Questions you would like to ask Andy Redwood-a hypothetical exercise-

Clay Regazzoni wrote:"Is this the way to Amarillo?"

"Do you really want to hurt me?"

"Hello? Is it me you're looking for?"

"Why why why, Delilah?"

"Do ya think I'm sexy?"

"Can I kick it?"

etc. etc. ad nauseum (expert use of latin there, especially for Russian Doll)

As you can tell, I'm losing the ability to take Mr Redwood seriously. If he doesn't crack the case in the next six weeks ten minutes I'm going to start following him around, singing these. And you really don't want to be around to hear that.

You'll just be adding a new suspect to the list. 'The Mad Singer' - and could be linked to the weird/not ver nice guitarist Gerry noticed that day they went to the beach and had icecreams, which didn't happen but that iffy Guitarist was there and possibly part of a team and now we have a singer here who clearly needs a bit of guidance on the tunes...   

"Do you believe in magic?"

You're nothing more than a tacky magician Redwood, pulling umpteen rabbits from a hat when the audience can clearly see all evidence leads to the McCanns!

Why have you had to deliver documents by hand to Portugal, and were you surprised to be photographed doing so?

Jane Tanner allowed Dave Edgar/McCann (when making their own documentary) to change her version of events re which side of the road she had seen McCann & Wilkins standing chatting.  How did she react DCI Redwood, when you told her you'd had a revelation moment and that Tannerman was to be disposed of?  Was she the same easy pushover as in the Edgar/McCann production?

PJ said Tanner not a reliable witness - clearly not, and not only in respect of her descriptions of the man & child she claims to have seen.  Can you imagine this woman in Court being questioned, she'd change her story at the drop of a hat if either the prosecution or defence suggested to her it would be a 'nice thing to do.'

Definitely the weakest link!

Has she already spilled the beans Andy?

Andy
Do you think the British people are gormless cnuts?
What do you think of Pat Brown and Wendy Murphy. Their logic tells them that the parents are lying?
Have you been told by a "higher authority" to protect someone regardless of the fact that it may involve (deleted)

The list is endless, but the above 3 answers would be appreciated. It must be very boring for your team of "experienced investigators" to be working so called tirelessly but how long can even they keep the act up for?
     

Could you just send a memo to Sir Bernard and remind him which investigation is called 'Operation Grange', please?

worriedmum wrote:Could you just send a memo to Sir Bernard and remind him which investigation is called 'Operation Grange', please?

I think LadyinRed already reminded him worriedmum.   Good on her.

I still remain surprised that the BBC did not let him know what questions were going to be asked.

Do you know for an absolute fact that Madeleine was carried in pregnancy by KM?

Have you interviewed Dave Edgar - never seen someone looking so uncomfortable telling lies, reckon he would spill the beans within seconds.

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

my question to redwood:

when will we see you again?

My question is, Detective Redwood, you have stated that you intend to go back to the inception of this case and investigate it as if it were a crime committed in the UK. Would you not agree that the very first priority in a missing person case is to establish the last known independent sighting of the person in question.

In the matter of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the last independent sighting appears to emanate from a Catriona Baker. Have you or any of your officers reinterviewed her and confirmed that she is indeed a credible witness?

In view of the latest press release, I would like to ask the question  I first asked when I started this thread last July-


My question is 'What do you think the British trained police dogs, Eddie and Keela, were alerting to?

The time for questioning AR has passed and I just want to give him a slap round the head and tell him to get his arse in gear and start making arrests 

So, Andy, was Madeleine 'alive' OR 'dead' when she 'left' her holiday apartment?

< channels AR >

"Well er, jean, tut we're working on the assumption that Madeleine may have been um dead or erm she may have been alive when she was taken from her holiday apartment".

Mr Redwood, why are you not demanding that the T9 go back to Portugal for that all important reconstruction?
How can you take everything back to zero and accept nothing when you have 'evolving' witness statements from the T9 and the parents that remain open to scrutiny?

Hicks wrote:Mr Redwood, why are you not demanding that the T9 go back to Portugal for that all important reconstruction?
How can you take everything back to zero and accept nothing when you have 'evolving' witness statements from the T9 and the parents that remain open to scrutiny?

Has he blinked yet? When AR blinks it'll mean the hypnosis has worn off and he's telling the truth. Fact.   

 
 
 
 

tigger wrote:

Hicks wrote:Mr Redwood, why are you not demanding that the T9 go back to Portugal for that all important reconstruction?
How can you take everything back to zero and accept nothing when you have 'evolving' witness statements from the T9 and the parents that remain open to scrutiny?

Has he blinked yet? When AR blinks it'll mean the hypnosis has worn off and he's telling the truth. Fact.   

 

tigger wrote:

Hicks wrote:Mr Redwood, why are you not demanding that the T9 go back to Portugal for that all important reconstruction?
How can you take everything back to zero and accept nothing when you have 'evolving' witness statements from the T9 and the parents that remain open to scrutiny?

Has he blinked yet? When AR blinks it'll mean the hypnosis has worn off and he's telling the truth. Fact.   

***
He blinked twice and once produced something like a vague smile   

tigger wrote:

Hicks wrote:Mr Redwood, why are you not demanding that the T9 go back to Portugal for that all important reconstruction?
How can you take everything back to zero and accept nothing when you have 'evolving' witness statements from the T9 and the parents that remain open to scrutiny?

Has he blinked yet? When AR blinks it'll mean the hypnosis has worn off and he's telling the truth. Fact.   

Yes tigger........the eyes have it...       I'll keep watching!

tigger wrote:

Hicks wrote:Mr Redwood, why are you not demanding that the T9 go back to Portugal for that all important reconstruction?
How can you take everything back to zero and accept nothing when you have 'evolving' witness statements from the T9 and the parents that remain open to scrutiny?

Has he blinked yet? When AR blinks it'll mean the hypnosis has worn off and he's telling the truth. Fact.   

On the youtube clip of tonight's Crimewatch update, AR blinks at c0.19, 0.40, 0.44, 0.51, 1.34, 2.09, 2.25.

c1.47 he shakes his head and makes another similar gesture a few seconds later.  At c2.50, he momentarily looks as if he's about to burst out laughing.  For the remainder of the update his features have a distinctly jovial look to them. 

Whatever else you may think of him, tigger, Andy sure tells a convincing lie - unlike the prime suspects, their cohorts, and the ubiquitous pink lapdog. 

ultimaThule wrote:

tigger wrote:

Hicks wrote:Mr Redwood, why are you not demanding that the T9 go back to Portugal for that all important reconstruction?
How can you take everything back to zero and accept nothing when you have 'evolving' witness statements from the T9 and the parents that remain open to scrutiny?

Has he blinked yet? When AR blinks it'll mean the hypnosis has worn off and he's telling the truth. Fact.   

On the youtube clip of tonight's Crimewatch update, AR blinks at c0.19, 0.40, 0.44, 0.51, 1.34, 2.09, 2.25.

c1.47 he shakes his head and makes another similar gesture a few seconds later.  At c2.50, he momentarily looks as if he's about to burst out laughing.  For the remainder of the update his features have a distinctly jovial look to them. 

Whatever else you may think of him, tigger, Andy sure tells a convincing lie - unlike the prime suspects, their cohorts, and the ubiquitous pink lapdog. 

Ah! From the description above it seems I was wrong, the hypnosis is or has worn off and hysteria has set in. Now we will never know the truth from AR.

He's no doubt pottering round the house even now, wondering whether It's safe to go out in this dangerous world full of foreign binmen, gypsies and the lights, the Lights! in the studio last night, did I say binman? Was it right? Where's my book of suspects? Somebody's hidden it, I'm not paranoid, they're all after me, but I smiled, I smiled last night, that will fool them. Why do all these policemen in Portugal speak in a foreign language? That's libel, they're talking about me. No slander, there was - musn't mention libel, nobody's supposed to know about that or dogs - they're gone now. Where's my razor? Ha! Ozzam, Octarini, no Occam has my razor, they're all out to get me, where's Dr. Roberts when you need him?  

Yes Occam's Razor.

My question would be : Why does everyone believe that Madeleine was carried away rather than possibly driven
away?

I read that no-one had access to a car but depending on timelines and the GNRs arrival did they the GNR
officers see any cars in the car park when they arrived? Or did any families in the block hear any cars
starting up in the Car Park at the back of the apartments before the kerfuffle started?

worriedmum wrote:In view of the latest press release, I would like to ask the question  I first asked when I started this thread last July-


My question is 'What do you think the British trained police dogs, Eddie and Keela, were alerting to?

 This is the third time I have posted this question, but it seems to me, in view of the ever-changing pick and mix of 'suspects' 'persons of interest', smelly/ flat/ mediterranean/ caucasian/ cleaning/soothing/ dead/alive helpfully target-wearing/male/female , all of whom have been helpfully tipped off by the main stream media, that this question is of tantamount importance to the investigation-


'What do you think the British trained police dogs, Eddie and Keela, were alerting to?

worriedmum wrote:

worriedmum wrote:In view of the latest press release, I would like to ask the question  I first asked when I started this thread last July-


My question is 'What do you think the British trained police dogs, Eddie and Keela, were alerting to?

 This is the third time I have posted this question, but it seems to me, in view of the ever-changing pick and mix of 'suspects' 'persons of interest', smelly/ flat/ mediterranean/ caucasian/ cleaning/soothing/ dead/alive helpfully target-wearing/male/female , all of whom have been helpfully tipped off by the main stream media, that this question is of tantamount importance to the investigation-


'What do you think the British trained police dogs, Eddie and Keela, were alerting to?

Oh yes the dogs. This is animated equivalent of the blessed shutters.

The fact is for Mr Redwood ( if he or his team have read the Portuguese case files?) is that the dogs are not the product of Mr Amaral's fevered imagination written down in his book they were a logical process following on from not having found Madeleine and the appeal to Dani Krugel to use his finding a body machine.  Early on when the search for Madeleine was a material fact and not just a passing wish/hope the British police offered the use of dogs to the PJ and they initially refused them. But as time wore on and no answers were forthcoming from the ordinary search desperate times required desperate measures and the dogs were brought in. True that without corroborating evidence ( DNA and other body fluids etc) as well as the strange corroboration of Madeleine's DNA as opposed to the heel stick nuclear DNA which 5 doctors - many forensic scientists as well as police forensics surpriingly forgot to ask for instead, then we were treated to many don't knows when we and the media could have been told that the tests showed that it was out of the question or that it was an answer to the question of whether what  Keela and Eddie indicated to really was ( or definitely wasn't ) anything related to Madeleine. Add to that the question for all the investigating officers concerned: Regardless of the subjective witnesses who said they left/saw Madeleine in 5a on the day or the night is there any objective evidence ( i.e. scientifc ) that Madeleine was in 5a that night to be removed either way by an abductor or anyone else?


Many posters on many forums have asked that question but I have never heard any former investigator Portuguese or British ( not even good old Brunty from Sky News ) ask themselves the question that: if there is no objective scientifc evidence that Madeleine was in 5a
that night then a possibility might be that she was removed from another apartment or somewhere else possibly by someone else?

Even if you are chasing the latest person of interest that doesn't change the fundemental question of where Madeleine was in order to be removed? You can only discount that theory if you believe that the witnesses are all telling the truth. DI Redwood has accepted that
he has been told the truth despite reading the case files. I don't think he has or if he has then he and his team have a very strange interpretation of circumstantial evidence and a terrible grasp of science.

Ask the dogs Andy? Or better still ask Martin Grimes and the man who requested the dogs - a British police officer from the UK.
Co-operation across the forces is being asked of the PJ. Have a crack at that internally in the UK  liaising with other forces. You
might not like the answers so maybe best not to ask the questions?

XTC 'You might not like the answers so maybe best not to ask the questions?'


Yes, XTC I think that would be about right.

worriedmum wrote:

worriedmum wrote:In view of the latest press release, I would like to ask the question  I first asked when I started this thread last July-


My question is 'What do you think the British trained police dogs, Eddie and Keela, were alerting to?

 This is the third time I have posted this question, but it seems to me, in view of the ever-changing pick and mix of 'suspects' 'persons of interest', smelly/ flat/ mediterranean/ caucasian/ cleaning/soothing/ dead/alive helpfully target-wearing/male/female , all of whom have been helpfully tipped off by the main stream media, that this question is of tantamount importance to the investigation-


'What do you think the British trained police dogs, Eddie and Keela, were alerting to?

They were alerting to what they were trained to alert to Worriedmum, the smell of cadaver and blood, or am I missing something?

Yes Cristobell, that is the hypothetical question I would like Andy Redwood to answer(OP)

Given that a cadaver appeared to have been in the hired car, and, granted, it could have simply been stored there for a time, nevertheless does it not strike you that the body may instead have actually been buried a car's drive away from the apartment rather than within walking distance?