The McCanns on CrimeWatch - REPORT

by **Tony Bennett** 17.09.14 1:05

100 seconds about the Madeleine McCann case on BBC CrimeWatch, 16 September 2014

Please also vote on the new poll about Operation Grange My notes on the programme:

The segment on the Madeleine McCann case lasted from 27 mins to 28 mins 40 secs.

27 00

It was featured in a larger, rather boastful section of the programme hailed as Crimewatch ‘Not only solving crimes, but actually Making The News’.

27 05

It proudly produced images of news cuttings about the programme last October, then clips from I think an Australian TV crime programme and from ‘America’s Most Wanted’. There was a concerted attempt to show that the Madeleine McCann case was of international significance and how the CrimeWatch McCann Special had been shown around the world: “spread all over the world”.

These images and extracts were interspersed with short 2- or 3-second clips from the October show reconstruction: Madeleine in the swimming pool with Kate, Madeleine on the tennis court, Redwood doing his act of trying too hard to look like a man you could trust.

27 20

There was then quite a long segment with a Redwood voice-over, or Redwood to camera, again interspersed with other clips. He referred to:

the intense media coverage
how ‘media coverage had often not been wholly accurate’
how the CrimeWatch programme had ‘helped the public to relive that moment’
how ‘for us this was an unprecedented event’
(doing his usual statistics bit) ‘how people watched us in their millions and how people called the programme in their thousands’
how the programme had allegedly ‘produced some really interesting leads’.

Again there were segments from the previous programme: the man with the child walking across the road a few yards in front of Jane Tanner; Melissa Little’s sketch of him first published 5½ months late; and a close-up of Melissa Little’s sketch of the child, in white & pink patterned pyjamas.

[ Observation: No new e-fits, no old e-fits shown, just Melissa Little’s version of ‘Tannerman’. Which made me wonder if they are still looking for Smithman (they didn’t say) – or is it because Martin Smith’s and the Smiths’ ‘Smithman’ is exactly the same, in 16 different respects, as ‘Tannerman’:
dark jacket,
light trousers,
5’ 9”,
about 30,
not a tourist etc.

In which case that would mean that the Smiths saw a man virtually identical to Crecheman but 45 minutes later.

TWO blokes,
both on their own with no female companion
and no buggy,
one at 9.15pm, one at 10.00pm,
both wearing the same clothes,
both of the same height
and age,
both carrying a child of the same age with the same white-and-pink pyjamas,
both children barefoot
and with no blanket.

Funny that. ]

28 20

Kate and Gerry were re-interviewed, made some predictable comments endorsing the CrimeWatch McCann Special, and finally Gerry said: “People who had really relevant information have come forward”.

[ Observation: Clearly, in order for him to say that, he must have been briefed by Redwood, Redwood says his leads are ‘interesting’ – but Gerry goes much further: ‘They are relevant’. Indeed, better than that. They were ‘really relevant’. ]

by missbeetle 17.09.14 1:32

Thank you for that précis, Tony.

I don't suppose you happened to notice what manner of outfits the McCann were wearing...?

by **Tony Bennett** 17.09.14 1:45

missbeetle wrote:Thank you for that précis, Tony.

I don't suppose you happened to notice what manner of outfits the McCann were wearing...?

Do you know, I saw Kate and Gerry sat in their chairs being interviewed for about 20 seconds, on a very clear TV screen, yet I can't remember 1% of what the Smiths recollected after seeing a bloke for a few seconds in the dark - 17 months after the event.

Funny that.

Any way, I think Kate was wearing a deep yellow dress with IIRC a green-and-blue pattern on it. Gerry was wearing something bland. He looked uneasy and a bit shifty.

ETA: Perhaps with a sense of irony, just after the segment on Madeleine McCann, a bloke came on and uttered these words:

QUOTE: "Well, there's nothing more important than accuracy in the reconstruction. They've got to be as close as possible to what we think are the facts of the case".

Well, exactly!

by Guest 17.09.14 1:51

Tony Bennett wrote:28 20

Kate and Gerry were re-interviewed, made some predictable comments endorsing the CrimeWatch McCann Special, and finally Gerry said: “People who had really relevant information have come forward”.

[ Observation: Clearly, in order for him to say that, he must have been briefed by Redwood, Redwood says his leads are ‘interesting’ – but Gerry goes much further: ‘They are relevant’. Indeed, better than that. They were ‘really relevant’. ]

I think you are right, OP is keeping the McCanns informed.

I wonder did they tell Gerry how many people said the e-fit looked like... Gerry?

by plebgate 17.09.14 8:07

Had a laugh when I read from Tony's original post that the McCann Crimewatch Prog. had been seen the World over. Really? I thought it wasn't shown in Portugal, the country where they all holidayed and little Maddie went missing.

Who writes this stuff. Are they deliberately trying to be dumb or sumat?

by Guest 17.09.14 8:17

They didn't get arrested live on air then? Oh well.

by Praiaaa 17.09.14 8:47

Clay Regazzoni wrote:They didn't get arrested live on air then? Oh well.

by Doug D 17.09.14 8:51

Can't believe they went to that trouble for such a small snippet of the Mc's and I very much suspect it was cut right down and probably moved within the programme context as well, (although this is purely surmise). Having advertised that they were going to appear it would have been difficult to have nothing at all.

Hardly part of the 30 year 'success story' in any case.

Would love to see what was originally planned before they started changing the adverts, trailers, etc. under pressure.

by plebgate 17.09.14 9:00

The Book with all the answers (independent), The Crimewatch Show last night featuring Mr. & Mrs. What happened? Both seem to have fizzled out somehow titter

by canada12 17.09.14 9:02

Perhaps there was an anticipation that the Summers and Swan book would be much higher profile and would have sold far more copies than it has actually sold? And Crimewatch was hoping to ride on their coattails... only to discover that nobody really wants to hear more of the same?

by Liz Eagles 17.09.14 9:19

I fell asleep during the programme so I'll have to watch it this morning.

Here's lazzeri's take on things

30 YEARS OF CRIMEWATCH

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Baldrick 17.09.14 9:58

aquila wrote:I fell asleep during the programme so I'll have to watch it this morning.

Here's lazzeri's take on things

30 YEARS OF CRIMEWATCH

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Summed up nicely. After all we cant know the truth. The Police have to protect those higher up the food chain.

by aiyoyo 17.09.14 10:17

I didn't watch it.

Who else (beside the Mcs) was given airtime?
Police? Family members and/or relative of other victims ? If Mcs only were given airtime to speak would it not be rather strange why unfailingly they were always singled out and given special treatment?
The inclusion of missing Madeleine case (still under active review/investigation) in a CW featuring historical brutally murdered victims is rather out of place. It's not historic until it is over for one thing. For another thing it's rather odd the Mcs were the highlight in a CW programme featuring murders.

Was the programme about unsolved historical murder cases and Mcs case incidental? Or the other way around the Mcs were real focus and the rest incidentals?

by Liz Eagles 17.09.14 10:32

It was a pretty odd mish-mash of a programme imo. I haven't had time to gather my thoughts on it.

What I did notice is that in the reflection of past presenters there was no mention of Jacqui Hames who was on the programme for years. I googled to see how many years she had been on the programme and she's not even listed on the Wiki entry.

by Woofer 17.09.14 10:38

aquila wrote:It was a pretty odd mish-mash of a programme imo. I haven't had time to gather my thoughts on it.

What I did notice is that in the reflection of past presenters there was no mention of Jacqui Hames who was on the programme for years. I googled to see how many years she had been on the programme and she's not even listed on the Wiki entry.

I think that`s cos she was a police officer and not a presenter.

by Baldrick 17.09.14 10:38

aquila wrote:It was a pretty odd mish-mash of a programme imo. I haven't had time to gather my thoughts on it.

What I did notice is that in the reflection of past presenters there was no mention of Jacqui Hames who was on the programme for years. I googled to see how many years she had been on the programme and she's not even listed on the Wiki entry.

This might explain [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Tony Bennett** 17.09.14 10:39

aiyoyo wrote:Was the programme about unsolved historical murder cases and Mcs case incidental? Or the other way around the Mcs were real focus and the rest incidentals?

Let's put it this way.

In the lead-up to the programme, and at the beginning, the featuring of the McCanns during the programme was heralded - trumpeted even...'later in the programme we will hear from the McCanns and the detective who is leading the investigation...'.

So we all waited with bated breath - and waited, and waited, until at 27 mins, there they were, with clips from the dodgy reconstruction, Redwood with his earnest, deliberately furrowed-brow look speaking in hushed tones about his 'careful' and 'thorough' investiagtion etc. - convincing no-one with more than a few active brain cells left.

The segment on the McCanns, however, was just 1 min 40 secs long in a programme lasting 45 minutes - less than 4% of the programme.

Not unnaturally, the programme focused on some of Crimewatch's undoubted successes, with video and CCTV clips played to show how some criminals were caught.

Some failures were mentioned, like their appeal for information about the killing of Jill Dando, which led to the eventual humiliating of the Met for conspiring to lock up the wrong man - Barry Bulsara - for the crime.

Lest it should ever be forgotten on this forum, the man responsible for bringing a case against Bulsara - based on a single piece of firearms residue which is widely now believed to have been planted - Det Chief Supt Hamish Campbell - was the very man appointed by the government and the Met Police to co-ordinate and lead Operation Grange. Redwood was and is the dogsbody carrying out his masters' orders.

(I should add 'IMO' to that last sentence. There is a thread about Hamish Campbell and his background on the forum)

by Liz Eagles 17.09.14 10:45

Woofer wrote:
aquila wrote:It was a pretty odd mish-mash of a programme imo. I haven't had time to gather my thoughts on it.

What I did notice is that in the reflection of past presenters there was no mention of Jacqui Hames who was on the programme for years. I googled to see how many years she had been on the programme and she's not even listed on the Wiki entry.

I think that`s cos she was a police officer and not a presenter.

David Hatcher gets a mention on Wiki. IIRC Jacqui Hames was an integral part of the Crimewatch Team but then again the Met hung her out to dry and the NOTW had her under surveillance and Rebekah Brooks told fibs about it.

Jacqui Hames was a household name on Crimewatch.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

ETA: Thanks for the link Baldrick - I was doing it from memory.

by Baldrick 17.09.14 11:27

Please remove if its of subject, but an interesting read about met corruption

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.])

by Liz Eagles 17.09.14 11:34

Baldrick wrote:Please remove if its of subject, but an interesting read about met corruption

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.])

I think it's possibly drifting off topic but it's relevant imo.

What's very relevant is that your Wiki link seems to have been whooshed or perhaps the link is incorrect.

ETA: here's the correct link - found it.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by aiyoyo 17.09.14 11:46

@TB
So we all waited with bated breath - and waited, and waited, until at 27 mins, there they were, with clips from the dodgy reconstruction, Redwood with his earnest, deliberately furrowed-brow look speaking in hushed tones about his 'careful' and 'thorough' investiagtion etc. - convincing no-one with more than a few active brain cells left.

Thanks.
Redwood's appearance is a surprise. Don't suppose he imparts any update on his 'careful and thorough investigation' did he? If he had not said anything of value or anything new I wonder why he agreed to be interviewed and featured?

All in all, very strange for BBC (?) to feature the Mcs and have them and the head-detective-in-charge come on to say nothing (of significance) really. Why rehash clips from reconstruction not as if this was meant as another appeal? Bizzare!

by Guest 17.09.14 11:51

aiyoyo wrote:
All in all, very strange for BBC (?) to feature the Mcs and have them and the head-detective-in-in-charge come on to say nothing (nothing significant) really. Why rehash clips from reconstruction not as if this was meant as another appeal? Bizzare!

It's part of the S&S book blitz.

Goebbels springs to mind.

by HelenMeg 17.09.14 11:55

aiyoyo wrote:

@TB
So we all waited with bated breath - and waited, and waited, until at 27 mins, there they were, with clips from the dodgy reconstruction, Redwood with his earnest, deliberately furrowed-brow look speaking in hushed tones about his 'careful' and 'thorough' investiagtion etc. - convincing no-one with more than a few active brain cells left.

Thanks.
Redwood's appearance is a surprise. Don't suppose he imparts any update on his 'careful and thorough investigation' did he? If he had not said anything of value or anything new I wonder why he agreed to be interviewed and featured?

All in all, very strange for BBC (?) to feature the Mcs and have them and the head-detective-in-in-charge come on to say nothing (nothing significant) really. Why rehash clips from reconstruction not as if this was meant as another appeal? Bizzare!

It was bizarre. It was also bizarre to move the program to such a late slot - owing to the program on Scottish Independence. Redwood also spoke in general - about how the Detectives brief each other on their individual cases - in that classroom type environment... also bizarre really
There was absolutely no point to the appearance by the Mc Canns - unless it was to attract viewers. It could certainly be used as a marketing ploy. I have a feeling that the feature on the Mc Canns was vastly chopped down at short notice - but this is only a feeling - not based on any knowledge

by **Tony Bennett** 17.09.14 12:05

aquila wrote:
Baldrick wrote:Please remove if its of subject, but an interesting read about met corruption

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I think it's possibly drifting off topic but it's relevant imo.

What's very relevant is that your Wiki link seems to have been whooshed or perhaps the link is incorrect.

There is much about the Daniel Morgan case (murdered by an axe being buried in his skull in 1987) on here, see for example this post/thread:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

...where I show how Masonic corruption in the Met was at the heart of ths shameful, corrupt cover-up - in which our new Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saundesrs, played her part (as indeed she has played a part in the McCann case with her visit to Portugal in early 2013).

Daniel's surviving brother Alistair Morgan maintains a blog about the case which is now, Hillsborough-style, the subject of an investigation by an Independent Panel.

Let's hope it's as successful as the Hillsborough Independent Panel has been so far.

Alistair Morgan and Les Balkwell (see Les Balkwell section on the forum) regularly speak to each other and swap notes about the overpowering stench of police corruption in their respective cases

by Baldrick 17.09.14 12:10

Thank you Tony

by aiyoyo 17.09.14 12:14

BlueBag wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
All in all, very strange for BBC (?) to feature the Mcs and have them and the head-detective-in-charge come on to say nothing (of significance) really. Why rehash clips from reconstruction not as if this was meant as another appeal? Bizzare!

It's part of the S&S book blitz.

Goebbels springs to mind.

There's possibility Summers connection to BBC may have something to do with his decision to write the book, having been introduced (perhaps) to the Mcs through associates in BBC that are mutual friends/supporters of the Mccanns, but I don't see what has Redwood got to do with part of the S&S book blitz?

It would of interest to know the circumstances under which the authors and Mcs met?
Did they encounter the Mcs through their own instigation/initiative or through a third party and who might the third party be? Knowing whether the authors meeting with Mcs was taken independently or influenced by third party could go a long way to explain why the book is slanted one way and totally devoid of objectivity.

by j.rob 17.09.14 12:21

It was featured in a larger, rather boastful section of the programme hailed as Crimewatch ‘Not only solving crimes, but actually Making The News’.

I mis-read this initially as: 'Crimewatch Not only solving crimes, but actually Making Them Happen.'

Or perhaps that should be: 'Not only solving crimes, but also covering them up.'

by Guest 17.09.14 12:32

Some may think there is coordination going on.

It does look like it.

by **Tony Bennett** 17.09.14 12:42

aiyoyo wrote:
There's possibility Summers connection to BBC may have something to do with his decision to write the book, having been introduced (perhaps) to the Mcs through associates in BBC that are mutual friends/supporters of the Mccanns, but I don't see what has Redwood got to do with part of the S&S book blitz?

It would of interest to know the circumstances under which the authors and Mcs met?

Did they encounter the Mcs through their own instigation/initiative or through a third party and who might the third party be? Knowing whether the authors meeting with Mcs was taken independently or influenced by third party could go a long way to explain why the book is slanted one way and totally devoid of objectivity.

@ aiyoyo

There are certain people in this world who will do all sorts of things for money.

And such people, being birds of a feather who flock together, tend to know each other.

They 'call in favours'.

I would like to name certain names who I think have done nothing but obey their masters' orders in this case, Gary Hagland springs to mind as a possibility, for example. And DCI Andy Redwood being another.

People like this will most certainly be prepared to lie if the occasion demands.

And in the case of Summers and Swan, they will certainly have been prepared to write a book to order by those who are paying them. Indeed, it looks like that they've done that in the past.

Contrast that with Richard D Hall who covered his costs in making a fact-packed 4.5-hour film - and then made it available for free viewing at various places on the internet.

If you add the mumbers who have viewed the DVDs on his website (tens of thousands) with those who've viewed it on YouTube (around 75,000 to date), around 150,000 or more have seen that film already.

I'll bet that's a great deal more than will ever read Summers and Swan's book, the contents of which were most likely dictated to them at their various meetings with the McCanns, the Met Police, and of course at their very long series of meetings with that appointer of dodgy detectives, Brian Kennedy, who is given hero treatment in their book.

Follow the money

by Woofer 17.09.14 13:19

Crimewatch have never been interested in `paedophile rings` it seems. Yes, they claim to have helped arrest 18 paedophiles in 25 years, but these seem to be loners.

Is this because the police didn`t want to bring attention to what they were investigating or is it because they prefer to deny these rings exist?

In the last 25 years there would have been ample opportunities for Crimewatch to appeal to victims to come forward. Who prevented this, the BBC or the police?

And I can`t find any reference to Crimewatch themselves stating that Jill Dando was investigating a paedophile ring.