Met chief 'indicates' Madeleine McCann probe may be wound down

[Liketochat1]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/9497581/Yard-chief-suggests-Madeleine-probe-may-be-wound-down.html. The investigation has cost 2.5 million since it opened 15 mths ago at the request of David Cameron. Should the 'open cheque' continue for as long as it takes to find concrete evidence of what happened to her? Or should it be wound down as the Portuguese police refuse to reopen the inquiry? What do you think?

I imagine, Novack, that she changed her mind when advisers pointed out that how unreliable lie detectors are, with particular reference to the stress point others have made on this thread.

But they are a very good tool for the innocent seeming to prove their innocence however as proof of guilt they are questionable.

The main thing is that the UK police should not be paying for this investigation that is out with their jurisdiction and the Family should write a nice letter that would take little time to ask the portuguese to reopen the investigation

I remember seeing Kate McCanns face as she met the Pope - the absolute misery and desperation - my heart ached for her.

I would have advised her to not do a lie detector too - they are notoriously unreliable with both false negatives and false positives. It was either Trisha or JKyles show which used to claim they were 99.9% accurate, and I always wanted to throw something at the telly! They are not admissable in UK courts for a reason and the haterz would say she tricked it even if she passed it- so what's the point?

Rosabud- my reference to the crime issue is that although the mccanns have always insisted the child was abducted from the apartment, there is no actual evidence of that. If I remember correctly the apartment was UNlocked . I am not denying that it's possible, or indeed probable that a crime was committed- but my point was that it isn't cast iron, whereas in the torso in the thames case, there was a body, evidence that it had been dismembered and possibly even poisoned (may be wrong on that last point)

I wonder whether that will be deleted because I seem to recall MN is very touchy about this subject, even when people just post plain facts ....

I don' think this is anything about haters but I think there are an awful lot of people who see themselves as supporters of Mrs Mcann rather than supporters or the truth of the crime getting out with open minds about whomever could have been involved.

I agree the lie detectors are iffy but the dogs have been very successful in missing cases especially recently,the police need to go over all that stuff as they have had a fair bit of money for this and iirc last time the lead detective spoke on teh news he said they were only a third through it all

I wasn't necessarily talking about haterz on this thread.

I was referring to the many vile and vitriolic websites about the McCanns. I came across some years ago and I've never seen such hatred.

I think its sensible to wind down the investigation. Unfortunately I doubt very much that people will ever know what happened unless someone confesses at some point or a body is found.

So incredibly sad for her poor family.

I don't see how it's sensible to wind down something that has already cost a lot of money. It should be seen through to the end. Why stop halfway through. Why start it in the first place only to stop before it's finished. Can't see the sense in this at all.

Jesus, Novack, why is it all about "the woman" and not "the parents"?

Also if you are a Catholic as I think they are, talking to the Pope and asking him to intercede with God would be for the sake of the family.

If they come to the end of what can be discovered with the evidence and technology available then that might be when the investigation has to be stopped. It might not be possible to work out what happened, no matter how much the matter is investigated.

It is a shame that the reconstruction and answering of questions wasn't done, that might have provided new information for the investigation to work on. As it is, the whole situation seems like a big tangle - I haven't yet seen one explanation for events that makes sense given the evidence available.

I don't understand why the police don't START by using the evidence of the British sniffer dogs, if they found blood and cadaver odour surely that is the first evidence that should be clarified? Instead of chasing hopeful sightings? These dogs are always in the news for solving crimes.

I agree and to spend what they have and just stop seems wasteful considering there is a certain amount of evidence that could be probed further

lots was said about jon benet ramsay's parents, especially her mother after that crime and now they have been totally exonerated. They acted 'strangely' after the death too. Who can tell how you might react though??

Novack - why do you keep going on about Sweden, have I missed something?

The Ramsay case was reopened and is still open is it not?

WERE they exonerated?

I think that there was male DNA found that didn't belong to the father - though the significance of that is uncertain.

Yes they were exonerated because of the unrelated male DNA. The enquiry was later reopened but that doesn't mean the exoneration was reversed or anything. The mother died of cancer a couple of years ago.

Surely until there is a case with someone guilty then he could still well be brought before the beak no?

Sorry Novack I am not sure of your point.

The point is that insufficient evidence to bring a case does not mean that the person is necessarily not guilty. It just means that they are given the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. That is not exonerated is it. After all someone did it and who knows who that was.

HOwever in that situation you an easily bring libel cases and win them as the boot is on the other foot then and those contesting your libel action have to bring a balance of evidence against you if you are not to receive millions. IN the same way that in the USA peolpe may be found not guilty of murder by a criminal court but then a civil court may see it differently and award damages against the so called innocent party as one is on a beyond reasonable doubt ideal and the other on a balance of probabilities.

My understanding was that they had specifically been exonerated.

I am surprised that no-one seems to be bothered about the fact that the judicuary appears to be given orders by the executive about what they should or should not investigate. The Gvt ordered the ploice to investigate an alleged crime that, if it took place, happened in anotehr jurisdiction - surely if there is reaon for investigateion, this is a matter for the police to decide. Even more shocking is that the police are asking the Gvt if they should or shouldn't continue. Surely the plice should be independent of the executive and freely decide whether or not an investigation should take place.
If you report a crime to the police, they may or may not proceed - should not be up to the gvt to interfere - that is dangerous ground.

Anyone can ask the police to investigate.