decisions in any way. The only time I can recall the Chairman asking for guidance from the Clerk on a point of law was when I pointed out that the CPS had filed the wrong charge against a defendant. The clerk assured him that it was correct and so we adjourned to the annex while it was sorted out. Half an hour later a rather shamefaced clerk came in clutching his volume and admitting that I was in fact right!

[Monty]

Bob

My daughter has spent the night in hospital so my fight has left me Im afraid.

If my point has failed you then I accept full responsibility, sorry.

And youre right, its the clerk who holds the legal knowledge whilst the magistrate makes the man on the street decisions based on the clerks advice.

And its the usher who runs the court, you should know that.

Peace Bob,

Monty

[Bob Hinton]

Putting the Record Straight

Some of you will have noticed an exchange of views between Monty and myself. Some of the statements he made about magistrates might have left you wondering what exactly the functions of the various officers of the court are. I would like to clarify the situation. Monty’s last post states:

And youre right, its the clerk who holds the legal knowledge whilst the magistrate makes the man on the street decisions based on the clerks advice.

This is totally misleading. The magistrates make their decisions based solely on the evidence presented to them by the CPS, they do not under any circumstances make their decision as to guilt based on advice given to them by any other person present and especially the Clerk of the Court. To do so would be to completely undermine the legal system.

The clerk is there solely to give his opinion in matters of law – nothing else. He does this because he is a qualified solicitor and the Magistrates do not have any legal training. For example if a witness starts to tell the court what someone else had told him, the clerk would interject by saying that to hear this would be against the hearsay rules.

The Magisterial system is one of the oldest forms of justice in the country and I find it personally offensive to be told that I am only there to make decisions based on what some third party tells me.

The court usher simply calls the witnesses and swears them in, to say he runs the court is nonsense.

I am not expecting a reply from Monty neither do I want one, I just felt I had to put the record straight as to what magistrates actually do.

[Monty]

Oh for goodness sake Bob...

...I was pulling your leg.

Bob is completely correct folks. Id have thought he'd have realised I was teasing him.

A Magistrate represents the man on the street, makes decisions based on evidence provided and is guided on legal matters by the clerk should he be required to do so. Most often this is during the sentencing stage.