Madeleine McCann cops ask Home Office for more money to continue search for missing child

FoxEye said:
At this point I imagine they are pretty much desperate to pin this on somebody - anybody - so they can say, "We didn't waste 10 years and £11m on this one missing person case for nothing!"

If the chap is a sex offender anyhow, then so much the better. Should be pretty easy to close the case with a conviction, based on some "new evidence" they'll conveniently find somewhere or other :p[/QUOTE
Click to expand...

I don't understand that logic. So just because the case is over 10 years old the police shouldn't investigate leads?
 
diamount said:
I don't understand that logic. So just because the case is over 10 years old the police shouldn't investigate leads?
Click to expand...

He didn't say that at all. There has been an unusually high amount of money spent on this case when compared to similar cases, with an unusual number of police officers working on it for an unusually long period of time compared to other cases. I imagine there is a feeling they must get a result to justify the former.

He didn't say "it happened 10 years ago, move on".
 
wesimmo said:
Looking at the evidence they've already released, I'd say there's a good chance that this will go somewhere.

If they know so much about phones being used etc they will probably already have traced a lot of his movements.

I was on the jury for a murder case maybe 15+ years ago and even then it was astonishing how they could track someone.

What they've released so far is obviously circumstantial but it hints at a stronger case to me.
Click to expand...
Yup, this is looking increasingly like she was snatched for trafficking to be honest.
 
Ahleckz said:
He didn't say that at all. There has been an unusually high amount of money spent on this case when compared to similar cases, with an unusual number of police officers working on it for an unusually long period of time compared to other cases. I imagine there is a feeling they must get a result to justify the former.

He didn't say "it happened 10 years ago, move on".
Click to expand...

Maybe you need to learn to read in-between the lines then because the implication is definitely there. Why even bring 'an investigation cost x and took y amount of time' into the discussion then? Who decides to put a cap on the cost of a human life?
 
diamount said:
Maybe you need to learn to read in-between the lines then because the implication is definitely there. Why even bring 'an investigation cost x and took y amount of time' into the discussion then? Who decides to put a cap on the cost of a human life?
Click to expand...

There has to be a cap, we can't indefinteily have a number of officers focusing on this investigation. Cases get closed all the time due to lack of evidence, no leads, etc. Some are reopened but many (most?) aren't as there just aren't new lines of inquiry. Why has this one been allowed to continue so much longer than others?

What do you propose? We investigate every single crime, to completion, every single time? Because whilst that may be great in perfectland, it's just not possible is it?
 
diamount said:
Maybe you need to learn to read in-between the lines then because the implication is definitely there. Why even bring 'an investigation cost x and took y amount of time' into the discussion then? Who decides to put a cap on the cost of a human life?
Click to expand...

Society does, every single day.
 
diamount said:
Why even bring 'an investigation cost x and took y amount of time' into the discussion then?
Click to expand...

The point is being made because the cost and time is huge compared to other cases, so it will absolutely increase pressure for results.

Take April Jones case as an example - this is a case also held up as an example of a 'huge cost' case and that came in at £2.5m with the active searching for her body abandoned after a year.

£11m on one specific case is relatively speaking, astronomical, so he's absolutely on point to suggest they'll be feeling under pressure to deliver a result, especially as it's been ongoing and active so much longer than other cases too.
 
FoxEye said:
At this point I imagine they are pretty much desperate to pin this on somebody - anybody - so they can say, "We didn't waste 10 years and £11m on this one missing person case for nothing!"

If the chap is a sex offender anyhow, then so much the better. Should be pretty easy to close the case with a conviction, based on some "new evidence" they'll conveniently find somewhere or other :p
Click to expand...

Nail. On. Head

They're just looking to close the case and call it done.
 
I think it all comes down to how old she was when abducted. It's rare to have a young child taken like this and vanish off the face of the earth.

Look at past abductions of young children that got and still get coverage to this day. ie. the Moors murders. Even in 2000, Sarah Payne got huge coverage, but eventually she was found.

This case is in a void and as such all inquiries should be followed up, no matter how small.
 
Wizzfizz said:
I think it all comes down to how old she was when abducted. It's rare to have a young child taken like this and vanish off the face of the earth.

Look at past abductions of young children that got and and still get coverage to this day. ie. the Moors murders. Even in 2000, Sarah Payne got huge coverage, but eventually she was found.

This case is in a void and as such all inquiries should be followed up, no matter how small.
Click to expand...

A conviction was made in 2001 for that case, it's hardly a similar issue.

I certainly hope this case finally ends, but it just raises so many questions about what the money could have been used for, especially in terms of kids that need help right now in abusive relationships, homelessness or whatever.

There are seemingly around 20000 people currently missing, we can't be spending nearly a third of our entire government budget on it.
 
diamount said:
Maybe you need to learn to read in-between the lines then because the implication is definitely there. Why even bring 'an investigation cost x and took y amount of time' into the discussion then? Who decides to put a cap on the cost of a human life?
Click to expand...

Whilst a tragic story, I'm struggling to see a positive outcome after all this time.

I have to admit it is a terrific amount of money spent on a single case of a missing child, if we were treat ALL missing children in the same manner who would fund it ?
 
Wizzfizz said:
They are similar as Sarah Payne was abducted. She was found and a conviction made, so that brought it to an end.

The point being if she had never been found and no leads to follow then i'm sure we'd still be talking about her to this day
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I think there's a fair few differences here in terms of what the government did.
 
FoxEye said:
At this point I imagine they are pretty much desperate to pin this on somebody - anybody - so they can say, "We didn't waste 10 years and £11m on this one missing person case for nothing!"

If the chap is a sex offender anyhow, then so much the better. Should be pretty easy to close the case with a conviction, based on some "new evidence" they'll conveniently find somewhere or other :p
Click to expand...

I rather doubt that the German police are going to stitch someone up because the British have splashed the cash on the case.
 
Mr Jack said:
I rather doubt that the German police are going to stitch someone up because the British have splashed the cash on the case.
Click to expand...
According to the BBC the British police are letting the Germans take the lead. Is zat because ze haf vays of making him talk?

(I'll get my coat)
 
omnomnom said:
Bloody hell not everything is a conspiracy.
Click to expand...

A relative of mine this to someone we know who is big into (BS) conspiracy theories. They turned round and quite seriously meaning said "That's what they want you to think." Absolutely nuts! It's almost like brain washing!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom