Re: Madeleine: The Last Hope? - Panorama UPDATED 7.30 25th April (only certain areas) and 8.30 pm Mon 30th April 2012

by friedtomatoes 24.04.12 21:56

candyfloss wrote:
nomendelta wrote:"closure to the family" troubles me. Surely it is not even remotely in their remit. Reviewing the evidence and establishing, as much as possible, the truth as to what happened to Maddie is surely the ONLY remit. If that happens to bring closure to the family - rather than prosecution! - then that would be a happy side effect for the family but not the absolute remit.

But how can they bring closure unless Madeleine is found. Do they have some information as to where she is, because if they come to the conclusion that she was abducted and the McCanns are not in any way involved, how on earth can that be closure. Madeleine would still be missing and it would still be an unsolved case.

Only if the Met decide she was taken by paedos and killed maybe. The cadaver scent found in the apartment though will be a major stumbling block.

by mrscee 24.04.12 22:06

nomendelta wrote:"closure to the family" troubles me. Surely it is not even remotely in their remit. Reviewing the evidence and establishing, as much as possible, the truth as to what happened to Maddie is surely the ONLY remit. If that happens to bring closure to the family - rather than prosecution! - then that would be a happy side effect for the family but not the absolute remit.

I agree this is troubling to me also. Closure should naturally follow from the truth but the fact the truth is not referred to directly is odd. Also I have seen mentioned some place (bbc?)how DI Redwood is well placed to 'explain Madeleine's disappearance'
This is a peculiarly benign turn of phrase and makes me wonder if they may even begin to look for alternative scenarios including 'wandering off' as opposed to either abduction or death and cover up. Oh well we shall see.

by nomendelta 24.04.12 22:21

Well the BBC is very sensitive to complaints so I am sure, given the comments on the Radio Times forum, that if this show isn't seen to be impartial and at least showing that abduction is not the only theory - and is indeed the least likely theory - then there will be a siginificant number of complaints.

by friedtomatoes 24.04.12 22:28

Just seen Andy Redwood on the news and have no idea what to make of it. Fingers crossed it is not a witewash. They just cannot get away with one and I do not think it will happen if the parents are suspect. The Met cannot afford to lie in this.

by Guest 24.04.12 22:29

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

Tony Bennett outside Belgravia Police Station on Goncalo Amaral Day 2011 (2 October), handing in a large dossier to the Scotland Yard Madeleine McCann Review Team, dealing with an in-depth analysis of the extraordinary story of the McCann Team's private investigatons, beginning with their appointment of corrupt top cop and drugs thief Antonio Giminiz Raso of Metodo 3 as their lead investigator (now in prison), continuing with the appointment of serial con-man and fraudster Kevin Halligen (also now in prison), and ending up with the appointment of Dave-the-abductor-could-have-been-a-woman-Edgar, of the phantom company Alpha Investigations Group.

by russiandoll 24.04.12 22:29

looked again at the clip.
At no time does Redwood speak of finding Maddie, he talks only of the ultimate goal being solving the case. So the written report of this conversation is innaccurate unless he says he has the best opportunity to find Maddie elsewhere in the programme.
He hopes he can make a difference, sounds to me like review has some way to go.
Bilton, not the police, unless not shown in this particular snippet, talks of Portuguese police failure.
I would be very surprised if he did not mention Maddies family at some stage and I cannot think of anything he could say apart from being able to draw a line. The family will have to admit at some time that the police have done all they can, a review cannot go on indefinitely.

I think he is bring partial, balanced and although I am not a police officer, this man is answerable to those above him in the chain of command. He will have to show reasons for his inactions and actions on certain issues and why he follows one line of inquiry rather than another. It is more than his job is worth to do anything other than start at the beginning........is there evidence that this abduction report is credible?
He is keeping things close to his chest, he will not be discussing anything operational I am sure.
He is hoping to solve the case of a missing child. He never once uses the a word.
And note Bilton's intro.....
the parents SAY that when they went to check on her she was gone....[sloppy and inaccurate, they didnt discover her gone, Kate did, didnt she?] not even Bilton states this as fact, though.

by tuom 24.04.12 22:32

mrscee wrote:
nomendelta wrote:"closure to the family" troubles me. Surely it is not even remotely in their remit. Reviewing the evidence and establishing, as much as possible, the truth as to what happened to Maddie is surely the ONLY remit. If that happens to bring closure to the family - rather than prosecution! - then that would be a happy side effect for the family but not the absolute remit.

I agree this is troubling to me also. Closure should naturally follow from the truth but the fact the truth is not referred to directly is odd. Also I have seen mentioned some place (bbc?)how DI Redwood is well placed to 'explain Madeleine's disappearance'
This is a peculiarly benign turn of phrase and makes me wonder if they may even begin to look for alternative scenarios including 'wandering off' as opposed to either abduction or death and cover up. Oh well we shall see.

This is troubling and as you say we will shall see , however one cannot help but have a gut negative feeling about this , is this a way of stopping the circus and we all go away , including the MCT and "build a bridge and move on " poor Madeleine , what closure is there for her ?[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest 24.04.12 22:33

Tomorrows Express front page from Nick Sutton ....

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

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

We have evidence wow

by russiandoll 24.04.12 22:35

You beat me to it Candyfloss.
now it changes from there might be something in the jigsaw....
to there IS evidence....

by russiandoll 24.04.12 22:36

actually on re reading it is the same as posted earlier......they do have evidence.
and something there may solve the mystery.

by friedtomatoes 24.04.12 22:42

Good night all....... lets watch Panorama tomorrow and see what is what!

by tuom 24.04.12 22:45

russiandoll wrote:You beat me to it Candyfloss.
now it changes from there might be something in the jigsaw....
to there IS evidence....

Would it be possible to set up a thread here , a sort of live commentry for those of you who will see the programme tomorrow night to benefit those who will not see it until next week ? Patience was never my strong point !!!!

by Guest 24.04.12 22:46

tuom wrote:
russiandoll wrote:You beat me to it Candyfloss.
now it changes from there might be something in the jigsaw....
to there IS evidence....

Would it be possible to set up a thread here , a sort of live commentry for those of you who will see the programme tomorrow night to benefit those who will not see it until next week ? Patience was never my strong point !!!!

Yes, will definitely do that tuom thumbsup

by tuom 24.04.12 22:49

[quote="candyfloss"]

tuom wrote:
russiandoll wrote:You beat me to it Candyfloss.
now it changes from there might be something in the jigsaw....
to there IS evidence....

Would it be possible to set up a thread here , a sort of live commentry for those of you who will see the programme tomorrow night to benefit those who will not see it until next week ? Patience was never my strong point !!!!

Yes, will definitely do that tuom [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] [/quote

Thank You and Good Night.......... little thing called work gets in the way !!!! Sleep well all

by Guest 24.04.12 22:50

candyfloss wrote:Tomorrows Express front page from Nick Sutton ....

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

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

We have evidence

Okay, all you budding Poirots out there, big grin

what evidence could they have?

by juliet 24.04.12 22:54

Saw the BBC clip when, in my view, Bilton was being quite aggressive towards Goncarlo Amaral. There seemed a quite obvious bias against the Portuguese who weren't conveniently accepting the McCann line. And Redwood displayed the usual McCann worship - in my view. I do hope I am wrong.

by uppatoffee 24.04.12 22:54

Well they have said there is no new evidence, so there must be something in the case files that will help them. I could name a few things; dogs, DNA, inconsistencies, lack of evidence of abduction. It's all there, it's just whether they choose to look at it I guess!

by russiandoll 24.04.12 22:59

Bilton biased. Redwood was totally impartial imo. What did he say that was remotely pro the abduction line?
please remember this from earlier this month re SY

A source close to the investigation said: “They are working extremely hard to solve the case in the sense that they want to be able to say what they believe has happened to the child. Their attitude is that it is solvable and they are working to that end.

“The approach is very professional and all officers are committed to doing their very best to understand existing evidence while looking for new evidence. They want definitive answers and are working extremely hard to get to the truth. The investigation is gathering momentum.”

now they would not mention truth unless somewhere in there they had to sift through some dishonesty imo

by Guest 24.04.12 23:01

russiandoll wrote: Bilton biased. Redwood was totally impartial imo. What did he say that was remotely pro the abduction line?

I don't think the word abduction was mentioned at all was it?

by TheTruthWillOut 24.04.12 23:01

candyfloss wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Tomorrows Express front page from Nick Sutton ....

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

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

We have evidence

Okay, all you budding Poirots out there, what evidence could they have?

I really have no idea. It bothers me that they have "evidence" that "may help" solve the mystery.

Admittedly, I have a pea brain but I can't get my head round that headline. Either it does help or it doesn't?

by redrag 24.04.12 23:06

russiandoll wrote: looked again at the clip.
At no time does Redwood speak of finding Maddie, he talks only of the ultimate goal being solving the case. So the written report of this conversation is innaccurate unless he says he has the best opportunity to find Maddie elsewhere in the programme.
He hopes he can make a difference, sounds to me like review has some way to go.
Bilton, not the police, unless not shown in this particular snippet, talks of Portuguese police failure.
I would be very surprised if he did not mention Maddies family at some stage and I cannot think of anything he could say apart from being able to draw a line. The family will have to admit at some time that the police have done all they can, a review cannot go on indefinitely.

I think he is bring partial, balanced and although I am not a police officer, this man is answerable to those above him in the chain of command. He will have to show reasons for his inactions and actions on certain issues and why he follows one line of inquiry rather than another. It is more than his job is worth to do anything other than start at the beginning........is there evidence that this abduction report is credible?
He is keeping things close to his chest, he will not be discussing anything operational I am sure.
He is hoping to solve the case of a missing child. He never once uses the a word.
And note Bilton's intro.....
the parents SAY that when they went to check on her she was gone....[sloppy and inaccurate, they didnt discover her gone, Kate did, didnt she?] not even Bilton states this as fact, though.

Well noticed russiandoll! That was the stand-out comment of the entire video clip for me. It introduces the possibility of inconsistencies in the parent's (and other tapas group members') witness statements. Perhaps the witness statements (from Portugal and England and maybe even Ireland) are the 'documentary evidence' that Redwood believes to be so important to the solving of the mystery?

by russiandoll 24.04.12 23:16

Well I am interested to hear about translated files as the pros always complain we rely on translations from people with an agenda.
George Galloway gets on my nerves at times, but I think he got it right by saying the McCanns are either victims of a massive injustice or involved in something despicable. There are no half measures thats for sure.

by juliet 24.04.12 23:21

Redwood seemed to be saying "Of course we must do everything to help these poor parents" (That is how I interpreted it anyway). Again, I do sincerely hope I have got it wrong, and for once there might actually be something truthful. If nothing else, why don't the McCanns ever explain simple things like:

Why she didn't answer the 48 questions

Why he stumbled over the Murat question

Why he threw a hissy fit when asked about blood in the apartment

Why they are so certain Madeleine didn't just wander out of the unlocked door

Why they said the shutters were jemmied when they weren't

Why they deleted so many phone calls

Why she washed Cuddle Cat

Why the eye defect (as confirmed by members of the family in May 2007) is now just a "fleck"?

Why they said "We didn't even think leaving them alone was a problem" - yet Fiona Payne said Kate was worried and said so

Whether Payne stayed three minutes or 30 at the apartment on the evening of May 3

And on and on and on.....

But no. Everyone is supposed to forget the inconsistencies while the massive cover-up continues.

by russiandoll 24.04.12 23:32

Daily Mirror, iconic Maddie photo and caption
"police...this is our best chance to solve the case."

Star I think... just a quick flash on Sky News.. top cop " I'll solve Maddie mystery "
Peter Mac online.can someone drag him here for his opinion on Redwood?!

by justme3 24.04.12 23:35

And what about Smith's sighting of a man carrying a child? Why didn't the McCann's ever speak about this? If they have nothing to hide, they should be shouting it from the rooftops, and demand that this be followed up by the police.

by Guest 24.04.12 23:39

Daily Star also has it on front page with Amazing new evidence........

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

by Woofer 24.04.12 23:40

russiandoll wrote:Daily Mirror, iconic Maddie photo and caption
"police...this is our best chance to solve the case."

Star I think... just a quick flash on Sky News.. top cop " I'll solve Maddie mystery "
Peter Mac online.can someone drag him here for his opinion on Redwood?!

Yes, be interesting to hear Peter Mac`s thoughts on AR, though imo he didn`t seem very `copper like` - maybe the west country accent - and no, I`m not saying good coppers can`t come from the west country !

by **HiDeHo** 25.04.12 1:23

Its on the schedule for 7.30pm Wednesday night.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Can be watched online:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Download Expat Shield to watch from overseas (can watch Corrie also!)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Expat Shield is free but has (for obvious reasons) a few little aggravations (looks worse than it is...its no big deal:

-Once connected don't try to go to other webpages (it will redirect to Anchor Free page)
-Dont click onto any box that pops up (hotspotshield etc) either 'x' out or hold clicker down on title bar and move to another position (clicking on the boxes with change your settings for searching from Google eg to their search page)
- Every little while a new webpage will appear with a video that starts automatically. Pause the video rather than deleting the page to prevent more popping up immediately

Find the page to watch (ITV, BBC etc) and THEN connect, once the little shield turns green then refresh the TV page.
Once finished watching, disconnect on the task bar icon AND a new webpage that will appear after you try to disconnect. Click the red disconnect bar and you are back to normal. (just delete the 'Expatshield and Anchorfree and Technews tabs that have appeared while watching the live broadcast)

Its free so cant complain at a few little glitches...not when you can watch Brit TV online 24 hrs a day!

by Liz Eagles 25.04.12 1:33

As an expat I cannot go onto BBC or ITV on-line and watch things. It blocks me. Tells me it is about copywright or something like that. I'm grateful I'm in UK today and can watch the programme this evening (if it appears) but I must tell you that in Africa we cannot get the UK stuff from the websites.

by **HiDeHo** 25.04.12 1:37

aquila wrote:As an expat I cannot go onto BBC or ITV on-line and watch things. It blocks me. Tells me it is about copywright or something like that. I'm grateful I'm in UK today and can watch the programme this evening (if it appears) but I must tell you that in Africa we cannot get the UK stuff from the websites.

Not sure about Africa but I am in Canada and I can watch UK tv using the Expat Shield I explained in the last post.

How do you think I keep up with Corrie!![You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Latest topics