18.01.2015 Views

The new Madeleine McCann Re-Investigation: Jim Gamble doesn't ...

The new Madeleine McCann Re-Investigation: Jim Gamble doesn't ...

The new Madeleine McCann Re-Investigation: Jim Gamble doesn't ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

e solved. It is sadly is unlikely to result in a positive outcome. <strong>The</strong>re<br />

have been a lot of missed opportunities and no-one will ever be able to<br />

reclaim the time and evidence lost”.<br />

REPLY: It is indeed questionable whether this <strong>new</strong> investigation will get<br />

anywhere, for all sorts of reasons. We in <strong>The</strong> <strong>Madeleine</strong> Foundation feel<br />

that this underlines the request we made back in early 2008 for there to be<br />

a formal inquest or public enquiry into what really happened to<br />

<strong>Madeleine</strong> <strong>McCann</strong>. Because of the huge public interest, and because we<br />

all need to understand why a three-year-old British girl is no longer with<br />

us, it’s vital that all the relevant witnesses in the case are brought to a<br />

public inquest or inquiry without delay. That is the best way of getting to<br />

the truth of what really happened. A lengthy re-investigation whose<br />

parameters appear to have been defended in a series of discussions<br />

between the <strong>McCann</strong>s and the Home secretary and staff is not the better<br />

way forward. Let us hear the evidence discussed, debated and challenged<br />

in a judicial setting, not behind closed doors in a <strong>Jim</strong>-<strong>Gamble</strong>-inspired<br />

‘reinvestigation’. If that happened, we might all end up much better<br />

informed about what really happened to <strong>Madeleine</strong>.<br />

H. <strong>The</strong> suitability of <strong>Jim</strong> <strong>Gamble</strong> to have carried out this<br />

review<br />

We have given some specific reasons why we think that <strong>Jim</strong> <strong>Gamble</strong> was<br />

entirely the wrong choice to carry out this review. <strong>The</strong> issue is simply:<br />

did he bring an independent mind to it We say: No he didn’t.<br />

But there are many other voices questioning <strong>Jim</strong> <strong>Gamble</strong>’s suitability in<br />

his current post, most notably in relation to his controversial role in<br />

heading up Operation Ore, an investigation into child pornography on the<br />

internet. He has been attacked for failing to bring prosecutions against<br />

professional people said to have been viewing and downloading images<br />

of child sexual abuse. <strong>The</strong>se are said to have included top politicians,<br />

civil servants, members of the legal profession and social workers.<br />

This is a hot topic right now, after the extraordinary recent events which<br />

happened to legal adviser Robert Green in Scotland when he tried to<br />

expose a high-level paedophile ring said to be operating in north-east<br />

Scotland that had abused Hollie Greig, a Downs Syndrome girl, and<br />

seven other children. You can find more about this case in the internet by<br />

googling ‘Hollie Greig’.<br />

14

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!