Wednesday, 6 January 2010

Anything you say will be ignored

Anything you say

Madeleine McCann - the guilty websurfer
by Jon Clements 3/11/09

Among the many interesting comments made by Jim Gamble, Britain's most senior child trafficking and abuse cop, about the disappearance of Madeleine was his theory about how whoever was involved would be regularly checking the internet to see if the net is closing in.

Gamble believes the new viral advert will "rattle" the offender or offenders because "every time you search for updates about where the investigation is you will meet this prompt to your conscience".

His willingness to discuss the case was a welcome relief after two and half years of complete silence from Leicestershire police, the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Serious Organised Crime Agency.

Gamble was reluctant to offer his own theory of what happened in Praia da Luz saying it "didn't matter" if Madeleine was taken for trafficking, or sexual exploitation or by some "deluded soul" who wanted to raise their own child.

Two words which did not pass his lips at any point, however, were "kidnap" and "abduct". Instead the case was strictly referred to as a "disappearance".

One thing Gamble did make clear, however, was his passionate belief that the advert would help find Madeleine and that it was still possible she remained alive.

"Statisticians do that most awful thing", he said. "They take away people's hope".

Old post or not, twelve hours plus is plenty of time to respond, so here's my comment left yesterday.

Perhaps Jim Gamble might be kind enough to share with us the evidence that supports these most unlikely scenarios that you mention, be it "rattled" abductor, or "deluded soul" just wanting a child to love.

Now from whom have I heard the likes of that before, just give me a moment? Ah yes, David Edgar, that's the fellow, Dave Edgar, he of, "Madeleine held in a secret lair" notoriety, paid lackey of the McCanns, beg pardon that should read, McCann's private investigator.

Not for one moment that I am suggesting Jim Gamble is a lackey, well not of the McCanns per se, but I do wish Mr Gamble would share any such evidence he holds that supports Madeleine McCann being abducted in the first instance.

Whether I be a natural worrier I don't really know, but it bothers me somewhat that Jim Gamble, and as such the CEOP, are putting their weight behind the theory that Madeleine McCann was indeed abducted, based upon what I ask?

Because "Gerry McCann says she was," is hardly a basis for the mighty machine of the CEOP to roll into action in support of such a theory is it? And the last time I looked, and believe me, I look often, because "Gerry McCann says she was" was the sum total of the "evidence" in support of an abduction.

So I entreat Mr Gamble to share with us any such evidence that he might hold regarding this case, other than of course, Gerry McCann says she was, because that quite frankly, isn't good enough, is it?


Gerry McCann is a guest speaker of the CEOP at this event.

Taken: Sexually-motivated child abductions
A One Day Conference, Tuesday 26 January 2010. School of Oriental and African Studies, Bloomsbury, London