New DCI

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.

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

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.

I loved this bit from the Algarve resident piece
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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.

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.

Peter Mac 

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

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 !

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

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"

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

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

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.

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 "

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.

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.

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 !

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

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 !

It used to be (apart from senior ranks I think) that regular bobbies had to retire at 55 years of age or on completion of 30 years service whichever came first. I don't know if that's changed.

PeterMac wrote: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 !

Not such an impressive legacy isn't it by any standard?
I would say no. 7 is his best legacy and hope his successor keeps up this legacy.

He's got it so secured that CM clutching at straw invented this crap "A lead detective would not typically stand down if they can see a result in the pipeline".

ETA: Redwood will probably be remembered for his clever invention of the Brit "Creche Father". An invention unparalleled in the history of the MET Police Force.

Woofer wrote:£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

Or he could become a private detective and offer his service to McCann Pte Ltd.
And for once, Brian Kennedy et al would be accurate when saying they've hired the best of the bests in the field.

Woofer wrote:

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.

That's how I viewed it.  Forces work the same way and I know the view is that no one is irreplaceable and go when you're times up as there will be somebody who can step into your shoes and you've done your bit for your Country.  The Establishment is a well oiled machine.

.............  he`ll now have the time to join the forum 

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.

I'm with you there aquila, especially after what PeterMac had said upthread "With the exception that if a court case is pending you might stay on for a few more months to see it through". So no pending court case in the near horizon it seems.

His 30 years of service is up and it's time to go. Best go while the going is good.
So......expect the case to drag on for another 8 more years til the new girl reaches retirement...

So are we of the opinion that Grange is a pre-pension wind down for senior officers ? , a little like the BBC where fuddy duddies are put out to graze on public cash ? ....I feel a poll coming on .
Poor Madeleine .

Grim wrote:So are we of the opinion that Grange is a pre-pension wind down for senior officers ? , a little like the BBC where fuddy duddies are put out to graze on public cash ? ....I feel a poll coming on .
Poor Madeleine .

I remember being vociferous (gobby) when OG was set up and the age of the detectives within the team was criticised. I was of the opinion that experienced officers were a boon.

The OG team has a complement of 38 members of staff which has been cut back recently according to newspaper reports.

All teams will have natural wastage due to sickness, promotion, retirement, death etc.

I'd be interested to see a breakdown in the turnover of OG staff. That would be a yardstick (forgive the pun) to measure how the investigation is conducted imo - i.e. whether it's a six month secondment period for lower ranks.

Hi all on here today or even last night. I just would like to see what others think about this .  Apart from Scotland yard being on this case ,is it not true that the PJ also opened it up again some months ago ? so have they been doing their own thing on this case ? something made them feel they have found a reason to reopen so I wonder what it really was and if is going to now come up with the things they need to go forward with the case?  Would be good if mr amaral won his case now pending ,and just maybe it could be carried forward by P J  to a real conclusion ,after all it was only shelved before . joyce1938

aquila wrote:
It used to be (apart from senior ranks I think) that regular bobbies had to retire at 55 years of age or on completion of 30 years service whichever came first. I don't know if that's changed.

55 was the maximum age for Sgts and Pcs, Insps and above could stay till 60.
from 2015 it is going up to 60 for all, with reduced benefits and increased contributions - naturally !

PeterMac wrote:

aquila wrote:
It used to be (apart from senior ranks I think) that regular bobbies had to retire at 55 years of age or on completion of 30 years service whichever came first. I don't know if that's changed.

55 was the maximum age for Sgts and Pcs, Insps and above could stay till 60.
from 2015 it is going up to 60 for all, with reduced benefits and increased contributions - naturally !

That's a matter for the Police Federation - and I can't say I have much faith in that organisation. No doubt the Federation will be upping its fees too.

joyce1938 wrote:Hi all on here today or even last night. I just would like to see what others think about this .  Apart from Scotland yard being on this case ,is it not true that the PJ also opened it up again some months ago ? so have they been doing their own thing on this case ? something made them feel they have found a reason to reopen so I wonder what it really was and if is going to now come up with the things they need to go forward with the case?  Would be good if mr amaral won his case now pending ,and just maybe it could be carried forward by P J  to a real conclusion ,after all it was only shelved before . joyce1938

Hi Joyce - supposedly the Portuguese re-opened the case on the strength of Tractorman who has been cleared. Goodness knows if they are still on the case - we never hear anything from that side.  They have got a new Public Prosecutor now, Ines Sequira, who has said she wants to get it solved quickly so maybe things are progressing over there.

I was wondering if our SY are working with the same team that is investigating it over there, or are they liaising with another team.

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.

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

Cressida Dick, Assistant Commissioner

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

For the second time, I find myself in accord with Aquila, the gender of the person in charge of this 'investigation' is totally irrelevant, what is relevant is their remit.

You'll soon know what this remit is if the investigation continues in the vein of seeking fictitious or deceased paedophiles with a prediliction for openly carrying 3 yr. old children around the streets of Praia Du Luz between the hrs. of 9 and 10.0  pm.

aquila wrote:I remember being vociferous (gobby) when OG was set up and the age of the detectives within the team was criticised. I was of the opinion that experienced officers were a boon.

There are advantages to be had from using experienced officers if the advantages are used to the optimal level. That said, even experienced ones can sometimes have inept moments (eg. Tia sharp case).

Putting an experienced but about to retire one in charge of a complicating complex high profile case seems a tad redundant and shortsighted. Unless they did not expect the longevity of the investigation to out last the Officer's employment longevity.

It has been over 3 years now.....who would have thought a cold-case review would last this long?
I didn't. I'd given it two years max, and looks like multiplying it by 2 might be about right. I'll be very surprised if closure is not forthcoming within the ensuing 6 months max.

She, Nick Nick, is also a trained hostage and crisis negotiator
----------------------------------

World 'EXCLUSIFF'!

"Our Skycopter is circling Rothely Manor as you can see, Operation Strange police officers have the house surrounded. Any news Martin?"

"Well, Kate, i heard that DCI Nick Nick was negotiating with K&G, to come out of the house, but it would appear Mr is armed with a jemmy, or, erm......... whatever you call it"

"I believe the news that they might have been involved, which i thought all along, and have said so, repeatedly, in their daughter's 'disappearance', has led to this situation today, came from a local source, Martin'

"Interestingly Kate, my sources tell me the information came from a person who says she hadn't believed a word, the parents and their friends have said, about the child's 'disappearance' from day one"

"Ok, Martin, if you could firm up whether there are any other local people that don't, and never have, believed, like me and you, that  an 'abduction' ever took place, in the first place, that would be brilliant, thankyou"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DCI (same rank as DCI Redwood at OG) Clive Driscoll, ('removed' from Lambeth children's homes abuse investigation)

But got SL 'convictions'

DCI Driscoll: "there is no doubt that there were mistakes made in this investigation (SL) and there is much debate about whether those mistakes were corruption mistakes or incompetent mistakes"

Interviewer: "In your view were most of the 'mistakes' down to incompetence or is there something more SINISTER?"

DCI Driscoll: "the difference between incompetence and corruption is a bit like a bad tackle at football, the person who knows is the person who made the tackle, you know, i could be incompetent all day long if you want."

Interviewer "What's your sense?"

DCI Driscoll: "My sense was i couldn't work certain things out, there were certain incidents, there were certain inquiries, which didn't appear to be progressed, there were certain, um, PARTS of 'the investigation' THAT REALLY DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME AT ALL, but i never investigated whether that was corruption or is it incompetent"

Interviewer: "But what does corruption look like?"

DCI Driscoll: "Question i've asked myself many times, what is corruption, i mean is corruption going behind a pub somewhere and getting an envelope full of 50 quid notes and thats corruption, or is corruption that you don't go down a certain path, you don't follow a certain inquiry, and therefore YOU MAKE SOMEONE VERY HAPPY THAT YOU HAVEN'T FOLLOWED THAT INQUIRY and THEREFORE, YOUR NEXT PROMOTION IS EASIER FOR YOU?  Your CV looks a bit more glamourous by the time you finish your career and at the end of your pension you could have earnt considerably more than what you'd ever stuff in an envelope so what is corruption...."
------------------------------------
'WHERE are those T9 statements, and PJ files, team?"

"WHAT T9 statements and PJ files, Nic?"

"Nick, Nick."