ramonmercado
CyberPunk
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2003
- Messages
- 58,270
- Location
- Eblana
Even worse: farmers!
maximus otter
And they like U2.
Even worse: farmers!
maximus otter
how does it compare with the ben needham case
I bet they didn't spend a fraction of that looking for that lass from Blackpool who was reputed to have ended up in the kebabs.
Also, has any one been following the "who ha" over the Netflix 8 part documentary of the McCann case?
what was the cost of the investigation ?
To put that into perspective, the cost of the Soham murder investigation (Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman) was less than £10M, and even that nearly bankrupted the Cambridgeshire police.
maximus otter
Seeing as we have you here, I'm curious. When we hear about investigations that run to millions or tens of millions of pounds, are their some 'single item' costs that drive that figure upward or is it merely the agglomeration of wages/overtime for so many different people over an extended period?
I speak in total ignorance, but are--perhaps--forensics or something especially costly.
So really, context is everything. What are the chances that the single hair would have gone undetected without the other money being spent? I would say the chances of having an officer spot 1 hair in that van, without the rest of the investigation going on, would have been perishingly unlikely. It is amusing to think that the whole case hinged on 1 low priced DNA test, but it took a lot of groundwork to get to that point, no? Where is Sherlock Holmes when you need him? I'm sure he would have come in well under 3 million pounds, but he is also a fictional character, and the real world is strangely racist towards fictional characters.So: roughly 65% in wages, of which 40% was overtime; 13% forensics; 14% food & transport. Yet the pivotal evidence was a £17 DNA test on a single hair found on a T- shirt in the offender’s van...
maximus otter
What are the chances that the single hair would have gone undetected without the other money being spent? I would say the chances of having an officer spot 1 hair in that van, without the rest of the investigation going on, would have been perishingly unlikely. It is amusing to think that the whole case hinged on 1 low priced DNA test...
Off at a tangent, yesterday I watched the first episode of the TV documentary series Homicide Squad: Atlanta. The nude body of a nineteen-year-old girl is found in a public park, and the police begin their investigation. I watched the initial response with some shock, as SOCOs, detectives etc. walked around the crime scene in street clothes, and no attempt was made to shield the scene from weather or prying eyes. Later the girl's car is found abandoned, and three (?) detectives attend the scene and make a pretty cursory search. One, to his credit, spots an abandoned dress and water bottle on the other side of a fence topped with barbed wire. In the UK, this new scene would have been swarmed by SOCOs. In Atlanta, a detective stands on a shopping trolley (?), leans over the wire (doubtless leaving fibres and possible blood at exactly where the offender might have) and fishes out the dress and water bottle using a branch from a nearby tree! He even handles the water bottle with his bare hands, joking to a colleague, "That'll be my prints on the bottom!", or similar. I was wincing. What if the proverbial single DNA-matchable hair had been on that dress - until he'd dragged it over a fence using a stick? If I'd pulled a stunt 1% that crass at a serious crime scene, the SIO would have ensured that I'd be picking my nose out of a catalogue. maximus otter
Because then you wouldn't be able to see how pretty they all.I have noticed that in CSI, I love the programme, but for the life of me cannot understand why they are not covered head to toe in ghost gear, even in the lab their hair is everywhere
presumably if it can be calculated for one case (as above), it can for another ?I'm not sure how many different sets of figures you'd have to track down and add up to determine this. The last two increments of special funding from the Home Office within the last few years totaled 500K - 550K pounds. I have no idea how complicated it would be to try and identify countable amounts dating back to the 1990's.
presumably if it can be calculated for one case (as above), it can for another ?
Sorry to be dim but to whom are you referring?
Also, has any one been following the "who ha" over the Netflix 8 part documentary of the McCann case?
what is that comparison meant to representThe £100,000 reward for information is still outstanding, and now represents less than 1% of the total spent on the search for Madeleine McCann.
what is that comparison meant to represent
at least theres the basis for a comparison rather than rhetoric, mccann case has become huge so the reward has scaled proportionatelyWould you prefer the £100,000 being compared to the £2.5M currently being offered as the equivalent in the Madeleine McCann case?
without a doubt !Must be horrible to be the parents of some other missing child ...
are you suggesting alien abduction is still on the table ?They says it’s been discredited but how can you without a body.