Redwood :The Mccanns latest P.R. man

by RIPM 18.10.13 20:26

As a new member, could anybody explain why, apart from wishful thinking, do you have faith in DCI Redwood and his team?

This man has constantly said the Macs and the tapas seven are of no interest to this enquiry, so he is working from the outside in, instead of those close to the victim, out. He is scouring Europe for leads on people already identified.

He will not mention sniffer dogs in any way shape or form. Does Scotland Yard still have any faith in them?

He sits on TV Sofas and thinks he is a celebrity and after two years and millions of pounds he reveals Madeleine is alive or dead.

“Eat your heart out Sherlock”

If Madeleine was alive he leaves her for weeks to conform to BBC schedules, failure of duty at the very least. This week, the best bit……….

Most informed people would say Tanner is the weak link but in one week, he turns her into the greatest most accurate and reliable witness, in the history of crime anywhere.

According to Redwood, JT is totally accurate, flip-flopping up the road at 21.15 and seeing in the half light at a distance of 8 to 40 ft, and in a time of 2 to 5 seconds, a man carrying a child. She describes the child and man and after a search of over 2 years costing millions, SY have found that man exactly as JT described in every way.

So Scotland Yard have confirmed Tanner is not a fantasist she saw the crèche man, down to the small pattern on the child’s legs. SY have said so .They are the most respected Police force in the world, never a hint of scandal or rogue officers (cough).

Unless this man is identified, which will never happen, human rights etc., Tanner is off the hook, no charges can be brought, she has been totally cleared by SY`s finest. The PJ will be blamed for the cock-up on the Smiths sighting and the British people will never be told the truth. The Macs agree to wind up the fund, the Payne’s are never mentioned, Oldfield is glossed over, Clarence becomes an MP and life will go on.

This is my personal opinion based upon what DCI Redwood and the BBC showed to the British nation on Monday night. He is the clean up man, not the finder of what happened to Madeleine McCann and he’s doing a good job.

by chillyheat 18.10.13 20:29

I followed this case as it began and thought, or had the instinct knowledge of what I read to put me in the parents have more to answer category. Who am I when millions of pounds are being pumped into a charade....Do you get me.
The police not only have the problem of trying to convict the guilty. They also have the problem of trying to convict the guilty through the pretence.
Most people on the street have no knowledge of whats going on. Many simply see it as a missing child. They don't even consider what the parents are thinking. That's the psyche of the public. If Madeleine was found tonight, most would say "Oh....that's that kid that went missing somewhere....cant remember, but glad she is home".....That's the psyche of many..........And Gerry knows that !!
Redwood has to go about it in a professional manner....

by KenzieWenzie 18.10.13 20:30

Just think about it. Day before the suspects status was lifted those allegations came out In the Portuguese press. The media are like a violin, a clever person can play them to any tune they want, that's not to say the statements do not exist in the police files, but I truly believe David Payne is innocent and the statements were made to stop him breaking ranks, because although he doesn't know much, he could unwittingly could help solve the case. This is all my own opinion and I feel strongly about this. I believe it was a straightforward accident that became complicated for all, including the mccanns.
I also think the case will be solved, and the mccanns defence has cleverly been placed over time since that night through the media, the way the press has been worked there's loads of room for doubt in people's minds even if they are found guilty.

by Guest 18.10.13 20:32

RIPM wrote:As a new member, could anybody explain why, apart from wishful thinking, do you have faith in DCI Redwood and his team?

This man has constantly said the Macs and the tapas seven are of no interest to this enquiry, so he is working from the outside in, instead of those close to the victim, out. He is scouring Europe for leads on people already identified.

He will not mention sniffer dogs in any way shape or form. Does Scotland Yard still have any faith in them?

He sits on TV Sofas and thinks he is a celebrity and after two years and millions of pounds he reveals Madeleine is alive or dead.

“Eat your heart out Sherlock”

If Madeleine was alive he leaves her for weeks to conform to BBC schedules, failure of duty at the very least. This week, the best bit……….

Most informed people would say Tanner is the weak link but in one week, he turns her into the greatest most accurate and reliable witness, in the history of crime anywhere.

According to Redwood, JT is totally accurate, flip-flopping up the road at 21.15 and seeing in the half light at a distance of 8 to 40 ft, and in a time of 2 to 5 seconds, a man carrying a child. She describes the child and man and after a search of over 2 years costing millions, SY have found that man exactly as JT described in every way.

So Scotland Yard have confirmed Tanner is not a fantasist she saw the crèche man, down to the small pattern on the child’s legs. SY have said so .They are the most respected Police force in the world, never a hint of scandal or rogue officers (cough).

Unless this man is identified, which will never happen, human rights etc., Tanner is off the hook, no charges can be brought, she has been totally cleared by SY`s finest. The PJ will be blamed for the cock-up on the Smiths sighting and the British people will never be told the truth. The Macs agree to wind up the fund, the Payne’s are never mentioned, Oldfield is glossed over, Clarence becomes an MP and life will go on.

This is my personal opinion based upon what DCI Redwood and the BBC showed to the British nation on Monday night. He is the clean up man, not the finder of what happened to Madeleine McCann and he’s doing a good job.

Have merged you topic here RIPM as really the same sort of thing.

by Mariita 18.10.13 20:37

Yes, exactly! Before this new so called reconstruction, Jane Tanner's second name was LIAR. Now she has been cleared...she wasn't lying at all - she DID see someone with a child. It just wasn't Mr Abductor. Thank God the innocent man came forward after more than 6 years.

by ChippyM 18.10.13 20:44

KenzieWenzie wrote:Just think about it. Day before the suspects status was lifted those allegations came out In the Portuguese press. The media are like a violin, a clever person can play them to any tune they want, that's not to say the statements do not exist in the police files, but I truly believe David Payne is innocent and the statements were made to stop him breaking ranks, because although he doesn't know much, he could unwittingly could help solve the case. This is all my own opinion and I feel strongly about this. I believe it was a straightforward accident that became complicated for all, including the mccanns.
I also think the case will be solved, and the mccanns defence has cleverly been placed over time since that night through the media, the way the press has been worked there's loads of room for doubt in people's minds even if they are found guilty.

Hello,

you say you feel strongly about this, that David Payne is innocent , he could solve the case and that it was an accident that became complicated, for all including the mccann's.

What are you basing this on? what convinces you,

Thanks.

by chillyheat 18.10.13 20:49

Mariita wrote:Yes, exactly! Before this new so called reconstruction, Jane Tanner's second name was LIAR. Now she has been cleared...she wasn't lying at all - she DID see someone with a child. It just wasn't Mr Abductor. Thank God the innocent man came forward after more than 6 years.

Let me begin on your end. Thank god the INNOCENT man came forward.....Oh and lets not forget, after 6 years.
Im thinking of what to say next........Let me think for a moment.
Oh there we are.....I almost forgot. Yes this innocent man has come forward....He has no axe to grind, he just simply wants an end to it like us all. Im so glad he still kept the pyjamas of the child he was carrying in a very awkward position. Im so glad its been emphasised that's this information is not the core of the case anymore......I wonder why ?
I wonder if Jane Tanner patted SY on the back for finding him.....As a matter of fact, if true, her statement would be the most important thing about this case....Shouldn't she had been sat next to the McCanns in the cosy CW studio ? Of course not.....And Andy knows why.

by stillsloppingout 18.10.13 20:58

Mariita wrote:Yes, exactly! Before this new so called reconstruction, Jane Tanner's second name was LIAR. Now she has been cleared...she wasn't lying at all - she DID see someone with a child. It just wasn't Mr Abductor. Thank God the innocent man came forward after more than 6 years.

The last post mentioned that Tanner man would not come forward due to Human rights . Not so he has every right to make himself known to All and sundry , by any means he see's fit .

Furthermore , normally Editors would be fighting between each other to get him to give an exclusive , as this case has been one of the biggest World stories , and last week probably THE biggest story .

This man must have deep pockets , because i would expect an exclusive with a title who can afford it Sunday Sun pay the most . he would receive easily Between £ 20 to £ 30K . on a par with a scandal payment or celebrity story .

Then there would be , the opportunity , to do further interviews with magazines . say £ 2 to £5 k for exclusive .

after that world syndication , via agency say £ 10 k . TV news and programming £5 k .

at least fifty thousand . The person Would do it for fear of being outed by family, friends, or associates . because they would know , and everybody has access to media these ,day's and are savvy in how to use it . They would ring it in and receive a Tip fee , usually for a story this big it would be a couple of grand ]

THAT IS WHY, THIS PERSON IS A FAKE

by **sharonl** 18.10.13 20:59

I think that it is important here to distinguish between what has actually been said by DCI Redwood and the Met, and what the media claim has been said. I think that we can dismiss the latter, particularly as it was Rebekah Brookes who requested this review.

The Police are likely to use the media to their advantage but are unlikely to provide a free flow of information that could hinder their investigation.

If we were to believe everything that we have read in the press we could conclude that the Met were totally incompetent and irresponsible, are they really likely to put themselves in that position and loss all credibility for the sake of protecting two suspects or pleasing Rebekah? I think not.

What I don't understand is the Met taking the evidence of the private investigators seriously, especially as most of them have criminal records. They only need to look at Alphaig to see that the private investigation is not a credible one. And what about that e-fit? Are the Met really going pass off what looks likes an I-Phone App manipulation image of a PACT trustee as a suspect? they would have known that we would have had that one sussed out in no time.

So, what is it that Redwood has "actually" said, on television or video and not just on paper.

BTW - I would love to know what the sub titles in the foreign versions are claiming that he says

by chillyheat 18.10.13 21:00

stillsloppingout wrote:
Mariita wrote:Yes, exactly! Before this new so called reconstruction, Jane Tanner's second name was LIAR. Now she has been cleared...she wasn't lying at all - she DID see someone with a child. It just wasn't Mr Abductor. Thank God the innocent man came forward after more than 6 years.
The last post mentioned that Tanner man would not come forward due to Human rights . Not so he has every right to make himself known to All and sundry , by any means he see's fit .

Furthermore , normally Editors would be fighting between each other to get him to give an exclusive , as this case has been one of the biggest World stories , and last week probably THE biggest story .

This man must have deep pockets , because i would expect an exclusive with a title who can afford it Sunday Sun pay the most . he would receive easily Between £ 20 to £ 30K . on a par with a scandal payment or celebrity story .

Then there would be , the opportunity , to do further interviews with magazines . say £ 2 to £5 k for exclusive .

after that world syndication , via agency say £ 10 k . TV news and programming £5 k .

at least fifty thousand . The person Would do it for fear of being outed by family friends or associates . because they would know , and everybody has access to media these day's and are savvy in how to use it .

a Tip fee , [ somebody who gave the Name of this person could be a couple of grand ]

THAT IS WHY, THIS PERSON IS A FAKE

I tend to agree.....And no one twisted my arm laughat

by chillyheat 18.10.13 21:11

A coverup is a cover up of a cove r up......
I will go on my instinct and trust SY
I tend to more or less look at the most simplest things to pick up on reasonings.
CW was for the McCanns to have their final 15 minutes.....SY gave them 25 so Gerry will be very happy.
When Kirsty walked away from AR he stood absolutely motionless as she walked around the screen to approach the McCanns. That's not TV, it was a your on your own moment. The sofa was built for 3.....They were alone.
Lets go to Germany....Many will say he sat with them in a live interview......But the cat was already out of the bag by then. Tannerman was a Gonnerman. The McCanns have to keep up the pretence..........That's why Andy is skipping around Europe. Not for his jollys me thinks.

by MaryB 18.10.13 21:20

They must want to identify the person the Smith's saw. Otherwise why would they broadcast this appeal in Holland and Germany. Hardly anybody even knew there was a Smith sighting so if they didn't want to find out who it was why did they even publicise it at all.

by chillyheat 18.10.13 21:24

MaryB wrote:They must want to identify the person the Smith's saw. Otherwise why would they broadcast this appeal in Holland and Germany. Hardly anybody even knew there was a Smith sighting so if they didn't want to find out who it was why did they even publicise it at all.

Because the McCanns knew.....

by chillyheat 18.10.13 21:26

ChillyHeat wrote:
MaryB wrote:They must want to identify the person the Smith's saw. Otherwise why would they broadcast this appeal in Holland and Germany. Hardly anybody even knew there was a Smith sighting so if they didn't want to find out who it was why did they even publicise it at all.
Because the McCanns knew.....

I should have said, because Andy knows the McCanns know and knowing what Andy knows that Gerry knows that Andy knows it was him.....But who knows lol.
Sorry I had a few too beers moment spin

by MaryB 18.10.13 21:29

But no matter who knew what, if they wanted to dismiss the Smith sighting they would have done so just like they dismissed the Jane Tanner sighting. With such a person the Smith's saw was x taking his child home from the creche. They want more people to come forward who saw the man the Smith's saw.

by KenzieWenzie 18.10.13 21:35

KenzieWenzie wrote:Just think about it. Day before the suspects status was lifted those allegations came out In the Portuguese press. The media are like a violin, a clever person can play them to any tune they want, that's not to say the statements do not exist in the police files, but I truly believe David Payne is innocent and the statements were made to stop him breaking ranks, because although he doesn't know much, he could unwittingly could help solve the case. This is all my own opinion and I feel strongly about this. I believe it was a straightforward accident that became complicated for all, including the mccanns.
I also think the case will be solved, and the mccanns defence has cleverly been placed over time since that night through the media, the way the press has been worked there's loads of room for doubt in people's minds even if they are found guilty.

Hello,

you say you feel strongly about this, that David Payne is innocent , he could solve the case and that it was an accident that became complicated, for all including the mccann's.

What are you basing this on? what convinces you,

Thanks.

Not sure, just intuition. I believe Payne is innocent, he only discovered the lies later. Still think a few tapas members do not know full story, although not too sure who. I believe he was afraid of arrest and couldn't be
bought So the the worst allegations that you could accuse a man were used and printed it in the foreign press as a warning, Uk papers next? Anyone can accuse someone of anything, doesn't mean it's true. Again this is my own opinion and I hope I'm proved right.

by MRNOODLES 18.10.13 21:39

ChillyHeat wrote:A coverup is a cover up of a cove r up......
I will go on my instinct and trust SY
I tend to more or less look at the most simplest things to pick up on reasonings.
CW was for the McCanns to have their final 15 minutes.....SY gave them 25 so Gerry will be very happy.
When Kirsty walked away from AR he stood absolutely motionless as she walked around the screen to approach the McCanns. That's not TV, it was a your on your own moment. The sofa was built for 3.....They were alone.
Lets go to Germany....Many will say he sat with them in a live interview......But the cat was already out of the bag by then. Tannerman was a Gonnerman. The McCanns have to keep up the pretence..........That's why Andy is skipping around Europe. Not for his jollys me thinks.

Im slowly trusting Scotland Yards movements .... - Page 2 263

by Mariita 18.10.13 21:40

ChillyHeat wrote:A coverup is a cover up of a cove r up......
I will go on my instinct and trust SY
I tend to more or less look at the most simplest things to pick up on reasonings.
CW was for the McCanns to have their final 15 minutes.....SY gave them 25 so Gerry will be very happy.
When Kirsty walked away from AR he stood absolutely motionless as she walked around the screen to approach the McCanns. That's not TV, it was a your on your own moment. The sofa was built for 3.....They were alone.
Lets go to Germany....Many will say he sat with them in a live interview......But the cat was already out of the bag by then. Tannerman was a Gonnerman. The McCanns have to keep up the pretence..........That's why Andy is skipping around Europe. Not for his jollys me thinks.

This is so weird and strange no matter from what angle you look at it. I'm having a VERY hard time believing that AR just 'swallows' the McCanns neverending production of lies. He must have looked into the old files from 2007-2008 (even if he never mentions them). How can he just ignore the dogs, for example? Ok, then the other one - he just plays along with them, like 'the silent before the storm' and then , further on, he strikes. I don't know, why go on and on and on. When comes the change of direction?
OK, I have to remind myself that he actually said that they had found this crecheman. Meaning he lies deliberately to protect their lies OR he lies temporarily as an act to deceive them. But how do the McCanns act upon this... what are their thoughts (suspicions)? well either way they must be constantly on the edge to a heart attack. Through all the confident smirks they look rather worn out. Living under stress 24/7 makes ageing go fast-forward.

by Woofer 18.10.13 21:42

Daisy wrote:
Woofer wrote:If he is truly on the side of justice, then hopefully the CPS ladies would have told him what was needed to sew up a prosecution.

That`s if one can trust the CPS !

And we don`t know for sure about DP - it may have just been a stupid drunken lapse.
What may have been a stupid drunken lapse Woofer?

Daisy - the things that were said about him in the Gaspar statements.
I`m not saying it was or wasn`t - I`m just thinking we don`t know for sure. But some people get disgusting when they`ve had a few to drink, full of bravado and go over the top.

I`m not totally convinced that FP wants to cover-up either by the things she said in her statement about thinking it was weird that the twins didn`t wake up and how KM kept checking they were breathing. I don`t think that`s a statement of someone covering things up.

by Woofer 18.10.13 21:49

I`m usually on the `whitewash team` but the CPS would have set out the surest way to get a conviction, so what we`re seeing now maybe the only way AR can achieve it.

I don`t know much about the head of the CPS, Alison Saunders, but a few on here don`t go much on her from her past exploits - we`ll have to wait and see.

by plebgate 18.10.13 21:56

Mariita wrote:
ChillyHeat wrote:A coverup is a cover up of a cove r up......
I will go on my instinct and trust SY
I tend to more or less look at the most simplest things to pick up on reasonings.
CW was for the McCanns to have their final 15 minutes.....SY gave them 25 so Gerry will be very happy.
When Kirsty walked away from AR he stood absolutely motionless as she walked around the screen to approach the McCanns. That's not TV, it was a your on your own moment. The sofa was built for 3.....They were alone.
Lets go to Germany....Many will say he sat with them in a live interview......But the cat was already out of the bag by then. Tannerman was a Gonnerman. The McCanns have to keep up the pretence..........That's why Andy is skipping around Europe. Not for his jollys me thinks.
This is so weird and strange no matter from what angle you look at it. I'm having a VERY hard time believing that AR just 'swallows' the McCanns neverending production of lies. He must have looked into the old files from 2007-2008 (even if he never mentions them). How can he just ignore the dogs, for example? Ok, then the other one - he just plays along with them, like 'the silent before the storm' and then , further on, he strikes. I don't know, why go on and on and on. When comes the change of direction?
OK, I have to remind myself that he actually said that they had found this crecheman. Meaning he lies deliberately to protect their lies OR he lies temporarily as an act to deceive them. But how do the McCanns act upon this... what are their thoughts (suspicions)? well either way they must be constantly on the edge to a heart attack. Through all the confident smirks they look rather worn out. Living under stress 24/7 makes ageing go fast-forward.

I'm worn out this week just reading about it all.

The libel trial must be on their minds and how they will win. I don't believe I have seen anything tuis far which will do that.

As TB has asked many times, have they produced a doctor/psychiatrist report to back up their statement about being depressed, not able to eat and having an indefinable fear?

No siree, I would not like to trade places with them for ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD.

by KenzieWenzie 18.10.13 21:58

Woofer.
This is exactly as I've been trying to get across, Fiona, David and Diane s statements showed no signs of cover up because they never knew anything at that time! In my opinion, they put 2 and 2 together and then had to be reigned in, so to speak. In my honest opinion the Gasper statements are not true. Never happened at all. The statements were clever to cause some confusion and doubt to cover the arses of who made them but the message was there. Talk and it gets in the uk press. I also believe Amaral knows this, that is why he does not mention it, because he wouldn't be libeling anyone if it's in the police files, he just does not believe it! Again, all my own opinion.

by plebgate 18.10.13 21:59

I just can't see why all this needs to be done.

Mr. A. has advised that all they need to do is put a stamp on a letter and ask for the case to be re-opened in Portugal.

How easy is that to do for Goodness sake.

by chillyheat 18.10.13 21:59

David Payne could be or might not be....You get my drift.
The thing is, if its true he will not be prepared to give evidence against.
So the only way around it is this. The Gaspar evidence is proved false. That wont happen because it was more than likely accurately accounted to be true, albeit in some eyes it could be an innocent drunken moment (strange, but benefit of the doubt possible). All David has to do is convince the world it was in jest and Gerry took it in jest.....Apologies Mrs Gaspar, would you like to make a further statement.....Along those lines.
As far as Im concerned though, if the statement is a very true account of what happened, and David knows she knows the truth. He will simply walk away from Madeleine.....That's how sad these group of people are.

by Hicks 18.10.13 22:02

KenzieWenzie wrote:
KenzieWenzie wrote:Just think about it. Day before the suspects status was lifted those allegations came out In the Portuguese press. The media are like a violin, a clever person can play them to any tune they want, that's not to say the statements do not exist in the police files, but I truly believe David Payne is innocent and the statements were made to stop him breaking ranks, because although he doesn't know much, he could unwittingly could help solve the case. This is all my own opinion and I feel strongly about this. I believe it was a straightforward accident that became complicated for all, including the mccanns.
I also think the case will be solved, and the mccanns defence has cleverly been placed over time since that night through the media, the way the press has been worked there's loads of room for doubt in people's minds even if they are found guilty.
Hello,

you say you feel strongly about this, that David Payne is innocent , he could solve the case and that it was an accident that became complicated, for all including the mccann's.

What are you basing this on? what convinces you,

Thanks.

Not sure, just intuition. I believe Payne is innocent, he only discovered the lies later. Still think a few tapas members do not know full story, although not too sure who. I believe he was afraid of arrest and couldn't be
bought So the the worst allegations that you could accuse a man were used and printed it in the foreign press as a warning, Uk papers next? Anyone can accuse someone of anything, doesn't mean it's true. Again this is my own opinion and I hope I'm proved right.

I think David Payne is most likely the one who took control of the situation in the very beginning. If we go back to Yvonne Martin's statement (the social worker who arrived on the scene morning of the 4th)
read her statement. DP seemed to be controlling the McCann's. Interesting to note that the McCann's became aggressive towards her and acted strange when she showed them her credentials. It seemed that having someone around who had worked in child protection made them feel very uncomfortable.

http://shadplay.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/witness-statement-yvonne-warren-martin.html.