CW was actually very clever I think

So SY are now "determined to find out what happened to MM"

Not "determined to find her" (because there's no point looking)

And, yes, I do believe Det Redwood when he says that

Châtelaine wrote:I always read your comments with interest, Mirage.

Just a small remark this time: HMS McCann has to make a 180º turn to return to port ...  

Haha. But I didn't say "return" I said "heading" for port. I didn't say which port. Could have been Panama!  

But in any case, this is HMS McCann and it requires more spin!

AR/SY are caught between a rock and a hard place:

If it's just the Mecs they have to expose, than they are up against batteries of hired flunkeys plus the public opinion, so far;

If it's a conspiracy, we just don't know what they're up against;

Also AR has to ensure total secrecy from within his own organization, which he has done incredibly well, so far. 
Not a single copper has broken ranks and snitched to the media.

This last fact alone makes his performance a remarkable one. 

I maintain he is a man not to be envied, no matter what, and I hope he pulls the whole operation off successfully and with honor

Chuckling at the ARSY at the beginning of your post Portia!!

There definitely seemed to be a change between the two CW programs. Redwood seemed angry this time, compared to his more chatty approach in CW1.  He clearly didn't want to be on TV (never mind showing up at the studio), said nothing at all, and didn't blink once in his astonishingly brief "update". 

We can only speculate (and indeed we are!) about what this change might mean.  Clearly the 3500 calls were of zero use (how could they be...?!) - as they were either for random / invented strangers glimpsed 6 years ago, or for Gerry.  No wonder he didn't ask for any more! 


And perhaps the CW producers realised that their normally very effective and genuinely helpful program had been debased and turned into a PR exercise for the McCanns.  Hence the placement of the other (very serious) items and a return to their normal format.

Mirage wrote:

"As we speak, there is an admission, after months of being told the Pt and UK investigation teams have been working closely, that there are two different investigations going on that are pulling against each other because they have different foci."
............................................................................................................................

SY/MET=  'stranger abduction' by a (preferably) dead foreign paedo

PJ/GNR= 'live' doctors

DCI Redwood knows what the public 'perception' of him is and his late 'team' leader Hamish Campbell, with his 'mistaken' identification of Barry George as the 'only' killer of Jill Dando and subsequent 'conviction' (overturned) after years of false imprisonment.

WHY would DCI Redwood 'believe', unconditionally, whatever the McCanns told him?

THEY, and only they, are the only people that have ever said 'Madeleine WAS abducted'

(plus their 'friends' who imo were 'persuaded' to go along with that 'claim')

I'm pretty sure that in his long service as a police officer he has been 'lied' to many, many times.

But with his copper's nose has sniffed out the truth from the people that have lied to him.

And got proper convictions to boot.

As in all polls i have seen, over 80% of people do NOT believe a word the McCanns say about them not being 'involved' in one way or another, in a child's 'disappearance'.

And that must surely be reflected among DCI Redwood's 'team'

So logic dictates that 30.4 out of the 38 people on DCI Redwood's own 'team' also don't believe the McCanns 'claim'

I am sure that a 'junior' member(s) or even senior members of the 'team' have pointed out 'inconsistancies and descrepancies' in statements and the files.

Unfortunately i don't know what has said to any 'team' member that has/did/have 'identified' descrepancies in released 'files'.

(DP's 'knows a few things, pertinent and relevent to establish the material truth about the 'case') a MASSIVE RED FLAG!

Even to the most 'junior' member of Andy's 'elite' team.

But can SY/Met really believe that at no time, ever, will a person, working, or has worked on the 'case' will not whistleblow?

Out of sheer 'frustation' of being told, rentlessly, to only persue ONE line of investigation, that of 'stranger abduction'

When there ARE 'other POSSIBLE explanations' as to how the child may have 'disappeared'

IF DCI Redwood can rule out every possible alternative 'explanations' and only be left with 'stranger abduction' and publicly state his reasons that it WAS, and could only be, 'stranger abduction' then he'll go up in my estimation.

But he hasn't, to date, even come close to doing that.

All he has to do is call a press conference and tell us that 'the McCanns and their friends were NOT involved in Madeleines 'disappearance' because, and here is the evidence,.........", dosen't he?

KM made " Whoosh curtains".
was it any wind at all that night in pdl?

The problem is that PJ or SY need a major breakthrough. Or else we are no further forward than when the case was shelved.  SY trying to chase down phantoms on the balcony, or random people who were in the area can never get anywhere.  

The question remains: Is there is any such breakthrough?  This means either finding Maddie (alive or dead), or someone with knowledge of the crime coming forward.  So far, there is nothing from PJ or SY to suggest that either has happened.   And until one or other of these occurs, then I can't see this coming to a conclusion.  How can it?

If, when asked if the Mecs are involved, AR/SY would not reply or would reply they are, then all hell would break loose, and he probably would have to bring them in if only for their own protection. 

This would turn the investigation upside down, complicating it even further than it's already been complicated by who knows what political a/o outside interference

No, let AR hold his tongue, and proceed as he appears to be doing: with caution

NickE wrote:KM made " Whoosh curtains".
was it any wind at all that night in pdl?

It's always a bit windy in the Algarve - just look where it is! That's why I find the slamming door comments a bit odd too.

Mirage wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I always read your comments with interest, Mirage.

Just a small remark this time: HMS McCann has to make a 180º turn to return to port ...  

Haha. But I didn't say "return" I said "heading" for port. I didn't say which port. Could have been Panama!  

But in any case, this is HMS McCann and it requires more spin!

***
In that case we can expect more 360º pirouettes  

NickE wrote:KM made " Whoosh curtains".
was it any wind at all that night in pdl?

From what I've read on a thread here ages ago, negligible. 

Besides, the children's bedroom shows the long curtains pinned behind the spare bed which was pushed up against the wall beneath the window (police photos) before you ever need examine the Beaufort scale.

The door slamming falls into the same ridiculous category, especially when you discover the window and shutter were closed anyway.

No, on balance this is something the MET need to concern themselves with. Not the MET Office!

Châtelaine wrote:

Mirage wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I always read your comments with interest, Mirage.

Just a small remark this time: HMS McCann has to make a 180º turn to return to port ...  

Haha. But I didn't say "return" I said "heading" for port. I didn't say which port. Could have been Panama!  

But in any case, this is HMS McCann and it requires more spin!

***
In that case we can expect more 360º pirouettes  

Yes, as they enter the Bermuda Triangle they will feel quite at home. 

Whichever way you care to look at it, I think that it is not unreasonable to compare Redwood to a duck.

In the case that it's a live duck, nothing much seems to be happening on the surface, but the legs are going like buggery underneath.

In the case of a dead one, well, it still looks like a duck, you just can't see the decay underneath until it's too late.

I hope people know where I'm going with this...

Curious_Bystander wrote:Whichever way you care to look at it, I think that it is not unreasonable to compare Redwood to a duck.

In the case that it's a live duck, nothing much seems to be happening on the surface, but the legs are going like buggery underneath.

In the case of a dead one, well, it still looks like a duck, you just can't see the decay underneath until it's too late.

I hope people know where I'm going with this...

Under a canal boat?  

Sorry, hysteria sets in with me sometimes  C-B 

Bishop Brennan wrote:There definitely seemed to be a change between the two CW programs. Redwood seemed angry this time, compared to his more chatty approach in CW1.  He clearly didn't want to be on TV (never mind showing up at the studio), said nothing at all, and didn't blink once in his astonishingly brief "update". 

We can only speculate (and indeed we are!) about what this change might mean.  Clearly the 3500 calls were of zero use (how could they be...?!) - as they were either for random / invented strangers glimpsed 6 years ago, or for Gerry.  No wonder he didn't ask for any more! 


And perhaps the CW producers realised that their normally very effective and genuinely helpful program had been debased and turned into a PR exercise for the McCanns.  Hence the placement of the other (very serious) items and a return to their normal format.

Bishop Brennan, I entirely agree with you, when you say that AR seemed to be angry. That is exactly what I thought, but I never mentioned it to anyone. I think he means business, and he's said a few weeks ago, "this has gone on far too long". AR is being the professional that he is; saying nothing, but speaking volumes.

Have the Twitter weirdos had anything to say about it?

PeterMac wrote:

Would you want to play him at Poker ?

In one word "NO".

Lets hope he's an ace-card up his sleeves where this case is concerned.

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Have the Twitter weirdos had anything to say about it?

Nope.

Kate TrulyJudas is getting her nails done!

No 'turning stones' for those manicured hands.

Châtelaine wrote:I always read your comments with interest, Mirage.

Just a small remark this time: HMS McCann has to make a 180º turn to return to port ...  

Even then, they may never reach the shore.....
Their boat is too heavy, laden with too much craps.....

Thank you for your reply Mirage.

I do veer on the side of optimism that is true, I am half glass full [of vodka] type of person.  I jest, this place becomes very intense at times.

All of your points are valid, so many times we have been brought to the brink, only for the case to continue dragging along much the same as always.  This time however, I feel there is real change.  The original Crimewatch gave the impression that SY were working FOR the McCanns - ie. checking in for the approval of Gerry, Kate, Clarence and Carter Ruck.  I did not get a sense of that last night - there were no friendly references to Gerry and Kate, or indeed to Mr and Mrs McCann.  The tragic couple were not perched on stools telling us that they were not as happy as they could be, and there was no reference to their innocence.

As for the unprecedented help they received, I think this was the result of a cascade effect.  On the night Madeleine disappeared the McCanns and their friends had address books full of influential people, and as we know they hit the phones with a vengeance. No time for actually searching.  The influential friends stepped in immediately, it was a tragic story and everyone wanted to look like the good guy, the hero running to the rescue of a beautiful child and her photogenic, erudite parents. Within a day they were in contact with No. 10 and had access to string pulling in every direction.  Added to which Gerry and Kate could give lessons in assertiveness, they knew what they wanted, and they how to get it.

It should be noted however, that diplomatic assistance was soon dropped.  Clarence was no longer acting in a Government capacity, he is a £75k a year free agent.  'The McCanns asked for a meeting with the Prime Minister but were only offered a medium level consul, which they declined', remarked Clarence in the infamous Vanity Fair interview.  Their access to David Cameron was via Rebekah Brooks - anything McCann related sees a massive rise in the sale of tabloids, and it suited him to grant the Review.  The people the McCanns were dealing with, are among the most ruthless in our society, its how they got to the top.  They are not going to endanger their careers for this pair.  



This actually developed into a blog, http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/

He said "we've had a fantastic response."
He did not say "please keep the responses coming in"

He said it was good that the PJ were re-opening the case
He did not ask for further sightings and suggestions

He did not reply to a direct question about Tractorman
He did not mention Smithman at all

He did say they had a lot of work to do in the next weeks and months
He did not say what that work might entail.
He specifically did not say it would involve tracing any of his list of people of interest

Cristobell wrote:Thank you for your reply Mirage.

I do veer on the side of optimism that is true, I am half glass full [of vodka] type of person.  I jest, this place becomes very intense at times.

All of your points are valid, so many times we have been brought to the brink, only for the case to continue dragging along much the same as always.  This time however, I feel there is real change.  The original Crimewatch gave the impression that SY were working FOR the McCanns - ie. checking in for the approval of Gerry, Kate, Clarence and Carter Ruck.  I did not get a sense of that last night - there were no friendly references to Gerry and Kate, or indeed to Mr and Mrs McCann.  The tragic couple were not perched on stools telling us that they were not as happy as they could be, and there was no reference to their innocence.

As for the unprecedented help they received, I think this was the result of a cascade effect.  On the night Madeleine disappeared the McCanns and their friends had address books full of influential people, and as we know they hit the phones with a vengeance. No time for actually searching.  The influential friends stepped in immediately, it was a tragic story and everyone wanted to look like the good guy, the hero running to the rescue of a beautiful child and her photogenic, erudite parents. Within a day they were in contact with No. 10 and had access to string pulling in every direction.  Added to which Gerry and Kate could give lessons in assertiveness, they knew what they wanted, and they how to get it.

It should be noted however, that diplomatic assistance was soon dropped.  Clarence was no longer acting in a Government capacity, he is a £75k a year free agent.  'The McCanns asked for a meeting with the Prime Minister but were only offered a medium level consul, which they declined', remarked Clarence in the infamous Vanity Fair interview.  Their access to David Cameron was via Rebekah Brooks - anything McCann related sees a massive rise in the sale of tabloids, and it suited him to grant the Review.  The people the McCanns were dealing with, are among the most ruthless in our society, its how they got to the top.  They are not going to endanger their careers for this pair.  



This actually developed into a blog, http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/

I agree Cristobell.

With all the string pulling early on its took six years for the 100's of influential/celeb/government people to back away so as not to be associated. They are now very close to being all alone.

I also think this case (if it gets resolved) will turn out so much more simple than we think.

aiyoyo wrote:

currio wrote:

Shrike wrote:

Greycatofoxford wrote:I notice, that as the days become weeks with the FUND closed, it seems unlikely that it is being " updated " and more likely that there is a connection to increased speculation as to the purpose of the fund.

Regarding the fund and what looks like a possible closure of donations either forced (by SY?) or advised I was wondering if anybody has tried to donate not through the "Donate" button within the store but by a bank transfer for example. Does anybody know somebody who has tried and failed as this could be a further indication that the "fund" has been stopped?

I was thinking of doing a transfer of a quid to check this but am in 2 minds as even the thought of giving a penny to these people is abhorrent IMO.

An interesting thought though.........

@Shrike
 .....that's been bugging me too.....there's even an address to post it to, if your real anxious  ...I'm sure plenty old Granny's will have their Xmas donation in with the card... 

Surely if there is more to it, all of this would have been wiped...

Oh come on, if cash were stuffed into envelopes (or christmas cards) and simply marked Mccanns@Rothley, it will get there, and you can bet your bottom dollar the Mccanns wont reject it. Ditto bank transfer.
The pertinent question is: are these donations properly recorded in the books of the Fund, as is legal requirement of the Fund Constitution and By-laws I would imagine.   Who's in charge of accounting for cash donations received at Rothley would be a valid question if the auditors were thorough in their job.

But Aiyoyo that is not the point of my comment/question. My point was - has anybody tried a bank transfer and failed as those have have/forced the Donation buttons into dormancy/extinction, whatever has happened, might also have forced the account to be closed. Cash is a different thing but that has no relevance to what I am thinking. If the bank account is closed then it looks like something is definitely going on behind the scenes? As I said, just a thought!

Transcript BBC Crimewatch: Madeleine McCann update

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html