SY ANNOUNCEMENT 2pm 4/7/13

PEANUT66 wrote:Hi all, Newbie here. I think with all that's happened lurkers are getting the courage to come onto the site and join in the discussion. I came across this site a couple of months ago, not really knowing anything about the case...All I can say now is WOW You couldn't even write a  fiction book with this!

I felt compelled after the latest revelations to give my opinion.

I think that Kate and Gerrys reaction speaks volumes...when have they ever been so quiet? When has Mr.Pink been so quiet?  The faces of the McCanns at poor Madeleine's virgil speaks louder than words.    I personally think there is so much more that is going on that hasn't been said.  The way the statement is worded has been chosen VERY carefully.

I myself along with all you good people on here just want justice for "the little girl with no voice"

russiandoll wrote:Merely was saying what I read and heard. Third party references to eliminations which were not in anything I read or heard directly from DCI Redwood.
 It might well be the case that the 9 are not of interest, or were of interest and have been eliminated, it is the case that I did not hear this in anything I saw of Redwood speaking.

aiyoyo wrote:
Just ask yourself why the Portuguese should or would oblige the CPS or the UK Government just to satisfy MET whitewash (if that is the objective)?

russiandoll wrote:I am waiting for the person who heard Redwood talk about elimination of tapas 9 in his interview with tv to show me when and where, because I saw it and never heard anything of the sort, just talk of 38 people who were there at the time. The tapas lot might well have been eliminated, but contrary to what twitter is buzzing with, I do not think Redwood said that, but the media.
 As always I stand to be corrected!

Clouseau wrote:Just clicked and listened to sky news again and yes the reference to the gang being eliminated has been edited out....don't say anything until the mic is off Mr Redwood 

nomendelta wrote:I don't understand how anyone here can put a positive spin on it.

Redwood says there is "no evidence" to suggest Maddie is dead...that then leads to encouraging us all to be vigilant and keep on looking for Maddie.

This is not a "well she might be, she might not" statement - we all know about the dogs, the blood and the cadaverine. For Redwood to state categorically that there is no proof that she is dead means that everything connected with the dogs has been discounted.

This looks more and more like a whitewash to me.

It is very unusual though - even though it's been 6 years since the abduction surely if there was any belief she was alive they'd be getting on with searching those 38 persons of interest?

If this had been a more current abduction there's no way police would be making announcements like that - they'd be vague and getting on with tracking her down.

I have no idea where this is all headed but I really doubt it's about getting the real culprits.

MaryB wrote:Seems a very strange investigation indeed if the police do not want to re-interiew those very people who were among the very last to see Madeleine alive.  Still it's SY.  They must know what they're doing.

aiyoyo wrote:One has to ask what the CPS hope to get when they submit the International Letter of Request for "evidence" from Portuguese to help their line of inquiry.

If the Portuguese should deny CPS their request (just like the UK authorities denied Portuguese' request for credit cards and medical records), what are the Review Team/CPS going to do?   Surely MPS would become a joke if they were to close the review after having prolonged it only to announce Portuguese denied them access to evidence, so end of the road!

Just ask yourself why the Portuguese should or would oblige the CPS or the UK Government just to satisfy MET whitewash (if that is the objective)?

1. They now know that they will never solve the case, but can’t bring themselves to say so.  They want it to go away and for everyone to get on with their lives, including the McCanns, however much it might gall people.  After months more of deliberation they will accept the PJ’s conclusion of unproveability (if that's a word), but with the caveat that the PJ arrived at the same answer, but for the wrong reasons.
   
2. This is a whitewash pure and simple, and perhaps, just for once the lightning rod of conspiracy theory really has been struck.  Many of those around now will have long been pensioned off, and probably met their maker by then.  Hopefully, in their case it will be the bloke downstairs.  So in that sense it is a get out of jail card for all the guilty including those who have been protected.
   
3. There is evidence in this case that trumps any measures of doubt that believers in Madeleine’s death and those likely responsible can throw at it.  Something we just don’t know.  If it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt then it a foul tasting medicine that I and others like me are just going to have to swallow.
   

Newintown wrote:

russiandoll wrote:I am waiting for the person who heard Redwood talk about elimination of tapas 9 in his interview with tv to show me when and where, because I saw it and never heard anything of the sort, just talk of 38 people who were there at the time. The tapas lot might well have been eliminated, but contrary to what twitter is buzzing with, I do not think Redwood said that, but the media.
 As always I stand to be corrected!

That's what I believe I heard Redwood say, although it's 5 hours ago now and I don't have any recording equipment to record these interviews.  That's why I was so enraged when I heard the interview.   Graham Wettone, former MET police officer, actually said "the McCanns and their holidays friends are not under any suspicion".

So how would you interpret it?