280214_SU_CHAINE (9).JPG

Blinkered views

Dear Editor,

Although I disagree with your writer James Marshall (About Madeleine –  June 1 edition), I am glad that despite his last line you did publish his letter as censorship by a newspaper is wrong.

However, if my memory is correct, he is totally wrong. To my knowledge, the only person who feels that Madeleine was killed in the apartment, and there is no evidence, is a PJ officer who was removed from the case and then resigned.

Why he was removed is a question to which I have not seen any official comments. Perhaps it was for failures, illegal leaks to the press? The final report, as I recall, came to no conclusions. The recent Metropolitan Police review suggested a number of leads etc, a report dismissed by the same ex-PJ officer as nothing but just justifying their time! In other words, not listening.

Hardly the response of a trained investigator, is it? There are two renown centres for child trafficking and paedophiles – one is the USA and the other London! It is a great pity that the Portuguese pride was not set aside very early in the investigation and Scotland Yard called in to assist. As it happened, neither the GNR nor the local PJ were trained or up to such an investigation.

Perhaps Mr Marshall, and others, should read your item on page 10 of the June 1 edition. The Justice Minister calling for a sex register, yes, but the second part of the story on trafficking was important. Few are perhaps aware of its worldwide reach or of the highly organised gangs involved.

I cannot be responsible for Mr Marshall’s blinkered views, ignoring facts, or his bias, but I can pray and hope that in life’s journey he learns some humanity and compassion.

D. Taylor Smith

By email