12 Feb 2008


Wed Jan 30, 5:39 PM ET
LONDON (AFP) - Police do not suspect the parents of missing toddler Madeleine McCann were involved in her disappearance, the couple's spokesman said on Wednesday.

During a debate on media coverage of the child's disappearance, Clarence Mitchell told a packed theatre at the London School of Economics that officials, whom he did not identify, had told him in private briefings that the case was being treated as a "rare stranger abduction".
"I have also had briefings privately from the police and the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre that also gave me complete reassurance that the authorities, in this country certainly, are treating this as a case of rare stranger abduction, as they call it," he said

So Clarence Mitchell claims he has had private briefings from the police who have given him complete reassurance..rare strange abduction ..Well the Police as he puts it who are dealing with this matter are Leicester Police (strange he didnt say which police!) and they say they are not in a position to release information, confirm or deny anything or brief the press and the heart of the enquiry is to find out what happened to Madeleine. So, this emails makes clear they would not speak to him and they are not treating this as rare stranger abduction. Now either Clarence Mitchell or Leicester Police are telling lies. I say Clarence Mitchell is a blatant liar and if he does not like that, as I have said before, then he can sue me, as he is so fond of threatening to do but never actually does.

This email is very encouraging and reassuring that Leicester Police are working under the direction of the PJ and they are fully co-operating with them.

Viv x

REPLY FROM LEICS POLICE!!THANKS DOVE ON THE DAILY EXPRESS!WE certainly do support Leics Police - what a nice email! Viv x -------------------------From Leicestershire police.I have today received this reply:"Thank you for your correspondance in relation to the Madeleine McCann investigation.Leicestershire Constabulary is one of a number of UK law enforcement agencies who are supporting the Portuguese authorities with their investigations into the disappearance of four-year-old Madeleine McCann.Our role is to complete and co-ordinate UK based enquiries at the request of the Portuguese authorities.Any tasks completed by British Police are under the direction of the Portuguese police and the results forwarded onto Portugal.The fact that this is not our investigation and also the implications of Portuguese judicial secrecy mean that we are not in aposition to release information,brief the press on the investigation`s progress or confirm or deny any specifics relating to the case.At the heart of this inquiry is an innocent little girl who went missing in May 2007.Our focus remains in doing everything we can to assist the Judicial Police and the Portuguese authorities to find out what has happened to Madeleine.I am sure that you would support us in this."• Posted by: Dove


2345 said...

Thanks - I read he heartwarming reponse from Leicester Police on 3 A's and it's good to see it here.

I also read that FBI had written some very sharp words to Clarrie regarding misinformation about FBI artists (toothman). Likewise, I would support a petition or referral to Scotland Yard for his blatant lies to the public regarding the beliefs and views of the Police. What are your views, and everyone else's ? 11.30 a.m.

felicity said...

Hi 2345

I was also delighted with the email from Leicestershire police and although I posted it on the long thread thought it deserved its own place on here because of its importance and to emphasise just how false Clarence Mitchell's statement was.

I am interested to learn FBI told Clarence what they thought of him also using them as well as British Police in his lies and spin.

I think the email I received back from the government made clear that Petitions cannot be used to make criminal allegations against an individual. This I can understand. It is the government's function to formulate policy in relation to law and order. It is only on conviction of certain serious criminals that that individual case may formulate a perceived need to legislate if the law is not sufficient to deal with the issues the case has thrown up. New legislation can then be brought in to address this by an Act of Parliament. If it is the common law (judge made law set down by precedent from other cases)that needs amending or an already existing Statute needs interpreting in a better way this can be amended by a definitive ruling from the Law Lords in the House of Lords. So there are clear separations of powers as to who is responsible. Sometimes Home Secretary's have come into conflict with the Judges when they have sought to interfere in a particular case e.g. Blunkett as to a sentencing decision.

The Home Secretary can refer a particular case for investigation by the police but this is not what generally happens. The usual way the police begin to investigate is on receipt of a complaint. In the McCanns case - their complaint their daughter had been snatched. It is not entirely unusual for people to make false complaints to the Police. The other way that people come to the attention of the police is of their own motion by the person's behaviour. I am sure that Clarence Mitchell's conduct has not escaped attention. I would not like to hazard a guess as to whether he will actually face charges for this but it is clearly possible. It could clearly be said he has sought to pervert the course of justice and, as above, made deliberately false allegations. Care needs to be taken here however, because even guilty people obviously have the right to defend themselves. Perhaps CM has crossed that line. Clearly a barrister or a solicitor could be in serious trouble for standing up in court and arguing a case on behalf of his client that his client has told him is false. I think their would be care in just how they choose to defend the McCanns. It may consist less of positive statements on their behalf and more of forcing the prosecution to prove their case, on the available evidence.

Hope that helps
Viv x

southerncross said...

Viv, thank you for taking the trouble with the petition.Truth will prevail someday

felicity said...

THANKS! gd to hear from u new poster - sorry hand swollen!

Anonymous said...

The comments contained on this site are defamatory and libellous and duly noted.