Serviceman threatened with knife outside RAF base
Yes, it is tragic.
However,at what stage does an investigation, with its associated costs in staff hours and money, merit closing down?
The taxpayer/ council tax payer has not infinite responsibility.
Perhaps an attempt at crowdfunding continuing search might be a gauge of public opinion on when to call it a day?
However,at what stage does an investigation, with its associated costs in staff hours and money, merit closing down?
The taxpayer/ council tax payer has not infinite responsibility.
Perhaps an attempt at crowdfunding continuing search might be a gauge of public opinion on when to call it a day?
However,at what stage does an investigation, with its associated costs in staff hours and money, merit closing down?
The taxpayer/ council tax payer has not infinite responsibility.
The taxpayer/ council tax payer has not infinite responsibility.
Source
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeez!! And people have called me insensitive.................
This whole thread has nothing to do with the "fight against terror" - the police in the Marham case have said from a very early point that whatever happeened had no terrorist connection - they continued to question the guy who claimed he was being abducted but have now put the case on ice.
In the missing man case he really IS missing and now persumed dead. Just because he made a bad call after a few beers is no reason to abuse hiim TBH
This whole thread has nothing to do with the "fight against terror" - the police in the Marham case have said from a very early point that whatever happeened had no terrorist connection - they continued to question the guy who claimed he was being abducted but have now put the case on ice.
In the missing man case he really IS missing and now persumed dead. Just because he made a bad call after a few beers is no reason to abuse hiim TBH
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad but inevitable I guess...
Corrie Mckeague: Missing airman search to be stood down - BBC News
There are "no realistic lines of inquiry left" in the investigation into the disappearance of RAF airman Corrie Mckeague, police have said.
Mr Mckeague was 23 when he was last seen on 24 September 2016 walking into a bin loading bay in Bury St Edmunds. Suffolk Police said the inquiry, which has cost £2.1m, had been handed to a cold case team but remained open. Det Supt Katie Elliott said: "It is extremely disappointing that we have not been able to find Corrie. We have now reached a point where we are unable to make any further progress, and have gone as far as we realistically can with the information we have," she added.
A police spokesman said the case had always been a missing persons investigation and there is no evidence of "criminal activity or third party involvement".
Suffolk Police said it had been "re-examining the evidence relating to all realistic theories to identify whether there is anything else that could be done to establish what could have happened to Corrie". But the force said an assessment of the evidence "still points to Corrie being transported from the 'horseshoe' area in a bin lorry and ultimately taken to the Milton landfill site".
Mr Mckeague was last seen on CCTV pictures at about 03:25 BST after a night out and his phone was tracked as taking the same route as a bin lorry. As part of the inquiry, police trawled a landfill site in Milton, Cambridgeshire, for the missing airman's remains. However, after the search the force said they were "content" he was not in the landfill areas.
Assistant Chief Constable Simon Megicks said he had "absolute confidence" in the way the investigation was conducted. "The major investigation team inquiry has been reviewed at various points by senior officers within the constabulary and external experts," he said. Det Supt Elliott added: "If any new, credible and proportionate inquiries relating to Corrie's disappearance emerge we will pursue them."
The force said Mr Mckeague's family have been informed of the decision. Mr Mckeague's mother Nicola Urquhart previously said the search of the waste site had given her "immeasurable peace of mind". The investigation into the disappearance has cost £2.1m and Suffolk's police and crime commissioner said the government had agreed to contribute with a special grant, expected to be about £800,000.
Corrie Mckeague: Missing airman search to be stood down - BBC News
There are "no realistic lines of inquiry left" in the investigation into the disappearance of RAF airman Corrie Mckeague, police have said.
Mr Mckeague was 23 when he was last seen on 24 September 2016 walking into a bin loading bay in Bury St Edmunds. Suffolk Police said the inquiry, which has cost £2.1m, had been handed to a cold case team but remained open. Det Supt Katie Elliott said: "It is extremely disappointing that we have not been able to find Corrie. We have now reached a point where we are unable to make any further progress, and have gone as far as we realistically can with the information we have," she added.
A police spokesman said the case had always been a missing persons investigation and there is no evidence of "criminal activity or third party involvement".
Suffolk Police said it had been "re-examining the evidence relating to all realistic theories to identify whether there is anything else that could be done to establish what could have happened to Corrie". But the force said an assessment of the evidence "still points to Corrie being transported from the 'horseshoe' area in a bin lorry and ultimately taken to the Milton landfill site".
Mr Mckeague was last seen on CCTV pictures at about 03:25 BST after a night out and his phone was tracked as taking the same route as a bin lorry. As part of the inquiry, police trawled a landfill site in Milton, Cambridgeshire, for the missing airman's remains. However, after the search the force said they were "content" he was not in the landfill areas.
Assistant Chief Constable Simon Megicks said he had "absolute confidence" in the way the investigation was conducted. "The major investigation team inquiry has been reviewed at various points by senior officers within the constabulary and external experts," he said. Det Supt Elliott added: "If any new, credible and proportionate inquiries relating to Corrie's disappearance emerge we will pursue them."
The force said Mr Mckeague's family have been informed of the decision. Mr Mckeague's mother Nicola Urquhart previously said the search of the waste site had given her "immeasurable peace of mind". The investigation into the disappearance has cost £2.1m and Suffolk's police and crime commissioner said the government had agreed to contribute with a special grant, expected to be about £800,000.
I think there may be a cover-up here.
Corrie Mckeague: Evidence 'manipulated', mother claims - BBC News
I hadn't realised that mum is a serving police officer in Scotland and has picked out an anomaly in the evidence regarding the weights of the refuse bins picked up at the scene.
As his mobile phone signal followed the path of the truck back to the dump I feel it reasonable to surmise he was in that vehicle. If the crew saw his body and panicked they may be hiding the truth of what they did next - even though it wasn't their fault. You and I would have called for an ambulance but others may have felt they were to blame and tried to get rid of evidence.
I hope Mrs Urquhart and family can get to the truth.
Corrie Mckeague: Evidence 'manipulated', mother claims - BBC News
I hadn't realised that mum is a serving police officer in Scotland and has picked out an anomaly in the evidence regarding the weights of the refuse bins picked up at the scene.
As his mobile phone signal followed the path of the truck back to the dump I feel it reasonable to surmise he was in that vehicle. If the crew saw his body and panicked they may be hiding the truth of what they did next - even though it wasn't their fault. You and I would have called for an ambulance but others may have felt they were to blame and tried to get rid of evidence.
I hope Mrs Urquhart and family can get to the truth.
"still points to Corrie being transported from the 'horseshoe' area in a bin lorry and ultimately taken to the Milton landfill site"
However, after the search the force said they were "content" he was not in the landfill areas.
How can both these statements be true?
If they are, what happened next......?
lsh
However, after the search the force said they were "content" he was not in the landfill areas.
How can both these statements be true?
If they are, what happened next......?
lsh
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gues they're pretty sure his body is inthe andfill and the cost of digging it all up is prohibitive
On the other hand I see the Met have more money for their annual trip to Portgual which has to be an even more useless use of cash
On the other hand I see the Met have more money for their annual trip to Portgual which has to be an even more useless use of cash
The concept of "the greater good" seems to be being ignored here. The police [nor indeed any other public body] do not have infinite resources, and even if they had, should these resources be used on single cases, however tragic, however newsworthy?
The media mindset these days is that someone, some public body, "them", must be held to blame for every tragedy.
Sh1t happens. people by and large do their best, people make mistakes, and still sh1t happens.
Time to move on, except for the grieveing famliies. Not their fault.
The media mindset these days is that someone, some public body, "them", must be held to blame for every tragedy.
Sh1t happens. people by and large do their best, people make mistakes, and still sh1t happens.
Time to move on, except for the grieveing famliies. Not their fault.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Age: 54
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I think I'd have to confess to different standards here.
I don't think Police forces should squander huge amounts of their slender funding in these ongoing searches but I also don't doubt for a minute that if my child was missing I would let the country bankrupt itself looking for them.
What parent wouldn't clutch at any and every shred of hope? Who wants to be the one to say "No, enough."?
I don't think Police forces should squander huge amounts of their slender funding in these ongoing searches but I also don't doubt for a minute that if my child was missing I would let the country bankrupt itself looking for them.
What parent wouldn't clutch at any and every shred of hope? Who wants to be the one to say "No, enough."?
Last edited by Tashengurt; 28th Mar 2018 at 15:05.
I certainly wouldnt authorise any further money until Mrs McCann answered the 48 questions that she refused to answer during the investigation by the Portuguese Police. In my view, any mother would answer any question that could shed light on what occurred, unless they had something to hide.
These are the questions she was asked:
1- On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?
2- Did you search inside the master bedroom wardrobe? (she replied that she wouldn’t answer)
3- (shown 2 photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?
4- Why had the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window (whose photo was shown to her) been tampered with? Did somebody go behind that sofa?
5- How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected your daughter Madeleine’s disappearance?
6- Why did you say from the start that Madeleine had been abducted?
7- Assuming Madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins home alone to go to the ‘Tapas’ and raise the alarm? Because the supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.
8- Why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?
9- When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?
10- What happened after you raised the alarm in the ‘Tapas’?
11- Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?
12- Who contacted the authorities?
13- Who took place in the searches?
14- Did anyone outside of the group learn of Madeleine’s disappearance in those following minutes?
15- Did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?
16- What does “we let her down” mean?
17- Did Jane tell you that night that she’d seen a man with a child?
18- How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?
19- During the searches, with the police already there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?
20- Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?
21- Who did you phone after the occurrence?
22- Did you call Sky News?
23- Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?
24- Did you ask for a priest?
25- By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?
26- Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?
27- What was your behaviour that night?
28- Did you manage to sleep?
29- Before travelling to Portugal did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?
30- What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?
31- Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?
32- What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?
33- What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?
34- As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?
35- What is your medical specialty?
36- Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?
37- Did you work every day?
38- At a certain point you stopped working, why?
39- Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?
40- Is it true that sometimes you despaired with your children’s behaviour and that left you feeling very uneasy?
41- Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?
42- In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?
43- In the case files you were forensic testing films, where you can see them marking due to detection of the scent of human corpse and blood traces, also human, and only human, as well as all the comments of the technician in charge of them. After watching and after the marking of the scent of corpse in your bedroom beside the wardrobe and behind the sofa, pushed up against the sofa wall, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
44- When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
45- When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
46- When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
47- When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, whose analysis was carried out in a British laboratory, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
48- Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?
A Question She Did Answer
- Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardizing the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
- “Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.”
These are the questions she was asked:
1- On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?
2- Did you search inside the master bedroom wardrobe? (she replied that she wouldn’t answer)
3- (shown 2 photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?
4- Why had the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window (whose photo was shown to her) been tampered with? Did somebody go behind that sofa?
5- How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected your daughter Madeleine’s disappearance?
6- Why did you say from the start that Madeleine had been abducted?
7- Assuming Madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins home alone to go to the ‘Tapas’ and raise the alarm? Because the supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.
8- Why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?
9- When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?
10- What happened after you raised the alarm in the ‘Tapas’?
11- Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?
12- Who contacted the authorities?
13- Who took place in the searches?
14- Did anyone outside of the group learn of Madeleine’s disappearance in those following minutes?
15- Did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?
16- What does “we let her down” mean?
17- Did Jane tell you that night that she’d seen a man with a child?
18- How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?
19- During the searches, with the police already there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?
20- Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?
21- Who did you phone after the occurrence?
22- Did you call Sky News?
23- Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?
24- Did you ask for a priest?
25- By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?
26- Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?
27- What was your behaviour that night?
28- Did you manage to sleep?
29- Before travelling to Portugal did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?
30- What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?
31- Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?
32- What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?
33- What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?
34- As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?
35- What is your medical specialty?
36- Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?
37- Did you work every day?
38- At a certain point you stopped working, why?
39- Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?
40- Is it true that sometimes you despaired with your children’s behaviour and that left you feeling very uneasy?
41- Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?
42- In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?
43- In the case files you were forensic testing films, where you can see them marking due to detection of the scent of human corpse and blood traces, also human, and only human, as well as all the comments of the technician in charge of them. After watching and after the marking of the scent of corpse in your bedroom beside the wardrobe and behind the sofa, pushed up against the sofa wall, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
44- When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
45- When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
46- When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
47- When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, whose analysis was carried out in a British laboratory, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
48- Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?
A Question She Did Answer
- Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardizing the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
- “Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.”
A few years back, AR1 (Mrs) was in court at the committal of a suspect Mr A, who was charged that on a certain date he murdered Mr X.
The evidence laid before the court was Mr A was seen on CCTV entering a street prior to where Mr X being found. That an object with Mr A's DNA on it was found in the vicinity of Mr X's body.
Unfortunately, the CCTV didn't show either of them leaving. Mr X was found unconscious in the early hours and died shortly afterwards.
In the pre court discussion the CPS and Police were adamant that they had the chap involved.
Eventually, after being remanded in custody and facing a trial by jury, Mr A was acquitted of the Manslaughter (the eventual charge) of Mr X.
Despite the confidence at the time of the investigation that they had their man, following a case review, some years later Mr Xs friend was charged and convicted for Manslaughter. A Man who had been interviewed during the initial case, as he was drinking with the victim that evening.
Blinded by tech and DNA the police were utterly focused on nailing Mr A. They were wrong, and a young man was perilously close to being locked up for a long time. This could be any of us making a turn in front of a camera, and dropping a bit of a takeaway. We all require the right to a proper and full investigation to protect us from injustice, and to ensure when an offence does arrive in court its done as a result of investigating with an open mind.
Equally, we need to park our own emotionally based judgments, or at least sometimes keep them to ourselves. - Out.
The evidence laid before the court was Mr A was seen on CCTV entering a street prior to where Mr X being found. That an object with Mr A's DNA on it was found in the vicinity of Mr X's body.
Unfortunately, the CCTV didn't show either of them leaving. Mr X was found unconscious in the early hours and died shortly afterwards.
In the pre court discussion the CPS and Police were adamant that they had the chap involved.
Eventually, after being remanded in custody and facing a trial by jury, Mr A was acquitted of the Manslaughter (the eventual charge) of Mr X.
Despite the confidence at the time of the investigation that they had their man, following a case review, some years later Mr Xs friend was charged and convicted for Manslaughter. A Man who had been interviewed during the initial case, as he was drinking with the victim that evening.
Blinded by tech and DNA the police were utterly focused on nailing Mr A. They were wrong, and a young man was perilously close to being locked up for a long time. This could be any of us making a turn in front of a camera, and dropping a bit of a takeaway. We all require the right to a proper and full investigation to protect us from injustice, and to ensure when an offence does arrive in court its done as a result of investigating with an open mind.
Equally, we need to park our own emotionally based judgments, or at least sometimes keep them to ourselves. - Out.
Last edited by AR1; 28th Mar 2018 at 23:21. Reason: Spooling Mistook.
