Re: New DCI

by Brian Griffin 06.12.14 2:52

Woofer wrote:
tungsten tel wrote:
Grim wrote:First name terms with Andy , just like Stu .
But not DCI Wall ........Yet

................. until the Mcs make it clear to her that she is working for THEM.

by Realist 06.12.14 3:47

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-top-cop-quits-4756701

This piece of garbage is totally misleading and unrepresentative of the facts. For instance:-

''Madeleine disappeared from her holiday apartment on May 3, 2007 as her parents dined out with friends.''

This isn't a fact, or indeed a proven entity, it is an assertion by the McCanns.

What is a fact is that the McCanns have stated that Madelaine disappeared from her holiday apartment on May 3. 2007 as they dined out with friends.

However, without wishing to champion the cause of the media, their products make extremely good fire lighters.

by Bishop Brennan 06.12.14 5:11

ultimaThule wrote:
I would imagine the old boss is not incognisant of the games played by those who have something to hide, Bishop, and is no doubt aware of the tendency of the McCanns to continue to add embellishment to their original story in order to fool those gullible enough to believe their claims about the events of 3 May 2007.

As for the new boss, she is likely to prove resistant to the ploys of those females who attempt to use their feminine charms to obsfucate the truth and is no doubt something of a red rag to a bull when questioning males who are chauvinistic by nature and/or inclination.
..

Agree completely. I've worked with women like that in business over the years and they were all excellent at what they did. They have little time for anyone who is not up to their high standard, and have a powerful mix of empathy and focus. Let's hope the new DCI is just the same and also that she is able to resist any external political interference.

Regardless, it's a relief to see the back of the entirely ineffectual and totally unconvincing Redwood. I've also met plenty of his kind in the past. Useless, every single one!

by Bishop Brennan 06.12.14 5:17

Ladyinred wrote:From today's Telegraph:

"...Portuguese police closed down their investigation into her death in 2008 but the Met launched its own operation three years later.

Mr and Mrs McCann paid tribute to Mr Redwood's work on the investigation into their daughter's disappearance.
In a statement, they said: "We would really like to thank Andy Redwood for his commitment to the search for Madeleine. We appreciate everything he has done and the great progress that has been made under his leadership.

"We are sure the investigation will continue in the same positive way under his successor DCI Wall.
"We don't think Andy could have done more for our family, especially for Madeleine."

Didn't he dig up a good portion of PDL looking for a body?

by Liz Eagles 06.12.14 5:52

I can't summon up much enthusiasm for a new leader of the investigation. It smacks to me of handing over a poisoned chalice to someone with 22 years service who will more than likely retire/move to pastures new within approximately 3 years - just like Andy Redwood has done. The fact this new person is female and people are somewhat buoyed by that means not much to me.

Here's another recent outgoing SY female (gone to the Foreign Office to take up a role in goodness knows what as it's an unspecified director-general level posting.

Cressida Dick, Assistant Commissioner

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cressida_Dick

by Sam S 06.12.14 5:58

This woman has said that she has a great life, nice house and a brilliant career, doesn't have kids, doesn't sound like she wants any. Seems to be living a feminists perfect life. So, IMO, she is not going to put this perfect life in danger by ruffling too many feathers. She has had her orders, Shut it down, quickly and as quietly as you can and move on with your career. End of.

by Joss 06.12.14 6:00

Isn't it uncanny that the new portugese prosecutor taking over the Madeleine McC case kind of coincides with the new DCI on the UK side. Both women have been portrayed in the media as no nonsense types to solve the case, hmm.
Not holding my breath on all of this. Wasn't it Mr. Amaral that said because of all the political interference in this case that it will never be solved or words to that effect?

by Joss 06.12.14 6:02

IMO this case will be officially made a cold case and eventually shelved again.

by Joss 06.12.14 6:22

2008-07-01

Gonçalo Amaral speaks of pressures in the Maddie case

Former coordinator for the investigation of the Madeleine case said pressures existed around the process of the case for it never to be solved. Gonçalo Amaral says that the presence of the officer Clarence Mitchell is proof of that and argued that neither researchers nor directors should be afraid of working.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id139.html

by aiyoyo 06.12.14 8:47

Internal political reason and/or strategy must be behind the switch from Wood to Wall giving the curious timing. Could it be one cannot see wood for trees, and the replacement is to put a wall between the Perp/s and Police? Are the parents from now to be ex-communicated, no more running commentaries to them, as we are led by a source close to the family to believe they were kept in the loops by SY constantly and frequently?

I fail to understand why a committed DCI who takes his job seriously, saying he feels privileged to be given charge of the case would make a sudden decision to quit at the tail end of it.
If his retirement by end of 2014 was a planned thing in advance, was on the table all along and known to the organisation, it seemed a bad judgement to put him in charge. Knowing full well a time structure for completion was never set for this case, the possibility that Wood might not be able to see this through to completion should have been foreseen.
If the longevity of the process was an unknown factor and if Wood's retirement was not priorly planned (and even if it was) why was it crucial for him to adhere to it or to withdraw now whilst in the middle of it? Why not delay it a bit until he completes this "privileged" task ? The timing just does not make sense at all unless some elements that necessitate it are at play behind the scenes.

The transistion process would involve more a comprehensive briefing to the successor and just straight hand over. The procedure to select and put a successor in place requires internal reorganising, restructuring, deliberating, follow by a multi-tier hierachy unanimous decision to decide on the successor and all that requires a process of time. You've got to wonder what the overriding factor was for the decision to do the head-switchover at this particular juncture. Why not earlier ? It must be apparent to them at some earlier stage that the process is going to drag beyond Wood withdrawal dateline?

by aiyoyo 06.12.14 8:57

Joss wrote:IMO this case will be officially made a cold case and eventually shelved again.

Bit busy/active now to revert it to cold case. too late for that surely?
It's anything but cold now.....it's more than lukewarm.
In fact it's quite hot going that head had to be changed.
The former ~~chef~~ chief has to get out because of the heat and hence we got Wall.

by noddy100 06.12.14 9:14

This has made me more pessimistic as I think if this enquiry was about to reveal an explosive conclusion AR word have stayed until the end fir his ego if nothing else

by aiyoyo 06.12.14 9:39

Maybe his expertise is no longer needed or relevant for a "Murder" investigation.
"Head of Homicide" replacement is put in place for a reason surely?
If reports are to be believed, at this stage witnesses are going to be asked "did you kill Madeleine" and for that the relevant expertise is going to be needed to oversee the operation.

I must admit I am perplexed at the switch timing.
It's like watching a football match where a player is suddenly taken off and replaced with another one in a last ditch attempt to score or claw back goal.

by **PeterMac** 06.12.14 9:47

I loved this bit from the Algarve resident piece
http://portugalresident.com/madeleine-redwood-moves-over-for-“painted”-lady

As the article pointed out, “she is only partially joking when she attributes her low media profile to the fact ‘we solve cases so quickly nobody gets involved…" -

God speed, Madam.

by Guest 06.12.14 10:11

aiyoyo wrote:Maybe his expertise is no longer needed or relevant for a "Murder" investigation.
"Head of Homicide" replacement is put in place for a reason surely?
If reports are to be believed, at this stage witnesses are going to be asked "did you kill Madeleine" and for that the relevant expertise is going to be needed to oversee the operation.

I must admit I am perplexed at the switch timing.
It's like watching a football match where a player is suddenly taken off and replaced with another one in a last ditch attempt to score or claw back goal.

According to Textusa no such question can be asked of a witness,only a direct question such as that can be put to an arquido.

by Woofer 06.12.14 10:16

Peter Mac

In your experience, is it usual practise to retire at the height of an investigation?

by **PeterMac** 06.12.14 10:17

By a train of thought from a tweet.

What will be Redwood's legacy.
1 - Confirmed that Death in the apartment was on their list
2 - Stated that "Madeleine did not leave the apartment alive", was on the list
3 - By searching, digging, radar-ing etc confirmed to the entire world that they were looking for a body
4 - By NOT handing out leaflets, following up sightings, visiting all parts of the globe, confirmed that they were not looking for a living person
5 - Trashed Tannerman, and therefore destroyed the main, or indeed the only plank of the "official story"
6 - Re-invents Smithman, but only to Trace Interview and Eliminate, not necessarily as an abductor, just to tie up a loose end.
7 - Kept the real investigation so close to his chest, and the security so tight that even Mitchell has to invent stories
8 - Briefed BHH so well that he leaked that Grange was a "Murder" investigation
9 - Briefed BHH so well that he stated that the "family" had handed over the Dossier of death

10 - Ate quite a lot of sardines !

by Grim 06.12.14 10:24

How will it look if 'Nick Nick Wall' rides into town and solves this case in the bat if an eyelash ?.

by ultimaThule 06.12.14 10:31

WMD wrote:A source say's,more like they don't know but let us hope they haven't got anything.

After Andy Redwood's announcement, a source close to the inquiry said: "A lead detective would not typically stand down if they can see a result in the pipeline"

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-top-cop-quits-4756701

In this instance ~~Mitchell~~ the 'source' would appear to be indulging in more wishful thinking on the part of his employers, WMD.

by **PeterMac** 06.12.14 10:38

Woofer wrote:Peter Mac
In your experience, is it usual practise to retire at the height of an investigation?

Not unusual at all. With the exception that if a court case is pending you might stay on for a few more months to see it through.

Being a cop is just a job, like, or unlike, any other.
Officers try not to develop emotional ties with cases, and everyone knows that there is a large cohort of people fully able to take over when you retire or move to another department.
Redwood has been in charge of a team. He is not the "super-sleuth" of TV portrayals or Victorian Melodrama, acting on his own, kicking in his own doors, making arrests, threatening suspects and all the rest of the nonsense.

He sits in his office, and people drift in from time to time to update him on things.
Each Monday morning there will be a meeting where everyone will chip in their bit, and report how their particular area of enquiry is coming on.
The HOLMES II and ANACAPA people will reveal what is emerging.
Then he will go back to his office and make some entries in the Policy Document, explaining how the next phase is going to go, and WHY
And later that morning he will report what he is doing to the Det Supt and Det Ch Supt, who may make observations, suggest alternative strategies, authorise financial things, and then all go for coffee.

What the new girl will do is spend some time going through that Policy book, in the same way as a cold case review team would do, NOT being briefed by Redwood.
Coming to it with a fresh mind - with any luck.

Once you have completed your 30 years it makes no sense to stay on.
You could get your pension for staying at home, so you are going to work for one third of your salary.
On that third you are paying 40% tax, NI, AND they are taking a further 11% of your whole salary as Pension contributions - but your pension cannot increase, so this is simply being lost.
If you work that out you find that a Chief Supt is being paid less than the part time cleaner.

Oh, yes, and everyone hates you, because you are blocking the promotion ladder.

by **PeterMac** 06.12.14 10:41

Grim wrote:How will it look if 'Nick Nick Wall' rides into town and solves this case in the bat if an eyelash ?.

Brilliant.

" I had the enormous benefit of DCI Redwood's well known meticulous approach. Everything had been prepared perfectly. The team had covered every single aspect, eliminating all other possibilities, and from the moment I took over I realised it was a welcome Christmas gift. I want to thank the entire operation . . . blah blah "

by Brian Griffin 06.12.14 10:46

aquila wrote:I can't summon up much enthusiasm for a new leader of the investigation. It smacks to me of handing over a poisoned chalice to someone with 22 years service who will more than likely retire/move to pastures new within approximately 3 years - just like Andy Redwood has done. The fact this new person is female and people are somewhat buoyed by that means not much to me.

Nor me.

I was thinking something along similar lines - the 'end of the road' job for someone who has messed up or who is wanted out for some other reason. You know you're on your way out once you've been handed the McCann case, a case from which no officer recovers. Or maybe I've been watching too many TV dramas.

She might be full of big ideas, but once she's in it for real, she'll see how tied her hands are she'll look just as dopey as Redwood as she chases up nonsense leads and has to go on TV reporting them with a straight face. That's my prediction.

In my opinion.

by Woofer 06.12.14 10:58

PeterMac wrote:
Woofer wrote:Peter Mac
In your experience, is it usual practise to retire at the height of an investigation?
Not unusual at all. With the exception that if a court case is pending you might stay on for a few more months to see it through.

Being a cop is just a job, like, or unlike, any other.
Officers try not to develop emotional ties with cases, and everyone knows that there is a large cohort of people fully able to take over when you retire or move to another department.
Redwood has been in charge of a team. He is not the "super-sleuth" of TV portrayals or Victorian Melodrama, acting on his own, kicking in his own doors, making arrests, threatening suspects and all the rest of the nonsense.

He sits in his office, and people drift in from time to time to update him on things.
Each Monday morning there will be a meeting where everyone will chip in their bit, and report how their particular area of enquiry is coming on.
The HOLMES II and ANACAPA people will reveal what is emerging.
Then he will go back to his office and make some entries in the Policy Document, explaining how the next phase is going to go, and WHY
And later that morning he will report what he is doing to the Det Supt and Det Ch Supt, who may make observations, suggest alternative strategies, authorise financial things, and then all go for coffee.

What the new girl will do is spend some time going through that Policy book, in the same way as a cold case review team would do, NOT being briefed by Redwood.
Coming to it with a fresh mind - with any luck.

Once you have completed your 30 years it makes no sense to stay on.
You could get your pension for staying at home, so you are going to work for one third of your salary.
On that third you are paying 40% tax, NI, AND they are taking a further 11% of your whole salary as Pension contributions - but your pension cannot increase, so this is simply being lost.
If you work that out you find that a Chief Supt is being paid less than the part time cleaner.

Oh, yes, and everyone hates you, because you are blocking the promotion ladder.

Thanks for that Peter - very informative. AR retiring quite sensible then. He seems so young.

by **PeterMac** 06.12.14 11:27

Woofer wrote:
Thanks for that Peter - very informative. AR retiring quite sensible then. He seems so young.

30 years service, and I suspect he joined from school, rather than University, so he need only be 48 or 49.

Just to bash the calculations home
Assume salary of £ 60,000
Full pension is £ 40,000 - for staying in bed.
to go to work is therefore only the extra £ 20,000
40% tax is £ 8,000
11% pension ( on the £ 60,000) is £ 6,600
so even before NI contributions the £20,000 is down to £ 5,400
A bit less than £ 3 an hour !

by Woofer 06.12.14 11:46

PeterMac wrote:
Woofer wrote:
Thanks for that Peter - very informative. AR retiring quite sensible then. He seems so young.
30 years service, and I suspect he joined from school, rather than University, so he need only be 48 or 49.

Just to bash the calculations home
Assume salary of £ 60,000
Full pension is £ 40,000 - for staying in bed.
to go to work is therefore only the extra £ 20,000
40% tax is £ 8,000
11% pension ( on the £ 60,000) is £ 6,600
so even before NI contributions the £20,000 is down to £ 5,400
A bit less than £ 3 an hour !

£40,000 for just staying at home ! not to be sniffed at eh. Plus he could get a little part-time job or open up a home for retired cocker spaniels.

From linkedin, he went to Portsmouth University - wonder if he was there same time as me? - nah he was probably there 1981-84

After Andy Redwood's announcement, a source close to the inquiry said: "A lead detective would not typically stand down if they can see a result in the pipeline"

Log in for more topics