American Videos of Review of Madeleine Case and Andy Redwood comments

Just found some videos re the review from American TV - Andy Redwood saying Madeleine taken by stranger in criminal act..................



[youtube][/youtube]



[youtube][/youtube]

[youtube][/youtube]

ok let me get this straight, here we have a redwood saying he believes there was a criminal act and madeleine was taken by a stranger but in the same few days of interviews in late april he said they were working on two theories, one that she was alive and one that she was dead, ah so it was an abduction whatever the outcome, get it now, they are working on stranger abduction full stop! what about the doggies andy?????

I don't think that's what he means at all. He makes a lot more sense in the 3rd video than he did on Panorama (but perhaps the Panorama clips were sloppily edited or hastily produced) - he says they have completely open minds about the case, are still collating all the evidence and therefore in no position to rule out either of the possibilities that Madeleine is alive or dead. In case she is still alive we have produced the age progressed picture and if she is still alive it's most likely she was actually abducted by a stranger, he says, but nowhere in these videos (or on Panorama I think) does he say we've reached or are reaching the conclusion that she was abducted - he's just saying while we're still gathering and examining all of the evidence we have to be open minded to all possibilities.

I think we have to be fair to Mr Redwood, I'm sure he's well aware you know who will begin spinning furiously if he's not very careful with his words.

Maybe he shouldn't have done all these interviews (maybe he didn't want to do them, but was told to? Who knows)

I think we have to be fair to Mr Redwood, I'm sure he's well aware you know who will begin spinning furiously if he's not very careful with his words.

Maybe he shouldn't have done all these interviews (maybe he didn't want to do them, but was told to? Who knows)


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



Posts: 30
Join date: 2011-05-13



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

tcat, you might just be making some sense of a nonsense.

What I do not understand is the hows and whys of Andy Redwood appearing on our television screens to declare that an he believes that Madeleine Mc Cann was abducted, bearing in mind that the UK have no jurisdiction over this case, and from what I have read up on this case, blocked requests from the Portugeuse authorities to hand over credit card details, phone records, and medical records.

This is UK taxpayers money, and we the taxpayer need to know that it is being spent wisely, we have no problem with Mr Cameron announcing that he has put 3 million towards a review of the Madeleine case, our objection is that his review has amounted so far to a publicity exercise at the taxpayers expense, and zero towards putting right the UK Government of the days determination that Gerry and Kate Mc Cann and their fellow NHS professionals (child minders) interests were way more important than the fate of a 3 year old in their care.

It is a fact that Andy Redwoods televised comments coincided with McCann INC, agenda to cash in on Madeleine.

This is sick.

mira2 wrote:
tcat, you might just be making some sense of a nonsense.

Just giving my opinion [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] If you're right then it might just be their biggest mistake - they'll be more notorious than Lindbergh.

I prefer to wait and see what happens with the review.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on Sat Jun 09, 2012 4:19 pm

mira2 wrote:
tcat, you might just be making some sense of a nonsense.

Just giving my opinion [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] If you're right then it might just be their biggest mistake - they'll be more notorious than Lindbergh.

I prefer to wait and see what happens with the review
_____________
ok tcat
For me the waiting game is over, it has become clear as the light of day that the review was nothing more than a politicical manouver.
Cameron, has been outed, he announced that there would be 3 million squid of taxpayers hard earned dosh put towards a review of the Madeleine case, what he forgot to tell us taxpayers was that he was under the spell of Murdock, and that his acquintance R Brooks, had him over a barell.
To be honest, I do not believe for one moment that Cameron is a shady character, i like him, I think Cameron is a breath of fresh air, and YES he DID have the guts to appoint Leveson to carry out a review into press practices. It is my gut feeling that Cameron like the rest of us is attempting to get back to honest politics, and lets face it after a decade of corruption in the scale that we are seeing, it is no surprise to me that Cameron felt the need to comply with the forces he met in order to stabilise whatever was happening.

The point is this: Gerry and Kate Mc Cann are nothing more than the parents of a child who disappeared into thin air whilst supposedly on holliday with themselves and a group of fellow NHS professionals. I have followed this case from late May 2007, initially I picked up on this case because the message was out there loud and clear British child abducted n the Algarve, could be in the hands of a group of international paedo's Morroco here we come.
For me that was enougbh to tell me that the parents of this child had some serious Q's to answer.
It was my belief from early on that Kate Mc Cann should have been treated as a suspect due to the fact that she was the mother of a 3 year old and 2, 18 month old babies. Lets face it what kind of mother nr right mind would go out for a night leaving children of this home alone door ajar, mates given the okies to pop in and out to check on the kiddies.
I tell you this in not normal practice in fact this is what i would deem child abuse.
Gerry and Kate McCann were quick to cash on the demise of their daughter, after all they getting untold behind the scenes cooperation from Murdochs dirty tabloids. I have not read Kate's bookie wookie, but didn't she claim that her and Gerry were were invited to dinner in the Algarve by shhhhhhhhhhh.
The Leveson enquiry has been interesting in that it has given credibilty to what those of us with a conscience have been saying over and over again.
Now that we know that the review was a whitewash at the bequest of Murdoch ( unofficial UK leader of the house) we know we are on the right track.

tcat wrote:I don't think that's what he means at all. He makes a lot more sense in the 3rd video than he did on Panorama (but perhaps the Panorama clips were sloppily edited or hastily produced) - he says they have completely open minds about the case, are still collating all the evidence and therefore in no position to rule out either of the possibilities that Madeleine is alive or dead. In case she is still alive we have produced the age progressed picture and if she is still alive it's most likely she was actually abducted by a stranger, he says, but nowhere in these videos (or on Panorama I think) does he say we've reached or are reaching the conclusion that she was abducted - he's just saying while we're still gathering and examining all of the evidence we have to be open minded to all possibilities.

I think we have to be fair to Mr Redwood, I'm sure he's well aware you know who will begin spinning furiously if he's not very careful with his words.

Maybe he shouldn't have done all these interviews (maybe he didn't want to do them, but was told to? Who knows)

his position is clear listen here at 2 30 HE believes she is still alive and a stranger took her and goes on to talk about other cases where children are found years later

what about the cadaver dog andy??????????

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

friedtomatoes wrote:

tcat wrote:I don't think that's what he means at all. He makes a lot more sense in the 3rd video than he did on Panorama (but perhaps the Panorama clips were sloppily edited or hastily produced) - he says they have completely open minds about the case, are still collating all the evidence and therefore in no position to rule out either of the possibilities that Madeleine is alive or dead. In case she is still alive we have produced the age progressed picture and if she is still alive it's most likely she was actually abducted by a stranger, he says, but nowhere in these videos (or on Panorama I think) does he say we've reached or are reaching the conclusion that she was abducted - he's just saying while we're still gathering and examining all of the evidence we have to be open minded to all possibilities.

I think we have to be fair to Mr Redwood, I'm sure he's well aware you know who will begin spinning furiously if he's not very careful with his words.

Maybe he shouldn't have done all these interviews (maybe he didn't want to do them, but was told to? Who knows)

his position is clear listen here at 2 30 HE believes she is still alive and a stranger took her and goes on to talk about other cases where children are found years later
what about the cadaver dog andy??????????
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Dan Lobb:

Do you believe she is still alive?

Redwood:

Yes I do.

Yes, he makes his opinion absolutely clear in that interview. I am surprised he has taken that stance and don't understand what has led him to that opinion, but evidently that's what he believes. If his aim was simply to keep the MCs guessing, then I don't think they would have spent their resources producing that age progression picture.

mira2 wrote:I think we have to be fair to Mr Redwood, I'm sure he's well aware you know who will begin spinning furiously if he's not very careful with his words.

Maybe he shouldn't have done all these interviews (maybe he didn't want to do them, but was told to? Who knows)


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



Posts: 30
Join date: 2011-05-13



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

tcat, you might just be making some sense of a nonsense.

What I do not understand is the hows and whys of Andy Redwood appearing on our television screens to declare that an he believes that Madeleine Mc Cann was abducted, bearing in mind that the UK have no jurisdiction over this case, and from what I have read up on this case, blocked requests from the Portugeuse authorities to hand over credit card details, phone records, and medical records.

This is UK taxpayers money, and we the taxpayer need to know that it is being spent wisely, we have no problem with Mr Cameron announcing that he has put 3 million towards a review of the Madeleine case, our objection is that his review has amounted so far to a publicity exercise at the taxpayers expense, and zero towards putting right the UK Government of the days determination that Gerry and Kate Mc Cann and their fellow NHS professionals (child minders) interests were way more important than the fate of a 3 year old in their care.

It is a fact that Andy Redwoods televised comments coincided with McCann INC, agenda to cash in on Madeleine.

This is sick.

Apologies I am never quite clear who I am replying to - if its tecat or mira. its why I use a large font incidentally, terrible eyes and not very technical. This case does become curiouser and curiouser. And I feel less confident at this moment, that the truth will ever come out. However, I don't see that as a happy outcome for the Mccanns, they will never achieve that peak of fame again. Those early days, when everyone believed them. I have lost track of what it is they are seeking - I think it could be some kind of papal exoneration, public backing again.

I remember Kate once saying that if they were arrested the public wouldn't stand for it, or some such words. I haven't quoted verbatim. I got the implication that there would be a public outcry if they were accused. It was a masterstroke from a media perspective, claim a huge following and don't dig too deep. Ditto, appealing to the catholics in a catholic country. However, they were they naieve? (sp), as Gerry told Jeremy, 'and in some ways they reaped a worldwind', again not verbatim, but a fleeting nod to the bad headlines. Not our fault guv.

I am not entirely sure what the phrase 'Search for Madeleine' means. Even the parents would be hard pushed to recognise her now, and staring intently at a small girl and taking her picture is likely to any adult arrested. Like most adults, I rarely take more than a cursory glance at other people's children. If I come across a screaming lost toddler in a supermarket, I have to weigh up the options of taking said child by the hand up to the help desk, for fear of being rugby tacked by burly security guards, and a hanging mob. That's never happened by the way. Incidentally, I would always go for grab the child by the hand option, I'd rather be screamed at by a panicked, but hopefully, much relieved mother, than to read about tragic outcomes days later.

With this cases, it always seems as if they are digging a deepeer and deeper hole. However, we have seen recently, that even with the 'dingo ate my baby' case, there will always be doubters. However, as long as there is such vagueness around the night of the 3rd May, and the frankly odd, behaviour thereafter, people will continue to question. It will be interesting to see how it unfolds.



If I am following this correctly, aren't the Portuguese Police carrying out a review too? It will be very interesting to see the findings from each. One or both, will have to publish their results to give that air of transparency the taxpayers may demand. However, it is a hobsons choice for the mccanns. It cannot exonerate them without the results being published, and if it remains under wraps, there will always be suspicion. I have no idea how the mccanns remain so calm.

Can anyone clarify for certain, that if the PJ reopened the case..... what access to the files Scotland Yard would have? Would SY have total access to all of them or would the PJ still be able to keep private the files they wanted to. Is SY simply just a review, and the PJ are the police investigators who are not obliged to reveal what they know to anybody else?

jd wrote:Can anyone clarify for certain, that if the PJ reopened the case..... what access to the files Scotland Yard would have? Would SY have total access to all of them or would the PJ still be able to keep private the files they wanted to. Is SY simply just a review, and the PJ are the police investigators who are not obliged to reveal what they know to anybody else?

If you look on the find Madeleine forum you will see the post that they (Mc's) want the Portuguese police to re-open the case. It's in the updates section 2nd May 2012.

Here is the snip

'We hope that the investigation will be reopened in Portugal soon, as this will give us the best possible chance of finding Madeleine and the person who committed this crime - of solving the case. The term ‘mystery’ (commonly used by the media) is not applicable until all possible avenues have been explored. They haven’t been, and can’t be until the case is reopened'

editing - it's not the find Madeleine forum - it's findmadeleine.com.

aquila wrote:

jd wrote:Can anyone clarify for certain, that if the PJ reopened the case..... what access to the files Scotland Yard would have? Would SY have total access to all of them or would the PJ still be able to keep private the files they wanted to. Is SY simply just a review, and the PJ are the police investigators who are not obliged to reveal what they know to anybody else?

If you look on the find Madeleine forum you will see the post that they (Mc's) want the Portuguese police to re-open the case. It's in the updates section 2nd May 2012.

Here is the snip

'We hope that the investigation will be reopened in Portugal soon, as this will give us the best possible chance of finding Madeleine and the person who committed this crime - of solving the case. The term ‘mystery’ (commonly used by the media) is not applicable until all possible avenues have been explored. They haven’t been, and can’t be until the case is reopened'

editing - it's not the find Madeleine forum - it's findmadeleine.com.

Thanks Aquila, but if the case is reopened, what access to all the files that have been so far withheld will SY have? I am not sure

I'm adding to my previous post. Take a look at the findmadeleine.com site. Get past the updated photo, get past the request for money via paypal etc and go to the support tab. Get past the ways of giving money to the McCanns and go to point No. 10. Then click onto 'helpingtofindmadeleine.org' and see what happens.

this is the link to that particular page but I urge you to trawl through the site to get to that point.

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

jd wrote:

aquila wrote:

jd wrote:Can anyone clarify for certain, that if the PJ reopened the case..... what access to the files Scotland Yard would have? Would SY have total access to all of them or would the PJ still be able to keep private the files they wanted to. Is SY simply just a review, and the PJ are the police investigators who are not obliged to reveal what they know to anybody else?

If you look on the find Madeleine forum you will see the post that they (Mc's) want the Portuguese police to re-open the case. It's in the updates section 2nd May 2012.

Here is the snip

'We hope that the investigation will be reopened in Portugal soon, as this will give us the best possible chance of finding Madeleine and the person who committed this crime - of solving the case. The term ‘mystery’ (commonly used by the media) is not applicable until all possible avenues have been explored. They haven’t been, and can’t be until the case is reopened'

editing - it's not the find Madeleine forum - it's findmadeleine.com.

Thanks Aquila, but if the case is reopened, what access to all the files that have been so far withheld will SY have? I am not sure

We need faith in the fact that the truth will out. It probably won't be for years. Look at how the libel trials have been strung out. There will one day be some justice for Madeleine. The little girl who was cheated.

aquila wrote:I'm adding to my previous post. Take a look at the findmadeleine.com site. Get past the updated photo, get past the request for money via paypal etc and go to the support tab. Get past the ways of giving money to the McCanns and go to point No. 10. Then click onto 'helpingtofindmadeleine.org' and see what happens.

this is the link to that particular page but I urge you to trawl through the site to get to that point.

[url=http://www.helpingtofindmadeleine.org/

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

It really is too early in the day to face the Find Madeleine site but I braved it and got to this link which says nothing other than "Future home of something quite cool", an image of a shirt hanging in a wardrobe and a message to either the site owner (log in to launch this site) or to a visitor (check back soon).

So it appears to be some money making scam, sorry enterprise, in the offing but the Find Madeleine site says that it was set up independently soon after Madeleine's "abduction".

Eh?

aquila wrote:

jd wrote:Can anyone clarify for certain, that if the PJ reopened the case..... what access to the files Scotland Yard would have? Would SY have total access to all of them or would the PJ still be able to keep private the files they wanted to. Is SY simply just a review, and the PJ are the police investigators who are not obliged to reveal what they know to anybody else?

If you look on the find Madeleine forum you will see the post that they (Mc's) want the Portuguese police to re-open the case. It's in the updates section 2nd May 2012.

Here is the snip

'We hope that the investigation will be reopened in Portugal soon, as this will give us the best possible chance of finding Madeleine and the person who committed this crime - of solving the case. The term ‘mystery’ (commonly used by the media) is not applicable until all possible avenues have been explored. They haven’t been, and can’t be until the case is reopened'

editing - it's not the find Madeleine forum - it's findmadeleine.com.

Why do we not see an "open letter" to the PJ or relevant person in Portugal published on the front page of the Sun written by Kate and Gerry, demanding the case is re-opened ?

Back in May when they were doing the sofa tour what happened to the impassioned plea by Kate to please, please re-open the case ? She is well able to say please please buy my book. But re-open the case now, this minute, we will come back to Portugal immediately and start again, do all we can, drag our friends away from their busy professional and social lives they place so much value on. Nope, nothing, no such plea.

A one liner buried in the middle of a web site few people visit is rather a weak attempt. Lip service.

Healy and McCann have about as much interest in having this re-opened as I have in getting a tatoo.

aquila wrote:I'm adding to my previous post. Take a look at the findmadeleine.com site. Get past the updated photo, get past the request for money via paypal etc and go to the support tab. Get past the ways of giving money to the McCanns and go to point No. 10. Then click onto 'helpingtofindmadeleine.org' and see what happens.

this is the link to that particular page but I urge you to trawl through the site to get to that point.

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

I too got the same as Jean with a shirt hanging in the wardrobe, it looks like the site is offline or disappeared because the subscription fee hasn't been paid

What I am getting at with the access to the PJ files is if the real motivation for this review is to get access to the missing vital files & statements. As I understand it, with Maddie a Ward of Court this means the mccanns get access to the files the British police/SY have. From their point of view they will be desperate to know what information the PJ have on them that has not been disclosed, just like us. I am wondering if this is a cunning way of getting access to them. Also maybe to get an idea of what GA may reveal at the trial in September. Just a thought

jd wrote:

aquila wrote:I'm adding to my previous post. Take a look at the findmadeleine.com site. Get past the updated photo, get past the request for money via paypal etc and go to the support tab. Get past the ways of giving money to the McCanns and go to point No. 10. Then click onto 'helpingtofindmadeleine.org' and see what happens.

this is the link to that particular page but I urge you to trawl through the site to get to that point.

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

I too got the same as Jean with a shirt hanging in the wardrobe, it looks like the site is offline or disappeared because the subscription fee hasn't been paid

What I am getting at with the access to the PJ files is if the real motivation for this review is to get access to the missing vital files & statements. As I understand it, with Maddie a Ward of Court this means the mccanns get access to the files the British police/SY have. From their point of view they will be desperate to know what information the PJ have on them that has not been disclosed, just like us. I am wondering if this is a cunning way of getting access to them. Also maybe to get an idea of what GA may reveal at the trial in September. Just a thought

Was there a court decision though to with hold the files from the McCanns ? This being the case, would this not take precedence over any normal procedures or rights in a case review ? Hopefully somebody here can answer.

sami wrote: [...]
Was there a court decision though to with hold the files from the McCanns ? This being the case, would this not take precedence over any normal procedures or rights in a case review ? Hopefully somebody here can answer.

***
If memory serves me, this was Leicester LE files, which they didn't get. They only got [copies of] their own files back.

Châtelaine wrote:

sami wrote: [...]
Was there a court decision though to with hold the files from the McCanns ? This being the case, would this not take precedence over any normal procedures or rights in a case review ? Hopefully somebody here can answer.

***
If memory serves me, this was Leicester LE files, which they didn't get. They only got [copies of] their own files back.

Madeleine McCann: parents' court bid for information Telegraph
 
By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
Last Updated: 7:26PM BST 20/06/2008
 
Kate and Gerry McCann are to ask a High Court judge to order the release of police documents which they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The McCanns hope their application to Mrs Justice Hogg will result in Leicestershire Police opening their files on scores of reported sightings of Madeleine, most of which have been passed on to them by police in Portugal, where the four-year-old disappeared in May last year.

Until now police in Leicestershire, the McCanns' home county, have refused the couple's requests for information about sightings, saying they are bound by the terms of an agreement with Portuguese police. unquote

AND

Documents handed over to the McCanns without informing the Attorney General Diário de Notícias
 
FILIPA AMBRÓSIO DE SOUSA
8th July 2008
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation
 
Investigation. The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro. unquote

The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] site looks like it has lapsed due to lack of interest or funding. Or maybe it's been 'rucked' by Team McCann because it deviated from the correct script?

Who knows. But there's nothing significant about the 'coming soon - future home of something cool' message. That will be standard hosting company speak.

Be interesting to know why it died though.

tigger wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:

sami wrote: [...]
Was there a court decision though to with hold the files from the McCanns ? This being the case, would this not take precedence over any normal procedures or rights in a case review ? Hopefully somebody here can answer.

***
If memory serves me, this was Leicester LE files, which they didn't get. They only got [copies of] their own files back.

Madeleine McCann: parents' court bid for information Telegraph
 
By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
Last Updated: 7:26PM BST 20/06/2008
 
Kate and Gerry McCann are to ask a High Court judge to order the release of police documents which they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The McCanns hope their application to Mrs Justice Hogg will result in Leicestershire Police opening their files on scores of reported sightings of Madeleine, most of which have been passed on to them by police in Portugal, where the four-year-old disappeared in May last year.

Until now police in Leicestershire, the McCanns' home county, have refused the couple's requests for information about sightings, saying they are bound by the terms of an agreement with Portuguese police. unquote

AND

Documents handed over to the McCanns without informing the Attorney General Diário de Notícias
 
FILIPA AMBRÓSIO DE SOUSA
8th July 2008
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation
 
Investigation. The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro. unquote

Thank you Tigger, this is what I was looking for. They are trying to get access to the undisclosed files in order to find out what the PJ have on them, remember it is not true the abduction, so they are thinking on what the PJ have that could be a serious exposure on them. In 2008 they went under the guise using "Reported sightings" (like now) and " they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine"...the mccanns know there isn't a real search and the mccanns know there was never an abduction so all they are interested in is keeping the cover up & making sure the PJ don't get near to the truth. The withheld files are worrying them and they are dying to get their hands on them

Also, Lord Justice Hogg is the legal guardian of Maddie. I am sure whatever files he has, the mccanns have the right to see it

The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro.

....This is very interesting

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Today at 10:29 pm

tigger wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:

sami wrote: [...]
Was there a court decision though to with hold the files from the McCanns ? This being the case, would this not take precedence over any normal procedures or rights in a case review ? Hopefully somebody here can answer.

***
If memory serves me, this was Leicester LE files, which they didn't get. They only got [copies of] their own files back.

Madeleine McCann: parents' court bid for information Telegraph

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
Last Updated: 7:26PM BST 20/06/2008

Kate and Gerry McCann are to ask a High Court judge to order the release of police documents which they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The McCanns hope their application to Mrs Justice Hogg will result in Leicestershire Police opening their files on scores of reported sightings of Madeleine, most of which have been passed on to them by police in Portugal, where the four-year-old disappeared in May last year.

Until now police in Leicestershire, the McCanns' home county, have refused the couple's requests for information about sightings, saying they are bound by the terms of an agreement with Portuguese police. unquote

AND

Documents handed over to the McCanns without informing the Attorney General Diário de Notícias

FILIPA AMBRÓSIO DE SOUSA
8th July 2008
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation

Investigation. The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro. unquote

Thank you Tigger, this is what I was looking for. They are trying to get access to the undisclosed files in order to find out what the PJ have on them, remember it is not true the abduction, so they are thinking on what the PJ have that could be a serious exposure on them. In 2008 they went under the guise using "Reported sightings" (like now) and " they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine"...the mccanns know there isn't a real search and the mccanns know there was never an abduction so all they are interested in is keeping the cover up & making sure the PJ don't get near to the truth. The withheld files are worrying them and they are dying to get their hands on them

Also, Lord Justice Hogg is the legal guardian of Maddie. I am sure whatever files he has, the mccanns have the right to see it

The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro.

....This is very interesting
______________
jd, the Justice Hogg guardianship of Madeleine McCann is even more confusing than her disapearance. I have been waiting a whole 5 years for some legal eagle to come online and explain what the point of this exercise is.
All we are privy to is the fact that Leicestshire police (using taxpayers money) refused to hand over files relating to the case to the McCanns, and eventually had to resort to going to court to question Justice Hoggs initial ruling. As a result Justice Hogg duly amended her initial ruling which just so happened to give the McCanns the power to demand at will full access to police files. Evenmore damaging is the fact that Clarence Mitchell in one TV interview hinted at the fact that he was beinf fed inside information. Fair play to the Leicestershire police they did act to honor their cooperation with the Portuguese to protect the integrity of the case, where the problem lies is that until such time that the Leicester cops went to court to contest Judge Hoggs initial ruling WE have no idea the damage that was done.
In any case why is Madeleine McCann a ward of court? and what does it amount to. From what I can see it amounts to nothing more than an attempt to undermine the system.
By the way 10pm evening of May 3, Kate was running of to the Tapas bar leaving the twins home alone and such, and Gerry was busy on the phone.
Anyone remember who Gerry called after 10pm that evening and the significance of that call?

mira2 wrote:[...].
By the way 10pm evening of May 3, Kate was running of to the Tapas bar leaving the twins home alone and such, and Gerry was busy on the phone.
Anyone remember who Gerry called after 10pm that evening and the significance of that call?

***
"Gerry was busy on the phone". Do you have a link to that? TA

In any case why is Madeleine McCann a ward of court?

To me, this is one of the most perplexing questions. No parents would give up legal custody of their missing child, even worse they made the application after just a mere 12 days after Maddie disappeared. And made the application when they launched the Fund. If Maddie was ever found she could not go back to her parents as the courts have legal custody of her. Why on earth is Maddie a Ward of Court, she is missing and I cannot see a single valid reason for this

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Yesterday at 11:22 pm

mira2 wrote:[...].
By the way 10pm evening of May 3, Kate was running of to the Tapas bar leaving the twins home alone and such, and Gerry was busy on the phone.
Anyone remember who Gerry called after 10pm that evening and the significance of that call?

***
"Gerry was busy on the phone". Do you have a link to that
_________
Chatelaine,
I do not keep links in this case, I am a hit and miss affair.
For me the mystery of Madeleine Mc Cann involves nothing other than the movements of the Tapas Group evening of May 3, for some reason they are reluctant to cooperate fully with the investigation, they prefer to hide behind expensive extradition lawyers, and threathen anyone who dare make accusations against them, at the expense of others of course and with much help from some corrupt media outlets and greedy PR agents.

I do not know if you are new to this case, but I have always found it surprising that noone regardless what side of the fense they are on wants to pick up on Gerrys first call of the evening.
In fact give Jill her due it was from this site that I first picked up on this. For me it is of major importance, and logic tells me that when you remove the PR spin you are left with the facts.

I cant remember where this information is archived .........Gerry made a call on evening of May 3, first call after 10pm to an old Uni mate who just so happened to be New labours mover and shaker at the time. Perhaps someone on here who keeps logs can point you in the right direction.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Today at 1:08 am

In any case why is Madeleine McCann a ward of court?

To me, this is one of the most perplexing questions. No parents would give up legal custody of their missing child, even worse they made the application after just a mere 12 days after Maddie disappeared. And made the application when they launched the Fund. If Maddie was ever found she could not go back to her parents as the courts have legal custody of her. Why on earth is Maddie a Ward of Court, she is missing and I cannot see a single valid reason for this
_________
jd, I am with you, no parent faced with the horror of having their child stolen would take steps to invoke a court order effectively distancing themselves from said child, it makes no logical sence. And then you have the same parents attempting to derail the police investigation by hiring extradition lawyers, and making statements to the media that they are okies with the fact that their fellow Tapas party Group, i.e. group of males who were supposedly sent to check on the 3 under 4 year olds left alone doors ajar are beyond suspician. Hmmmmmmm
jd, I get so frustrated with this case not because of the McCanns but because of the corruption that is our politicians, and the fact that they are above the law. It is wrong, and no way are we in the UK a Democracy, we are a sick society, it started with Thatcher, it should have ended there, the problem was Murdoch remained after Thatcher and Blair was his puppet. the rest is history and a history we should all be ashamed of. In a just society the likes of Blair and Murdoch would have long time ago been arrested for war crimes. It pains me that the UK today is so defunct and so downtrodden and its people are so selfish and so into themselves that they cannot, and will not, lift a finger to speak out about injustices that will affect generations to come.

Ribisl wrote:

friedtomatoes wrote:

tcat wrote:I don't think that's what he means at all. He makes a lot more sense in the 3rd video than he did on Panorama (but perhaps the Panorama clips were sloppily edited or hastily produced) - he says they have completely open minds about the case, are still collating all the evidence and therefore in no position to rule out either of the possibilities that Madeleine is alive or dead. In case she is still alive we have produced the age progressed picture and if she is still alive it's most likely she was actually abducted by a stranger, he says, but nowhere in these videos (or on Panorama I think) does he say we've reached or are reaching the conclusion that she was abducted - he's just saying while we're still gathering and examining all of the evidence we have to be open minded to all possibilities.

I think we have to be fair to Mr Redwood, I'm sure he's well aware you know who will begin spinning furiously if he's not very careful with his words.

Maybe he shouldn't have done all these interviews (maybe he didn't want to do them, but was told to? Who knows)

his position is clear listen here at 2 30 HE believes she is still alive and a stranger took her and goes on to talk about other cases where children are found years later
what about the cadaver dog andy??????????
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Dan Lobb:

Do you believe she is still alive?

Redwood:

Yes I do.

Yes, he makes his opinion absolutely clear in that interview. I am surprised he has taken that stance and don't understand what has led him to that opinion, but evidently that's what he believes. If his aim was simply to keep the MCs guessing, then I don't think they would have spent their resources producing that age progression picture.

Yes, he does come across as having said it with a certainty, or a high degree of conviction (to himself at least) that he believes Maddie is alive.

Yes, the age enhancement image is done for that purpose, else it just defeats the cost and time to get that done. So I, too, wonder what evidence within the files convinced him of that? That bit of evidence must be overwhelmingly strong for him to take the stance, exactly what that is I would certainly be interested to know, and why is he not handing thisover to the PJ if he has that crucial bit of info that indicates Maddie is alive.

I find it hard to swallow that he's playing the blinder there, more like he's talking out of his arse when he said with conviction Maddie is alive when he didnt indicate what evidence supports his firm belief.

jd wrote:

tigger wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:

sami wrote: [...]
Was there a court decision though to with hold the files from the McCanns ? This being the case, would this not take precedence over any normal procedures or rights in a case review ? Hopefully somebody here can answer.

***
If memory serves me, this was Leicester LE files, which they didn't get. They only got [copies of] their own files back.

Madeleine McCann: parents' court bid for information Telegraph

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
Last Updated: 7:26PM BST 20/06/2008

Kate and Gerry McCann are to ask a High Court judge to order the release of police documents which they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The McCanns hope their application to Mrs Justice Hogg will result in Leicestershire Police opening their files on scores of reported sightings of Madeleine, most of which have been passed on to them by police in Portugal, where the four-year-old disappeared in May last year.

Until now police in Leicestershire, the McCanns' home county, have refused the couple's requests for information about sightings, saying they are bound by the terms of an agreement with Portuguese police. unquote

AND

Documents handed over to the McCanns without informing the Attorney General Diário de Notícias

FILIPA AMBRÓSIO DE SOUSA
8th July 2008
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation

Investigation. The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro. unquote

Thank you Tigger, this is what I was looking for. They are trying to get access to the undisclosed files in order to find out what the PJ have on them, remember it is not true the abduction, so they are thinking on what the PJ have that could be a serious exposure on them. In 2008 they went under the guise using "Reported sightings" (like now) and " they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine"...the mccanns know there isn't a real search and the mccanns know there was never an abduction so all they are interested in is keeping the cover up & making sure the PJ don't get near to the truth. The withheld files are worrying them and they are dying to get their hands on them

Also, Lord Justice Hogg is the legal guardian of Maddie. I am sure whatever files he has, the mccanns have the right to see it

The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro.

....This is very interesting

Tigger, thank you very much.

JD, looks like you are right.

The ward of court issue is one of the less well publicised and strangest issues in this story. A child abducted, then you sign her over to the courts, for me it would feel like giving her away, loosing her a second time. This action back fired though as regard the libel cases, am I correct ? They cannot join Madeleine in their libel actions. Bit of a muck up there by McCann and Healy, very unlike them. Badly thought out, hasty decision at the time or a necessary course of action ?

If there is a thread here on the WOC could somebody point me in the direction please ?

sami wrote:

jd wrote:

tigger wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:

sami wrote: [...]
Was there a court decision though to with hold the files from the McCanns ? This being the case, would this not take precedence over any normal procedures or rights in a case review ? Hopefully somebody here can answer.

***
If memory serves me, this was Leicester LE files, which they didn't get. They only got [copies of] their own files back.

Madeleine McCann: parents' court bid for information Telegraph

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
Last Updated: 7:26PM BST 20/06/2008

Kate and Gerry McCann are to ask a High Court judge to order the release of police documents which they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The McCanns hope their application to Mrs Justice Hogg will result in Leicestershire Police opening their files on scores of reported sightings of Madeleine, most of which have been passed on to them by police in Portugal, where the four-year-old disappeared in May last year.

Until now police in Leicestershire, the McCanns' home county, have refused the couple's requests for information about sightings, saying they are bound by the terms of an agreement with Portuguese police. unquote

AND

Documents handed over to the McCanns without informing the Attorney General Diário de Notícias

FILIPA AMBRÓSIO DE SOUSA
8th July 2008
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation

Investigation. The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro. unquote

Thank you Tigger, this is what I was looking for. They are trying to get access to the undisclosed files in order to find out what the PJ have on them, remember it is not true the abduction, so they are thinking on what the PJ have that could be a serious exposure on them. In 2008 they went under the guise using "Reported sightings" (like now) and " they hope will kick-start the search for their missing daughter Madeleine"...the mccanns know there isn't a real search and the mccanns know there was never an abduction so all they are interested in is keeping the cover up & making sure the PJ don't get near to the truth. The withheld files are worrying them and they are dying to get their hands on them

Also, Lord Justice Hogg is the legal guardian of Maddie. I am sure whatever files he has, the mccanns have the right to see it

The British police released 81 documents from the investigation into the Maddie case to the McCann family due to a decision from the High Court in London. A fact that was not made known to the Portuguese PJ or to the Republic's Attorney General, Pinto Monteiro.

....This is very interesting

Tigger, thank you very much.

JD, looks like you are right.

The ward of court issue is one of the less well publicised and strangest issues in this story. A child abducted, then you sign her over to the courts, for me it would feel like giving her away, loosing her a second time. This action back fired though as regard the libel cases, am I correct ? They cannot join Madeleine in their libel actions. Bit of a muck up there by McCann and Healy, very unlike them. Badly thought out, hasty decision at the time or a necessary course of action ?

If there is a thread here on the WOC could somebody point me in the direction please ?

This is a rather rushed thought.
Would this WOC situation have an impact on Tony Bennett's forthcoming court hearings.
Is Madeleine included in the claims made by the McCanns against Tony.