A Tale of Two Files by Dr Martin Roberts A CEOP Mystery

I'm far from qualified to opine over this latest can of worms for reasons simple. One, I have not been following the debate over this issue. Two, internet technology is not my forte.

All I can say, if it comes down to matters of trust, does one put one's trust in man or machine?

I cannot speak for machines, but I think I might offer an opinion about the man, in this instance, that man  being Jim Gamble, late of the CEOP.

Of course you can trust Jim Gamble, he's a career policeman of twenty five years plus experience.

A TALE OF TWO FILES

The furore over Steve Marsden’s apparent discovery of inappropriate computer files having been generated by CEOP in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, revolves around two entities that were archived, according to the San Francisco-based Wayback Machine, on 30 April, 2007, several days before Madeleine was reported missing – an impossibility according to some, just as it appears impossible for a file recorded on 30 April to include specific references to events the following October, under the heading: ‘Latest News’.

On the basis of these paradoxes a number of scrutineers have concluded that the Wayback Machine was at fault and subject to computer error – a ‘glitch’ as is commonly referred to by those who use computers without actually understanding how they work.

Whilst Marsden pointed up the potentially explosive significance of a premature CEOP-generated internet file with a URL that included the name ‘mccann’, it was another, more expansive document that revealed a chronological inconsistency. Although both were archived on the same date, distrust of the one promoted dismissal of the other and, with the WBM backroom staff now busily ‘tinkering’ with their own records, it would appear that what might have been a smoking gun has had its cordite fumes wafted away. Or has it?

The ‘computer done it’ school of thought would have it that some as-yet-unidentified species of error occurred in late October 2007 (on a date following those futuristic ‘Latest News’ references) which led to the CEOP home-page for that period being erroneously recorded as an archival on April 30 – a leap backward in time of six months. The smaller, yet infinitely more significant, ‘mccann’ file was deemed, by extrapolation, to have suffered the same fate.

There has since been intense scrutiny of/debate surrounding/speculation over the very coding of the files in question, in an attempt to discover what exactly happened to them, and whether Marsden’s first impressions were justified, or not, as the case may be. Equations abound, the academic fur has been flying, whilst staff at Wayback headquarters, after giving a handful of contradictory answers to initial questions, have remained resolutely silent on the matter. As has Jim Gamble, Head of CEOP at the time the puzzling files were created. Perhaps the Marketeer’s dictum (‘KISS’ - ‘Keep it simple, stupid!’) should be brought to bear.

Let us suppose, merely for the sake of argument, that the Wayback Machine did indeed suffer some calamity, of whatever origin, during late October 2007. The first question to ask is whether there has been any evidence brought forth of said disruption’s having affected all the internet files the Wayback Machine has ‘crawled’ in the eight years since (*/*) – a catastrophe almost beyond measure if so.

Answer: ‘You cannot be serious!’

So then we should re-iterate the question, but progressively narrowing the field each time, until we are left, more simply, with ‘all CEOP files ’ (ceop.gov.uk/*).

Looking For Madeleine Amazon reviewes by "Vten"

This is already the test case, since the two files which have given rise to the debate are each CEOP files, and no mistake. One, it is claimed, has been affected, the other simply tarred with the same brush. However, since the files in question are functionally independent of each other we are entitled to examine them independently.

According to the Wayback Machine, on 30 April 2007 the file ‘mccann/html’ featured a single photographic portrait of young Madeleine McCann, together with a provisional link to a second picture. If, however, we consider what that second picture eventually turned out to be, we discover it is a ‘head and shoulders’ view cropped from the now well-known ‘tennis photo’, which Kate McCann claims in her book to have taken on Tuesday 1 May. However smart a computer may appear, it cannot refer for information to an event that has yet to take place.

At a stroke it becomes obvious that the 30 April version of the internet page in question (‘mccann.html’) must have been incomplete. In point of fact, no ‘screen shot’ of this file’s 30 April output has succeeded in revealing more than one photograph, plus a ‘broken link’ icon in respect of the other. Subsequent archivals by the WBM (on 13 May, for instance) include both pictures, which are reproduced without demur.

Had this file been ‘crawled’ in October and wrongly assigned as an April 30 record, then what until recently appeared to the viewer to be the earliest known instance of the file ‘mccann.html’, should have incorporated two photographs. It did not. In reality this file probably did not even exist beyond August 2007 and is highly unlikely to have featured in any October review by the WBM.

Even if one were to trace the history of the ‘two-picture page’ backward in time, with a view to offering up the fatuous argument that the WBM found a ‘broken link’ example only slightly earlier than 13 May and proceeded to drop that into its 30 April folder instead, that contention is still untenable, since the ‘crawls’ conducted by the WBM in this instance were two weeks apart (30 April – 13 May). As far as ‘computer glitch’ proponents are concerned, 13 May should have marked the file’s very first appearance among the WBM’s records, given that CEOP did not join the party until officially invited to do so on 7 May.

Instead we are brought back to the ‘Marsden scenario’ that first set alarm bells ringing. Until such time as its ‘minders’ completely re-work their indexing in this regard (and they will) the WBM self-evidently contained a record of CEOP file ‘mccann.html’ archived on 30 April, 2007 – four days before Madeleine McCann was reported missing. Even if we dismiss its contents, the very existence of such an entity is potentially incriminating.

But…but…but…how do we explain the contradictions inherent in that other file – the CEOP home-page with its Latest News from October? How did that come to be identified with April?

Answer: By accident or design. It matters not a jot, since we have already adduced evidence to establish that not all CEOP files were affected by whatever caused their home-page to experience a premonition. Whatever befell that page structure, it was an event unique to that document and basically irrelevant to the focal issue, which requires resolution.

Instead of bombarding the keepers of the Wayback Machine with questions concerning a problem they have never experienced, we should be asking Jim Gamble to explain how and why CEOP came to be preparing a ‘find me’ campaign for a girl who had yet to go missing.

Martin Roberts

Doing a Bit Of Grooming Yourself Mr Gamble? Re-Up

Though I might rectify the situation tomorrow, I'm a little too tired at present to write the intro worthy of this post. But for the most of you visiting tonight, the links and the graphics are more than sufficient for you to comprehend the basics.

Not forgetting of course, the latest, and the reason for this re-up. And dare I say it, insightful little cartoon strip?


16 December 2009 Uncleared Suspect in Simulating a Crime and Hiding a Cadaver to be Guest Speaker at CEOP Conference on Child Abduction

6 January 2010 Gerry McCann To Be Guest Speaker Of CEOP

26 January 2010 CEOP Let Us Have A Little Reminder About The Merits Of Your Guest Speaker Gerry McCann

Jim Gamble and the Abuse of Madeleine McCann

 In spite of what it represents, an official product of the CEOP under the then command of, Jim Gamble; the imagery itself is second place to the questions it raises.

As a prerequisite to any question asked, it is crucial to know the chronology surrounding this astonishing CEOP production, A Minute For Madeleine.

Having fled Portugal, immediately after being declared Arguido; persons of interest; or in the case of the parents, Kate and Gerry McCann,  suspects in all but name.

It is with this in mind, that some thirty days later, Jim Gamble foisted onto the world, this extraordinary piece of propaganda. And extraordinary it is, be assured of that.

It becomes extraordinary for reasons manifold. To mention but a few.

It becomes extraordinary, because it is the product of an experienced career policeman.

An experienced career policeman, who at the time, was CEO of a government funded organization.

 And let us for a moment, remind ourselves of the CEOP acronym: 

The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre.

Yes; quite.

 Which gives rise to our questions.

What was the intended effect of this non too subtle torpedo, supposed to have on the ongoing Portuguese investigation?

Was A Minute For Madeleine the product of the imagination of Jim Gamble alone?

Was the decision to produce and air A Minute For Madeleine, taken solely by Jim Gamble?

If the answer to the last two questions is yes, then we know where we stand. Or more precisely, we know where Jim Gamble stands.

If the answer is no however . . . .

I don’t think I even want to go there. 

Update:

"Madeleine will now be six years old" is a written statement which opens the CEOP vid. 'A minute for Madeleine'. Gamble is actually heard to say however, "Madeleine is now six years old". Altogether less tentative. Martin Roberts

Season Greeting Mr Gamble: The Brenda Leyland Conspiracy

And conspiracy it is, rest assured. Criminally so in fact.

David Cameron, Theresa May and Bernard Hogan-Howe, to name but a few that choose to ignore the culpability of the parents in relation to the death of Madeleine McCann.

Not to be confused with Jim Gamble, who, without remit, inserted himself in this case from the outset. One can only wonder why?

There is no abductor, there is only the parents.

Season Greeting Mr Gamble...

Jim Gamble ex cop, befriender of Kate and Gerry McCann, collaborator, collaborating with dangerous online vigilantes/McCann supporters, collaborating also with Sky Crime Reporter Martin Brunt his Dodgy Dossier Report, who together, and with others I have yet to mention, played their parts in the attack carried out against Ms Brenda Leyland. This lady sadly and tragically, days after their assault, was found dead in a hotel room.

Gamble's conduct and involvement in the attack on Brenda Leyland is truly shameful, as is that of the McCanns, Brunt, Murdoch, Mitchell, and not forgetting the chubby, dumpy legged lady, the feeder of ducks, one of the online vigilantes, one of the main players, if not the main player in this malicious campaign, in this appalling act, the heinous attack on Brenda Leyland.

Other than being an ex cop I know little of Gamble. What I do know I have "heard" him say online, and in interview etc, and frankly he comes across boorish, vulgar, a common low breed, malicious, ignorant in every way -wickedness personified.

And for anyone who does not know of the type of comments he makes, the following one of his Twitter postings demonstrating, and leaving the reader in no doubt whatsoever the character of this man. Here we have Gamble congratulating Martin Brunt for attacking Ms Brenda Leyland a lady innocent of the accusations made against her by Brunt, Gamble and those online vigilantes who Gamble and Brunt both befriended/communicated with on Twitter/elsewhere to enable their planned assault on this lady.

His comment is shocking, sickening! more

Also in the news.

Damning new Madeleine documentary promised for 2015 Portugal Resident

Jim Gamble: Judgement or Agenda? Re-Up

Given Jim Gamble's more recent blatant display of  agenda, edifying the authors, Summers and Swan and their failed literary attempt, Looking For Madeleine. I thought it might be of interest, perhaps more so than ever, to re-up this post from 10 April 2010. Covering as it does, many of the issues surrounding the then head of the CEOP, Jim Gamble. Unfortunately I cannot guarantee all links, but there is still ample sufficiency, to hopefully hold your interest.






I think I can safely say that my previous article Jim Gamble CEOP A Question If I May established the fact that Jim Gamble is a competent policeman of some twenty five years experience, well versed in the ways of the world.

With that in mind, I have to ask the question, does this statement by Gamble reflect that experience, or is it in fact, given Gamble's career accomplishments, totally anomalous?

Though it defies all logic, Gamble's unequivocal support of the McCann's is not unique, he has previously been vocal in support of another, the extremely suspect, if not indeed outright corrupt, Colin Port, Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset.

But that little nest of vipers I will address later in this article if not in a separate post altogether, because truth be told it makes my head spin. Everybody that is anybody is seemingly connected, from the disgraced Ronnie Flanagan, later to become Sir Ronnie, to Gamble, to Port, to murders and cover-ups, to you name it, everybody seems to coloured by the same brush. The hard part in all this, is trying to find the glue, if not to stick this shabby bunch together, then at least find enough cohesion to at least make an article out of it all. As I say, of this later, but don't be holding your breath.

The CEOP were active in this case from the very beginning, but before scrutinising that involvement, let me post a few relevant words, the rest of it being puff, from a Mirror article dated October 2007.

Cop hunts down net pervs
By Ros Wynne-Jones

EXCLUSIVE COP WHO HUNTS DOWN THE INTERNET PERVERTS PREYING ON KIDS

......And as head of the CEOP, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre, missing Madeleine McCann is inevitably never far from his mind.

"We absolutely support the McCann family," he says, sitting in his glass-walled office in Pimlico, Central London.

"They are to be applauded for their tireless work to keep the campaign to find their daughter in the public consciousness. It is a case for every parent of 'There but by the grace of God, go I'." Mirror 7th October 2007

"We absolutely support the McCann family, they are to be applauded for their tireless work to keep the campaign to find their daughter in the public consciousness."

Well, there's no ambiguity in that statement, crystal clear, unequivocal support from, and I shall not use the CEOP acronym here, lets call it as it is, because to do otherwise would be somewhat diversionary; unequivocal support from Jim Gamble.

Now that is quite a statement coming from an officer of the law, I assume that's what he still is, that he holds a rank of some description. It becomes even more of a statement, considerably more, when we consider to whom it pertains. And to whom it pertains is the parents, and the last two people to have seen to have seen Madeleine McCann alive before allegedly being abducted.

I have little inclination to quote chapter and verse as to what evidence there was at the time in support of this allegation by the parents, quite simply, it is the same amount today as it was then, nothing, zero, zilch. Likewise I have no inclination to spend a week making a list of factors that point to to the contrary. What I am inclined to however, is to state quite categorically that this statement of support by Gamble should have had alarm bells ringing from one end of this country to the other.

But if we add to the equation that which I have so far left out, then what I previously described as quite a statement becomes something else entirely. It becomes astonishing, and given that it is issued by a man supposedly charged with protecting children it becomes more than astonishing, it becomes sinister, and more than sinister it becomes criminal, both morally and legally.

So what is the missing expression in our fore-mentioned equation, it is the date?

The date of publication which quoted Jim Gamble's "absolute support the McCann family" was the Seventh of October 2007, a month to the day after the McCanns, quite understandably, had been declared Arguidos, persons of interest, suspects in all but name in the case of their disappeared Daughter.

Now you can call me old fashioned, you can call me whatever you wish, but I have a problem with this statement of support from Jim Gamble issued under the guise of the CEOP.

As much as he may like to think it is, the CEOP is not Jim Gamble's personal fiefdom, it is a Government organisation funded from the public purse. It's purpose, so we are told, is to combat child abuse via the internet. It is not platform for Jim Gamble to utter statements of support to suspects, period, no matter who they may be.

The CEOP was not conceived and brought into being in order that Jim Gamble may pursue his own agenda. The CEOP is not be vehicle from which to launch "Minute for Madeleine" video clips in an effort to legitimise the McCann's claim of abduction, when there is not one scrap of evidence to support this claim and there being much to indicate the impossibility of such an occurrence taking place.


Let us move on.


We know that the CEOP were on the ground in Portugal, "helping with the investigation" within two days, and what do we know of their activities there.

We know that they Profiled Robert Murat, this from Goncalo Amaral's book A Verdade Da Mentira. I include the rest of the passage for context and interest.

Members of the British agency CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre), take a close interest in Murat and work to develop his psychological profile. GA

With amazement the police officers discover a series of books and manuals exclusively intended for police services and government agencies.

Missing and Abducted Children: A Law-Enforcement Guide to Case Investigation and Program Management, National Centre for Missing & Exploited Children;

Training Courses, CEOP (Serious Organised Crime Agency - Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre);

Making Every Child Matter...Everywhere, CEOP (Serious Organised Crime Agency - Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre).

Mark Harrison himself wonders how Gerald McCann could have obtained these books.

Which led to, again from Goncalo Amaral.

FOR THE PROFILERS, MURAT IS THE GUILTY PARTY

Since Murat's first interview, which they attended, the specialists have continued to refine the profile of the suspect. They have heard about the statement from one of his so-called childhood friends, put on file by the police department: according to him, Murat had an affirmed penchant for bestiality.

He recounted his attempts at sexual relations with a cat and a dog, subsequently killed, he states, with cruelty. Moreover, he allegedly attempted to rape his 16 year-old cousin. This individual describes Murat as someone violent with behavioural problems, a sexual pervert, sadist, and misanthropist. We are somewhat sceptical.

All the same, according to the English profilers, there is a 90% chance that he is the guilty party. That seems to us to be a bit too easy. We think that drawing conclusions based essentially on the statement of an ex-convict is rather dangerous.

Yes it does seem a bit easy doesn't it, perhaps they had other reasons for reaching the conclusion they did.

Nevertheless Murat ended up as Arguido, but not before a little help from Jane Tanner, Lori Campbell and no doubt the odious one helping things along from under some nearby rock.

But I would be remiss if I didn't mention the expediency of Leicester Constabulary in forwarding to the PJ Campbell's suspicions of Murat. Pity they couldn't manage quite the same urgency when it came to forwarding the statements of possible paedophillic behaviour by Gerry McCann and David Payne. But never mind, they did manage to find the energy to fly out to Portugal to try and suppress the release of the documents when it be became apparent that the statements were to be made public.

It does make me beggar the question, I wonder how much time the CEOP spent profiling the statistically most likely persons to know her fate and the last persons to see her alive?*

The photo appeal; I don't want to dwell on too much, but suffice to say much was made of it by all concerned. Let me paste this from the Times, it being the shortest report I have but still includes all the players, Gerry McCann apart that is, for he was pleased as well. And you might want to remember herself from the NPIA, there being a chance she might pop up in the future.

May 21, 2007

Madeleine police appeal for holiday pictures

“We will then assess those pictures – at a rate of 1,000 pictures per hour – so that over a quick period of time we will pass meaningful information to the Portuguese authorities.”

The appeal was launched today by the UK law enforcement agencies assisting the Portuguese authorities – Leicestershire Constabulary, Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), CEOP and the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA).

Anne Harrison, Detective Chief Superintendent from the NPIA said that it was possible Madeleine was still in Praia da Luz but was being hidden and appealed for anyone that knew where she was to come forward.

“We do not know the reason why she was taken but the Portuguese authorities have searched extensively around Praia da Luz and she has not been found. It is possible she is being hidden or concealed in some way and if you know where then by now you may have realised it is in everybody’s interest that she is returned to her family”.

She also wanted anyone who took part in the initial search for Madeleine before the Portuguese police arrived to contact them on 0800 096 1233. Times

Now I might not be so cynical as to the reason for this appeal if the CEOP had actually sent a pic or two to the PJ. But they didn't and I remain just as cynical as ever I was.

And lastly, the blatant attempt by Gamble to whitewash the McCanns, legitimise the abduction theory, and as far as I am concerned, pervert the course of justice.

An attempt I might add, as crass as it is obvious, and as distasteful as it is illegal.

These screen shots taken from, and with a voice-over approved by  hardened crime fighter of twenty five years experience, Jim Gamble, CEO of the CEOP.
















She will now be six years old. It says it all.

Judgement or Agenda?

To round off, a few opinions of others that I have saved along the way, I concur with the writer's opinions, and the talking points the make do save me writing more at this ungodly hour.

No names no pack drill, but thank you all for your contributions and pray forgive me taking liberties with your words.

What evidence do the CEOP have that the mysteriously disappeared child has been abducted? What evidence do the CEOP have to support she has been abducted by paedophiles? If the CEOP have evidence to support that the mysteriously disappeared child was abducted and was abducted by paedophiles then why has this new evidence not been presented to the Portuguese authorities who have primacy in this investigation? If the CEOP have evidence to support abduction an abduction by paedophiles then this I believe is new evidence. New evidence that could re-open the archived case!

~ ~ ~

And CEOPS merrily go along with age-progressed pictures of a child whose dead body has been scented by two recovery dogs? Purrrrrlease!

~ ~ ~

Jim Gamble is being used to threaten any would be dissenters, letting everyone know that Gerry is still in total control of the UK police and all their investigations. How bizarre that given that Madeleine’s fate is still unknown senior policemen are sharing a platform with the statistically most likely person to know her fate and the last person to see her alive.* Even if one is convinced of the parent’s innocence it is an inexplicable way for a police officer to behave

~ ~ ~

What is it about Gamble that instinctively seems to concern so many of us? I cannot put my finger on it and I cannot even fully justify the feeling I have. I just know that it does not sit easily in my mind at all that he is seemingly ignoring the findings of the dogs and statements of Martin Grimes , the Gaspars etc., etc., etc., and that there is an inordinate amount of information to be ruled out before he can sit at conferences with these people as if he is their friend and victim support aid.

I would feel much happier about Gamble if he took a more objective role in this case. Or at least come out publicly and told us why these currently ex-arguidos are totally innocent in the eyes of CEOPS.

If, like Kate McCann, he knows something that nobody else knows, wouldn't it be better for him to come out and tell the public and put us all out of our misery? Because, after goodness knows how long, Kate McCann is sure as Hell never going to tell us how she 'knew' Madeleine was abducted. Her just 'knowing' is absolutely no compensation for the millions of pounds and hundreds of thousands of hours spent.

Where is Gamble's shred of evidence of abduction? Just one will do!

~ ~ ~

I have posted some additional reading below, because human nature being what it is, I have no doubt there will be visitors here from the CEOP, so in a way I could say this is for you.

Perhaps after reading these four articles, assuming you can be arsed, you might want to ask yourselves why the CEOP is involved in this case at all, but more particularly you might ask yourself a further question, why has the CEOP given, and continues give, it's categorical support to the McCanns and their abduction theory. A theory I might add that is so implausible that it becomes contemptible to any thinking person.

Please feel free to make use of the comments facility, particularly if you can argue the case as well as is done below.

Madeleine McCann Was Not Abducted: The Shutters Revisited

How did the alleged abductor snatch Madeleine in a time slot of no more than 3-4 minutes?

by Barbara Nottage

One of the curious aspects of the alleged abduction of Madeleine McCann is the extraordinarily tight timetable in which the abduction is supposed to have taken place. Dr Gerald McCann says he went to check on the children at about 9.05pm on 3 May 2007. He also said elsewhere that he had been an unusually long time in the apartment toilet, and that he had been inside all four rooms of the apartment. In addition, he told the world that he had had time during his visit to gaze down on Madeleine, whom he was to describe as ‘lying in the recovery position’, and think how lucky he was to have such a beautiful daughter. By this reckoning, He could not have left the apartment until around 9.10pm or several minutes later.............

.........The abduction scenario

So let’s examine this situation more closely.

The scenario put forward by the McCanns and their friends runs as follows:

· The abductor must have been watching the apartment for several days before snatching Madeleine on 3 May.

· The McCanns went down to the ‘Tapas bar’ at the Ocean Club at around 8.30pm that evening, with other members of the group arriving during the next half-an-hour or so.

· Dr Matthew Oldfield ‘checked the apartment from the outside’ at around 9.00pm to 9.03pm.

· Dr Gerry McCann returned to his apartment (5A) from the Tapas bar to check on his children at around 9.05pm. The walk to the apartment would have taken one to two minutes. So on his own timing, he would have arrived there around 9.07pm.

· Dr Gerry McCann was briefly in all four rooms of their holiday apartment, during which time he checked his children. He also says he spent an unusually long time in the toilet - maybe up to 5 minutes, though we have never been told why. He tells us that he paused briefly over Madeleine’s bed and thought to himself how very lucky he was to have such a beautiful child.

· Dr Gerry McCann says he noticed that the door to the children’s room was ‘wider open than before’. He says that at 8.30pm it had been open at an angle of about 45 degrees (half open). He remembers (he says) that when he went to check the children at 9.05pm, the door was now open at an angle of 60 degrees (two thirds open).

· The fact that the door - according to Dr Gerald McCann - was now (at 9.05pm) more open more than it was before (at 8.30pm), has been used by him to suggest the possibility that the abductor may have been already in the apartment when he checked on the children, although he says he only realised this possibility some months after the events of the day. Dr Gerry McCann has said that the abductor might have been hiding behind a door or in a wardrobe while he spent several minutes doing his ‘check’ on the children. more

.

Let's Not Concern Ourselves, They're Only Details
by Himself

Just what does it take to get arrested by the Leicester police?

The corner stone of this nonsensical abduction story offered by the McCanns has always centred around the window and the "jemmied shutters."

I have written about the shear impossibility of such a scenario here, and Dr Martin Roberts addresses the same likelihood and can be found at this link.

Below in black and white and on video tape are the accounts of McCann family members and friends, etched in stone as it were, and there is only one indisputable source for these accounts, Kate and Gerry McCann.

But firstly, prior to reading these accounts, we have to take a good look at the latest incredible words of Kate McCann.

This single paragraph is but one of many taken from the McCanns feeble effort to limit the fallout from what came to light in Lisbon. This latest blog entry written by Kate McCann? after their failed and misguided attempt to silence Goncalo Amaral and as such silence the truth.

The window: I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in finding my daughter which is our only aim. The window which is a ground floor window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown. It could of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring'

In the immortal words of John McEnroe, you cannot be serious, you really really cannot be serious.

Apart from a few lines by way of introduction, I have just posted the relevant parts of various articles.*

~ ~ ~

Agony as 3-yr-old vanishes from holiday flat

A HUGE hunt was going on last night for three-year-old Maddy McCann, feared snatched from her holiday flat.

Maddy is believed to have been taken as she slept in the complex on Portugal's Algarve as her doctor parents ate at a bar 120ft away. Her scent was picked up by a police sniffer dog. But it petered out after 400 yards.

Yesterday, 24 hours after the young child vanished in quiet Praia da Luz, anguished parents Gerry and Kate, both 38, of Rothley, Leics, begged for her return.

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy was abducted. They're devastated."

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad.

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying 'Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted'."

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open. Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken. more

The Rapidly Revolving Door
by John Blacksmith

Gerry McCann went back to the third version of his checking visit, the dodgy printed timeline which matched what he had told the police in his first witness statement, where he also mentioned the lavatory visit, timing his trip at 9.05. That document was never going to be accepted by either a judge or jury, not just because of these very changes but because the group had effectively colluding in preparing it after their first witness statements, so it was both worthless and suspicious, as the McCanns’ lawyers knew.

Never mind. Something had to be done, and so Gerry became the first ever victim of MMR syndrome – McCann Memory Recovery - when, four and a half months after the event, he suddenly recalled “sensing” an intruder’s presence in the apartment. To strengthen the story there was that wide-open bedroom door that Mathew Oldfield had seen. Gerry and Kate only ever left it ajar, never wide open or closed. That, surely, was clear evidence that someone was already there, in hiding, ready to leap into action as soon as the patio doors clicked shut. Now, with the actual approach and entry all having taken place before his arrival, the only time required as he walked down the back staircase to encounter Jeremy Wilkins, was fugitive exit time.

But this was like playing with a Rubik Cube because of what the Tapas 7 had already put in their witness statements: move one, you may have to move them all. If he’d done his check at 9.05 what had he been doing between 9.07, say, and when Jane Tanner saw him by the back gate about 9.20 at the earliest? A trip to the loo, a gaze down at his daughter – and then what? He must have been talking to Jeremy Wilkins, that’s where the unaccounted 10 -15 minutes had gone. But argh! Jane Tanner had said in her statement that, whatever time they had both gone, she had followed him only five minutes afterwards.

Shrug. That was another bridge that would have to be crossed if they ever went back to Portugal. For now it would be good enough: out went Clarence with the story that so enraged the Portuguese cop. more

Decisions, decisions
by John Blacksmith

The background to Mitchell's untruthful statement to the press lay in the problems that the defence team were uncovering in the abduction claim, problems that they patiently outlined at their offices to Gerry McCann one afternoon in September.

Mathew Oldfield confirmed that at just after 9.30, when he supposedly checked the apartment, while missing Madeleine herself, the children' bedroom door was open wider than Gerry McCann left it. So the abductor supposedly seen by Jane Tanner must have moved it, committed the crime and departed before Oldfield's arrival but after Gerry's departure, which was itself fixed in time by another witness, Jeremy Wilkins. Was there enough time for the abduction to occur within these limits?

In the famous “Let’s Dismember Noddy” timelines, the ones that the Tapas group insisted were truthful, there are two times given for Gerry’s visit. The first version says he checked at 9.10 – 9.15 PM.

On the second, the one with “Gerald” on it, Gerry, who was wearing a watch during his check, has corrected it to 9.15 exactly.

The same document, as can be seen, says that Jane, who was not present during the Noddy massacre, went for her check at 9.20, something she confirms in her witness statement, “five minutes after Gerry”.

So in that five minutes everything has happened. Gerry has made the two minute walk to his apartment, more

.

~ ~ ~

NI police colluded with killers

Police colluded with loyalists behind over a dozen murders in north Belfast, a report by the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland has confirmed.

Nuala O'Loan's report said UVF members in the area committed murders and other serious crimes while working as informers for Special Branch.

It said two retired assistant chief constables refused to cooperate with the investigation.

Special Branch officers gave the killers immunity, it said.

The officers ensured the murderers were not caught and even "baby-sat" them during police interviews to help them avoid incriminating themselves.

The Special Branch officers "created false notes" and blocked searches for UVF weapons.

They also paid almost £80,000 to leading loyalist Mark Haddock, jailed for 10 years last November for an attack on a nightclub doorman.

Responding to the report, Chief Constable Sir Hugh Orde offered an apology to the victims' families.

He said the report made "shocking, disturbing and uncomfortable reading".

NI Secretary Peter Hain said: "I am convinced that at least one prosecution will arise out of today's report."

Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams said republicans would "not be surprised or shocked by the revelations".

"We think that it's an incentive that the mechanisms which were put in place for accountability, which we put in place and which we have argued for, now need to be deployed, not only to make sure that this does not happen (again), but if it does, that those guilty will be dealt with properly," he said.

The report, published on Monday, called for a number of murder investigations to be re-opened.

But it is unlikely that any of the police officers involved will be prosecuted - the ombudsman said that evidence was deliberately destroyed to ensure there could not be prosecutions.

Nuala O'Loan said investigation was a lengthy task.

"What emerged during our inquiries was that all of the informants at the centre of this investigation were members of the UVF," she said.

"There was no effective strategic management of these informants. As a consequence of the practices of Special Branch, the position of the UVF, particularly in north Belfast and Newtownabbey was consolidated and strengthened over the years. How could this happen?"

Mrs O'Loan said former Chief Constable Sir Ronnie Flanagan was interviewed by her office, but was unable to assist the investigation.

The report said: "Others, including some serving officers, gave evasive, contradictory, and on occasion farcical answers to questions.

"On occasion those answers indicated either a significant failure to understand the law, or contempt for the law."

The ombudsman's investigation began more than three years ago when Belfast welder Raymond McCord claimed that his son, also called Raymond, had been killed by a police informer.

The former RAF man, 22, was a member of the UVF who had some involvement in drugs.

In 1997, he was beaten to death and his body dumped in a quarry.

Mr McCord has said he wants those who murdered his son to be put in prison.

He said he had received a death threat at the weekend from the UVF.

Among the investigations which could be re-opened are the murder in north Belfast in 1992 of 27-year-old taxi driver Sharon McKenna, who was shot at the home of an elderly friend.

The names of the police officers and the informers have not been made public.

However, it is known that the main informer at the centre of the investigation is Mark Haddock, who was named in the Irish parliament 15 months ago as a UVF killer.

Some of the Special Branch officers criticised in the report have rejected the ombudsman's allegations as "unfounded and incapable of substantiation".

In a statement, the Northern Ireland Retired Police Officers' Association said they had always acted in the best interests of the pursuit of justice and had nothing to be ashamed of.

The officers also challenged the ombudsman to disclose the details of any evidence of their criminal behaviour discovered during her investigation. BBC NI

Taking a Gamble: Championing The McCanns as Suspects

Championing The McCanns as Suspects. Then as now.

 I never cease to be appalled by some of the things people say. said Jim Gamble of a woman who exercised her right to hold an opinion that differed from that of the McCann party line, and its champions must be said,  to wit, one James "Jim" Gamble.

Leaving the irony of such a statement aside, it just falls to me to say, I know the feeling well. After seven years of listening to the pathetic utterings of the Doctors McCann, not only do I know the feeling well, I think I have become, as no doubt many others have, an expert in the appalling.

But it is not the Doctors McCann that concerns us here today, no, it is the aforementioned Champions, who, without the tiniest piece of irrefutable evidence to bolster their claim, and often acting outside their remit, champion the parents claim, that Madeleine McCann was in fact abducted from the now infamous apartment 5A, Praia da Luz, Portugal.

And should any of these champions, so called experts, or detective chief inspectors, produce that tiny piece of again, irrefutable evidence, that supports the McCann's claim of stranger abduction, not only will I eat my hat, close all my blogs, and apologise profusely, but will wear sackcloth and ashes for the remainder of my years on this planet.

So that said, what lies below, is nothing more than a copy and paste job. Heaven knows, I have written more than enough about our featured champion in the past, time then for someone else to say a few words, and who better, and what better, than the product of the fine analytical mind of the discerning, Dr Martin Roberts.

Below Doctor Roberts' piece, you will find a transcript of the offending interview with Jim Gamble, and here I give heartfelt thanks to Nigel Moore of the McCann Files for transcribing this (all in all) lengthy radio show. And my thanks are heartfelt, having undertaken the same tiresome task myself on occasionions past. 

I have however omitted the transcript of "Sarah" the target of Jim Gamble's ire. The content of which, is for the purpose of this article, quite academic. But needless to say, the complete transcript is available below at the relative link.

That just leaves me to say, having read Jim Gamble's tirade, and it can't be described as anything but, I cannot help but come away with the impression of someone in a bit of a panic. Of someone who has nailed his colours to the wrong mast. Nailed his colours to the mast of a vessel so full of holes, that it is imminent danger of foundering. And anyone who has ever been in that (real life) situation, knows only too well, how easy it to sound, if not act, a little panicky.

But no matter what you may think he sounds like, he doesn't sound like an impartial (previous) officer of the law with many years of policing under his belt. Of which by the by, and taken from the recent turgid puff piece in the Belfast Telegraph, you will find mention at the bottom of the page.  

TAKING A GAMBLE
By Dr Martin Roberts
25 May 2014

Nowadays, for the McCanns and their public champions, appearances before the camera or on radio are fraught with more risks than ever before. Former head of CEOP, Jim Gamble, illustrates the point only too clearly. Interviewed recently for the Belfast Telegraph (19 May) he concludes with:

"I think Gerry and Kate McCann will get closure in my lifetime. My heart goes out to them. I never cease to be appalled by some of the things people say.

"A woman on the radio earlier was more fixated that Kate and Gerry left the kids and went for a meal.

"You know what? Lots of people make mistakes. Few people pay this price. Sometimes people should just think before they speak.

It must surely be a comfort to know that 'closure' for the McCanns will come within a lifetime. Can we afford to sustain Operation Grange for quite that long? But you're right Jim. People really should think before they speak. The world would be a happier place if we all did so, including your good self if I may make so bold.

That 'woman on the radio earlier' was followed by none other than our Jim, interviewed on the same programme no less (The JVS Show phone-in on BBC Three Counties Radio, 15 May). But before we take a closer look at the thoughts of career copper 'Cap'n Jim', let's just adjust the starting blocks with another of his explanations to the Belfast Telegraph:

Q. "You invested a lot in CEOP, you built it up but then you walk away in 2010. Do you regret it?

A. "I came to the point it was a matter of principle. For me it was the right thing. My fear was that it would be subsumed into a larger organisation. The Home Secretary said it would retain its identity, its profile and they would build on the success it had. Well, arrests have dropped in the last three years, the sign outside CEOP no longer says CEOP. It says National Crime Agency. Its profile has dropped. In NCA the C stands for crime. In CEOP the C always stood for children".

Never mind the beguiling Home Secretary and Gamble's paternal concern for children, the answer to the question is writ large in sentences 1 – 3. 'Subsumed into a larger organization' would mean, inevitably, that he would no longer be 'top banana', and since 'wherever egos Jim goes', Jim went.

The sheer arrogance of Jim Gamble is reflected in his conspicuous lack of professionalism toward fellow police officers and sardonic ungraciousness toward others. He and Gerry McCann no doubt got on very well together. After listening to what 'that woman on the radio' said earlier, Gamble expresses his considered opinion with respect to the proposed excavation of Praia da Luz requested by the Metropolitan Police:

"'Why now?' that's a question perhaps for the Portuguese police. These issues are being addressed because they weren't done at the time. The... the British authorities and the Metropolitan Police, who have brought a real professional focus to bear on this..."

Implying, of course, that the Portuguese police brought something other than 'a real professional focus' to bear. Gamble's insinuation is not only tactless, it is unwarranted, disrespectful and quite disgraceful. But no more so than his comment upon 'that woman's' (Sarah's) earlier point of view:

"I think it's misplaced and she's given us a lot of her opinions, so let me just give you my opinion of her call.

"I think it's spiteful, I think it's small-minded, I think she's a condescending individual that needs to reflect on the hurt that parents feel - not the issues in the margins". He later adds:

"So, I think she needs... she really needs to look in the mirror, and if I was her this morning, after listening to my interview be broadcast, I wouldn't want to look in the mirror, and, quite frankly, I wouldn't want to meet ordinary mums and dads in the street after what she just said, whether it's in Praia da Luz or where she lives".

Well, Jim, we are each of us entitled to hold an opinion about things, but is a concentrated character-assassination really worthy of a former Police supremo with residual ambitions? I think not. The true worth of Jim Gamble's advocacy of the McCanns soon emerges, as he continues:

"but the fact that a child was, you know, has... was... did go missing... is still missing, and that those parents are tortured..."

Let's get one thing out of the way shall we? The parents have been 'tortured', as Gamble puts it, for seven years. Their daughter Madeleine is dead for eternity.

Now, what was it he twice had to duck out of saying? 'has been abducted', 'was abducted' perhaps? What makes him so uncertain? Let's allow 'big Jim' to tell us himself:

"These are the parents of a child who is suspected to have been abducted".

(The boot's on back-to-front here isn't it? 'She was the child of parents who were suspected of hiding her body').

"The initial inquiry had led, you know, to... to no... no one being arrested, no one being held to account for this".

(Standing a bit too near the edge again here are we? The initial inquiry had led, you know, to... to the McCanns. That’s in the evidence the 'professionals' engaged in Operation Grange will have reviewed)

"I mean, this is about searching for a child who may well have been abducted and who may well have suffered, you know, harm including murder. And I really don't like to speculate about what may, or may not have happened, but had the investigation covered all these bases in the beginning we wouldn't be here now".

Ah Jim... Jim... No sooner do you attempt to feed the world bullshit than you give yourself the impossible task of polishing a turd.

"I mean, this is about searching for a child who may well have been abducted"

The child may have been abducted. On the other hand she may not. Small wonder then that Gamble declines to 'speculate about what may or may not have happened'.

You see, as Jim Gamble so eloquently explains, this is all about a child who may have been abducted OR...

Our Jim, for glaringly obvious reasons, refrains from articulating the alternative. The same alternative that was expressly 'shut out' from the (published) remit for Operation Grange. But since he has introduced the element of doubt, there can be nothing illegitimate about our clarifying the situation on his behalf.

Madeleine McCann may have been abducted, or something else must have happened to cause her disappearance. Now what could that be? There's no way she could have left the family's apartment on her own (we've been told that often enough) and yet she has not been seen in her parents' company, or anyone else's for that matter, for seven years. Someone must have taken her from 5A. But that's abduction isn't it? And she may not have been abducted (the admissible alternative to Jim Gamble's 'may well have been').

Notwithstanding his understandable reluctance to speculate, Jim Gamble nevertheless gives us, in the same breath:

"...but had the investigation covered all these bases in the beginning we wouldn't be here now".

All what bases? The ones pertaining to the search for a child who 'may have been abducted'. Which makes the question of abduction itself a base to be covered, then as now.

So you're thinking of pruning a tree in your garden which happens to overhang the fence with your neighbour (who is entitled to engage in deforestation on his own account), and considering which side of the fence to work on yourself. No contest. Especially when you weigh up the number of branches involved. No one makes unnecessary work for themselves do they? No. So the first base either the Portuguese or the Met Police should have covered, Jim, is whether Madeleine McCann was abducted or not – not who might have abducted her in the event that she 'may have been'.

Well the seemingly less professional Portuguese acted sensibly. The Met, on the other hand, are lumbered with pruning all those extra branches. Which means, Jim, that you, the McCanns, and the rest of us, will probably have to wait a lifetime after all for the 'closure' to which you refer, unless or until someone in authority decides to lift the taboo on the blindingly obvious, and permit examination of the forbidden alternative, the existence of which you yourself have admitted.

Care to take a gamble on how long that might take, Jim? It would make a change from taking the Michael for the past seven years. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

~

The JVS Show phone-in on the Madeleine McCann case

Edit

Jonathan Vernon-Smith:  Jim Gamble is a former policeman and was head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre. He was involved in the search for Madeleine from 2007 to 2011. Good morning to you, Jim.

Jim Gamble: Good morning.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: Morning. So, listening to what Sarah says, she says that, you know, many years have now passed since this very unfortunate incident took place - it's time to move on. Can you understand her sense of frustration with this or do you think it's misplaced?

Jim Gamble: I think it's misplaced and she's given us a lot of her opinions, so let me just give you my opinion of her call.

I think it's spiteful, I think it's small-minded, I think she's a condescending individual that needs to reflect on the hurt that parents feel - not the issues in the margins, but the fact that a child was, you know, has... was... did go missing... is still missing, and that those parents are tortured. This is an unusual case - they're not, you know, twelve to the dozen. This is a case that has perhaps only one other child been missing in these circumstances, over this period of time, in a similar way, and that's Ben Needham.

So, I think she needs... she really needs to look in the mirror, and if I was her this morning, after listening to my interview be broadcast, I wouldn't want to look in the mirror, and, quite frankly, I wouldn't want to meet ordinary mums and dads in the street after what she just said, whether it's in Praia da Luz or where she lives.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: [interrupting] Well, you know Jim...

Jim Gamble: Her interview was disgusting.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: You know, Jim, she is getting some support as well. There are people contacting the programme already saying 'this... this woman from Hertfordshire has vocalised what I've been thinking all these years'.

Jim Gamble: Well, do you know what, and maybe there is a... a number of people out there that think that, but they're not the people that I've spoken to over many, many years in this investigation. There are a small group, for example, who go online on a 'hashtag' and they talk about the McCann case in the most vociferous and spiteful way. In fact, you know, if we were able to identify who those individuals were, their comments as such, that you'd prosecute them for harassment. These are the parents of a child who is suspected to have been abducted - we don't know what has happened to her - and to... to pour your bile out against them in the way that she has, in that condescending and aloof manner, with no real experience of... of investigations, or investigative strategies, or why the police do what they do, when they do. It's just despicable.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: Well, let's just run through some of the points she makes and you can obviously respond to them.

So, first of all, she says that Kate and Gerry McCann, they lost their daughter because ultimately they went out for dinner and they left their daughter, and their other two children, in a hotel room, on their own. And they could have taken their children to the restaurant with them but they didn't - they left them in a room, on their own. They did something that they possibly wouldn't have even considered to doing back home in the UK and yet they went to a foreign country and they did just that. And yet, there is a sense that everybody should feel sorry for them. That was the first point that she made.

Jim Gamble: Well, if you want to concentrate on that error of judgement, at that time, and you think that is the key issue, well... well knock yourself out.

But here's the thing, how many genuine parents out there listened to that interview and thinking: 'There but for the grace of God go I'. I, you know... those parents that sat in the lobby of a hotel, with the baby-listening on - you don't know what's going on there. Those parents that sit at home at night, and have a few drinks while their children are in bed, and have maybe one drink too many.

Lots of parents lose their children momentarily, for lots of reasons. Some people make momentary errors of judgement, you know. Would the McCanns do that again? Of course, they wouldn't. But the bottom line is, if that's where you want to focus your concern [stressed in a mocking away], you know, all these years after this child's gone missing, then... then to be honest, that says more about you. This should be about finding out what happened to Madeleine and seeking an end to this.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: And actually that is very relevant to the latter point that Sarah made in her conversation with me. She makes the point that this investigation has now been going on for seven years, errm... and yet, seven years later, it has been decided at the beginning of the holiday season, in a holiday resort, in a country that is still suffering terribly from an economic recession, it has been decided to go and dig up some fairly major parts of that resort, which will have a... a very detrimental effect on the resort itself and on the businesses there. Do you understand that and she is woman who feels passionately about that particular holiday resort, having been going there for thirty years.

Jim Gamble: Well, I'm sure she doesn't feel as passionately about the resort as parents do for their children.

If you want to look at: 'Why now?' that's a question perhaps for the Portuguese police. These issues are being addressed because they weren't done at the time. The... the British authorities and the Metropolitan Police, who have brought a real professional focus to bare on this; that... that's not for them. They have... as soon as they've been able to aggregate all of the evidence, look at the issues and identify areas where there should have been perhaps a... a focus at the time. They can't now say: 'Well, we'll tell you what we'll do. We'll tie that in with people's travel arrangements; we'll tie that in with holidays'. I mean, this is about searching for a child who may well have been abducted and who may well have suffered, you know, harm including murder. And I really don't like to speculate about what may, or may not have happened, but had the investigation covered all these bases in the beginning we wouldn't be here now.

And the fact of the matter is, it is an unusual case because it crosses territorial boundaries and therefore there are tensions and sensitivities which means it takes quite a long time to negotiate and it's taken a long time to negotiate to get to the position where you have this positive relationship between the Metropolitan Police and the Portuguese police. Nothing would be happening there without the agreement of the Portuguese, so they obviously recognise the investigative value of this search. I believe it should have been done at the time - for whatever reason, it wasn't.

And if a child had gone missing, you know, in Bournemouth or Brighton, or a UK town in the same circumstances, and... and a case review had been carried out years later and areas had been identified that could have been more thoroughly explored, I have no doubt that in the UK we would be doing that and that...

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: [interrupting] So, we would allow...

Jim Gamble: ...not many people in Brighton and Bournemouth would be complaining.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: [interrupting] So, we would allow foreign police to... to come over from another country and to start, for example, digging up parts of Brighton, during the summer season?

Jim Gamble: We would partner with... if you're saying a Portuguese family had come over, their child had been, you know, abducted, or a suspected abduction of that child in that area; they'd gone missing. The initial inquiry had led, you know, to... to no... no one being arrested, no one being held to account for this. The fact is that there's still a suspect at large and... and the police from Portugal came and said: 'Look, we've looked at this, we have these clues'. Of course local police would partner with them. It's not about another police force going into someone else's territory. The Portuguese police are leading this, partnered by the Metropolitan Police. If it was in the UK, local UK police would lead, partnered by the Portuguese.

This... that interview was all about the pettiness involved in this. It was all about, you know... to be quite honest, nonsense. I... I am quite disturbed having listened to that, that anyone would go on the air and.. and say some of the things that lady said.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: Okay.

Jim Gamble: Even more disturbed that you would broadcast it.

Jonathan Vernon-Smith: Okay, well Jim, thank you very much indeed for having your say. That's Jim Gamble who's a former policeman and was head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre. He was involved in the search for Madeleine from 2007 to 2011.  http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

~

Jim Gamble: 'I was under threat but was more fearful for my family' Belfast Telegraph

Chris Kilpatrick talks to the former head of Special Branch in Belfast who applied to be PSNI chief constable and was chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre.

Edit

Q. You served with the police for around 30 years, you were a highly-commended officer and you applied for the job of Chief Constable. Why did you not get it? Were you perceived as being outspoken or perhaps because of your security and intelligence background?

A. I think I was a round peg in a round hole at CEOP. The only job that could have attracted me away from that was Chief Constable of the PSNI. At the time I could not resist applying for it. Many of my friends said I was wasting my time because of my background with Special Branch, that would perhaps would be an impediment. Being shortlisted was an honour. Why didn't I get it? Maybe I wasn't good enough on the day. What I do believe with the gift of hindsight was that I wasn't the right person for the job given where we are now. Had I been chief constable people would have been more concerned during these fragile moments because of the political issues, the specific issues we see at the minute. My background as a Special Branch officer would have been unhelpful and perhaps unhealthy for the service. I've no complaints about that. Belfast Telegraph

Have you ever Googled?  Nuala O'Loan Operation Ballast
Shorter

Then as Now links scroll down for the older and relative stuff.