Re: Game over?

by comperedna 29.03.14 17:39

Woofer... I assure you people do write to Mr Redwood. Whether his many minions allow him to see what they write is another matter.

by shabba 29.03.14 18:41

Woofer wrote:@Maria - Perhaps someone ought to write to AR (special delivery of course).

Dear Detective Inspector Redwood,
I enclose a great scenario for your team to clear Mr. and Mrs. McCann.
YS

Don't think you'll need to put ideas in their head,remember this is the same crowd who told us that someone had climbed inside a bag and zipped himself inside it!

by aiyoyo 29.03.14 22:58

Tony Bennett wrote:@ aiyoyo

Good morning.

Your basic observation that there has been a major drop-off in the number of 'sightings' since Operation Grange began its work on May 2011 is correct - though there have been some even in the past three years.

But just suppose, for the sake of argument, that you were the parents of a missing child, and - for whatever reason - you wanted the world to believe that s/he had been abducted.

Then suppose that after four years, having set up a large fund to 'look for' your missing child, the money is running out. You have spent a small fortune organising a campaign, and hiring a series of dodgy detective agencies that, so far, have produced nothing except that they have succeeded in parading before the public 20 or more suspects or 'persons of interest' and had helped to promote hundreds of 'sightings' of your child in dozens of countries.

How would you feel if, after those four years, you were offered the following:

* A review personally ordered by the Prime Minister of your country

* The Prime Minister's spokesman explicitly states on the record that the purpose of the review is to help you and your family

* The review then pays for an age-progressed artist's sketch of your child and promotes this across all the TV and print media, urging the nation, once again, to look for her

* The head of the review team says repeatedly that neither you nor your friends are suspects

* The review team becomes an investigation team that produces a succession of e-fits and suspects, either dead or alive, and after nearly three years says: 'we've eliminated 22, but there are still 38 to go'

* The head of the operation says that his team have carried out 'actions' measured in the thousands - and have thousands more to do

* The head of the operation says he may need another 2 or 3 years to examine mobile 'phone records measured in tens of thousands in 30 countries

* The head of the operation says he is checking on the whereabouts in 2007 of over 500 registerd sex offenders.

How would you feel?

Elated (in this case in question) that attention is diverted everywhere else away from the DOGS !

SY had submitted nearly 250 requests on 3 ILORs that still need to be looked at first, before the DOGS will get any attention (if ever).

This has the potential of going on for another few dozen lots of 3 years until the Mccanns are six feet underground before the Truth is out.

by aiyoyo 29.03.14 23:09

PeterMac wrote:To pick up on TB's analysis

How would you feel it you were the parent of a child who had been abducted

The first detective agency announced they were going to have her back by Christmas - and then did nothing
The second detective agency - did nothing
The third (or fourth) agency announced they knew she was being held within 10 miles of the village - and then did nothing

A large team from Scotland Yard spent three years on the case - but did nothing
They then anounced they had suspects - and then did nothing
The Commissioner announced that he had names of suspects - and then did nothing

And so on.

What is the correct response in these circumstances ?

Answer : Go for a run. ?

Question : BUT......what about the special cadaverine odour ?

by Mirage 29.03.14 23:29

shabba wrote:
Woofer wrote:@Maria - Perhaps someone ought to write to AR (special delivery of course).

Dear Detective Inspector Redwood,
I enclose a great scenario for your team to clear Mr. and Mrs. McCann.
YS

Don't think you'll need to put ideas in their head,remember this is the same crowd who told us that someone had climbed inside a bag and zipped himself inside it!

With no evidence of a third party in the flat, according to Martin Hewitt Deputy Assistant Commander SY. I Understand there was no forensic evidence of Gareth in the vicinity of the bath either from reports I read.

The same Hewitt who recently said of Operation Grange, 'The process is the process' when commenting on the slowness of the PJ.

It's all a bit like a ten tonne truck approaching in slow motion with 'annihilate' written on the front..

So very predictable.

by Angelique 29.03.14 23:43

Cristobell

I am sorry I did not respond to your post.

I think that the general public are tiring anyway, as has been mentioned. IMO Cameron would have this mapped out already, that we would eventually tire of this waste of taxpayers money, SY would not be able to find a scapegoat and finally close the investigation.

I wish it was somehow different but all I see from this Government is self interest.

by aiyoyo 30.03.14 2:00

Cristobell wrote:
I am similarly buoyed Nglfi! He comes across as quite determined to discover what happened to Madeleine, and I well believe his words are scripted. I don't know if other high profile cases have forums such as this one, but SY are well aware of the social media side of the McCann campaign and the way in which their statements are scrutinized by experts in forensic linguistics! SY also know that the McCanns are accomplished manipulators of the media, and it may be that SY are using the media too.

Really ? Is that a fact - that Redwood team spend their time reading forensic linguistics by "experts" on THIS forum?
Do you seriously believe that or do you know it for a fact ?
So now according to you, SY is in the same league as the Mccanns ie use the media to manipulate ? Why would SY need to manipulate ?
Police are supposed to deliver facts, and not spin.
Also, I thought Police do not conduct their investigation under the Press radar ?

Incidentally, you don't seriously think Op Grange read your posts here do you ?
Or are you saying they have so much time on hands they can afford to browse this forum leisurely and be selective what they read on this forum ?

I don't think there is a massive rift between the two sources either, merely by the fact that DCI Redwood and some of his team hand delivered bundles of documents to the PJ, and of course the visit to Portugal of the high ranking officers from the CPS.

Scotland Yard are not looking for a live child, as is obvious from their recent CW broadcasts, and death in the apartment theory is a theory they are now following. They may well have been following it before (my guess is they were), but they have only now they have stated it publicly and it does not sit with his statement at the beginning of the Review, that the parents and their friends were not suspects. Many thanks, much needed cheer!

At this snail pace it's not wrong to say they are not looking for a live child.

by ultimaThule 30.03.14 2:48

On a point of information, Cristobell, AR said that 'Madeleine may not have left apartment 5A alive' which statement in itself does not equate to a "death in the apartment theory", nor does it indicate that your theory is one "they are now following".

There will of course be speculation here as to what alternative meaning may be read into AR's words, but IMO such speculation should not be disseminated on social networks by those who are known to be members of this forum as it can only serve to adversely reflect on the credibility of the membership as a whole.

by Bishop Brennan 30.03.14 6:48

UT is correct that AR's statement allows that she could have died in or before reaching the apartment. Nevertheless, even to quietly acknowledge that "she may not have been alive when she left the apartment" is significant. In the early days and even in CW, the focus appeared to be exclusively about abduction and a potentially alive Maddie. There has been a subtle but important change in official statements, even though it is only one of many lines of enquiry.

Personally I agree with aiyoyo that the police deliver facts and operate away from the media glare. Of course the recent appearances by BHH on radio, and AR on various CW programs, along with the current plebgate, Lawrence, hillsborough, document-shredding stories caution us to remember that this is not always the case.

by IKNOWWHATHAPPENED 30.03.14 7:04

REDWOOD is obviously a smart man and as such I have no doubt whatsoever he knows MM is dead, foulplay is involved and most likely whodunnit.

That being said REDWOOD takes orders from above, the MET is as corrupt as it has ever been and he has been told what the outcome of the investigation is.

MM is a political affair and has been from day one and there will never be a resolution.

IMO.

by Carrry On Doctor 30.03.14 8:49

Bishop Brennan wrote:UT is correct that AR's statement allows that she could have died in or before reaching the apartment. Nevertheless, even to quietly acknowledge that "she may not have been alive when she left the apartment" is significant. In the early days and even in CW, the focus appeared to be exclusively about abduction and a potentially alive Maddie. There has been a subtle but important change in official statements, even though it is only one of many lines of enquiry.

Agree with the above. SY's recent acceptance of death in the apartment is significant, and is a continuation of the gradual erosion of the story.

I do share Crostobels' optimism, and a whitewash could have been achieved many years ago.

SY know exactly what they are doing in the absence of tangible evidence - grinding away. The T9 are being played, and they know it.

IMO of course

by The Rooster 30.03.14 8:53

So tell us what happened then...

by **tigger** 30.03.14 9:50

Bishop Brennan wrote:UT is correct that AR's statement allows that she could have died in or before reaching the apartment. Nevertheless, even to quietly acknowledge that "she may not have been alive when she left the apartment" is significant. In the early days and even in CW, the focus appeared to be exclusively about abduction and a potentially alive Maddie. There has been a subtle but important change in official statements, even though it is only one of many lines of enquiry.

Personally I agree with aiyoyo that the police deliver facts and operate away from the media glare. Of course the recent appearances by BHH on radio, and AR on various CW programs, along with the current plebgate, Lawrence, hillsborough, document-shredding stories caution us to remember that this is not always the case.

The sheer duration of the investigation adds credibility to whatever they will come up with.
In the course of it they've discredited the Tanner sighting, implying that the PJ have implicitly believed it all that time.
A result. (Stupid PJ)
Burglars and various other accidental abductors are fielded. All presumably overlooked by the PJ.
After three years and getting on for half a million man hours it's suggested that Maddie could have died during the abduction.
Be interesting if Eddie's alert in the flowerbed will be used . Giving an opportunity for an abductor not realising she was dead.
Finally it can be presumed that either X, Y or Z are probably guilty but either dead or living in Ulan Bator.
Well done SY, suitable interviews with parents who are keeping the Ltd.Co. alive along with Maddie, although they will be giving .00001% to anyone losing a child whilst on holiday from now on.

by ultimaThule 30.03.14 12:27

Bishop Brennan wrote:UT is correct that AR's statement allows that she could have died in or before reaching the apartment. Nevertheless, even to quietly acknowledge that "she may not have been alive when she left the apartment" is significant. In the early days and even in CW, the focus appeared to be exclusively about abduction and a potentially alive Maddie. There has been a subtle but important change in official statements, even though it is only one of many lines of enquiry.

Personally I agree with aiyoyo that the police deliver facts and operate away from the media glare. Of course the recent appearances by BHH on radio, and AR on various CW programs, along with the current plebgate, Lawrence, hillsborough, document-shredding stories caution us to remember that this is not always the case.

IMO AR's acknowledgement is hugely significant, Bishop.

IME those in the upper eschelons of power can be out of touch with what the rest of the population is thinking and I see this introduction to the possibility that Madeleine wasn't alive when she left the apartment as little more than an exercise in testing the water, as I have no doubt that the governments of two countries have no wish to see a return to those few months in 2007 when the McCanns were able to influence public opinion in their favour.

by Cristobell 30.03.14 13:50

Bishop Brennan wrote:UT is correct that AR's statement allows that she could have died in or before reaching the apartment. Nevertheless, even to quietly acknowledge that "she may not have been alive when she left the apartment" is significant. In the early days and even in CW, the focus appeared to be exclusively about abduction and a potentially alive Maddie. There has been a subtle but important change in official statements, even though it is only one of many lines of enquiry.

Personally I agree with aiyoyo that the police deliver facts and operate away from the media glare. Of course the recent appearances by BHH on radio, and AR on various CW programs, along with the current plebgate, Lawrence, hillsborough, document-shredding stories caution us to remember that this is not always the case.

Imo, not alive means dead, ergo at some time she was dead in the apartment - whether she died there, was moved, whatever, dead in the apartment means the parents are involved, because no scenario allows cadaverine to develop in less than 30 minutes, the times of the checks, or the even 50 minutes that elapsed between Gerry seeing Madeleine alive and Kate declaring her missing.

Everyone uses the media, and it would be naive to think that the police don't - they have Facebook pages and Twitter accounts and no doubt a dedicated department with media experts. I agree the track record of the Met is not good, I read the follow up article on police corruption in yesterday's Mail, and it makes chilling reading. However, the police involved had personal agendas, mostly financial, and were heavily involved with the criminal underworld. I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester.

by Cristobell 30.03.14 13:57

IKNOWWHATHAPPENED wrote:REDWOOD is obviously a smart man and as such I have no doubt whatsoever he knows MM is dead, foulplay is involved and most likely whodunnit.

That being said REDWOOD takes orders from above, the MET is as corrupt as it has ever been and he has been told what the outcome of the investigation is.

MM is a political affair and has been from day one and there will never be a resolution.

IMO.

I think Redwood is a smart man too IKNOWHATHAPPENED, and any hold ups/delays whatever, are undoubtedly political, I understand now what Goncalo Amaral mean't when he said political courage.

It remains to be seen if the Met are as corrupt as they ever were, but in view of Hillsborough, Stephen Lawrence and Daniel Morgan, now is not a good time to cover up what is already a hugely controversial case where the facts are freely available on the www.

by Cristobell 30.03.14 13:59

ultimaThule wrote:On a point of information, Cristobell, AR said that 'Madeleine may not have left apartment 5A alive' which statement in itself does not equate to a "death in the apartment theory", nor does it indicate that your theory is one "they are now following".

There will of course be speculation here as to what alternative meaning may be read into AR's words, but IMO such speculation should not be disseminated on social networks by those who are known to be members of this forum as it can only serve to adversely reflect on the credibility of the membership as a whole.

We have been disseminating theories on here for years, why should this one be different?

by Woofer 30.03.14 14:03

@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."

But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?

by **PeterMac** 30.03.14 14:08

Cristobell wrote:
IKNOWWHATHAPPENED wrote:REDWOOD is obviously a smart man and as such I have no doubt whatsoever he knows MM is dead, foulplay is involved and most likely whodunnit.
IMO.
I think Redwood is a smart man too IKNOWHATHAPPENED, and any hold ups/delays whatever, are undoubtedly political, I understand now what Goncalo Amaral mean't when he said political courage.

In fairness I don't think anyone has to be terribly smart or intelligent to have worked out that Madeleine is dead, and that therefore the "Fund" has been a fraud from the outset.
The dogs simply confirmed that fact, and gave a number of locations for the body, in exactly the way they did in the Zapata case, to which Kate so helpfully drew our attention in the autobiography - (Why the hell did she do that, by the way ?)
The McCanns' actions on the night of 3rd / 4th, and then into the following weeks again served only to confirm what Dr Amaral and the PJ, Leicester, Met, and everyone else concluded within a few hours of studying the available evidence.
I think the courage involved will be that of deciding when there is sufficient incontrovertible evidence to launch a prosecution, against whomsoever, for whatever crimes fall within the jurisdiction of the prosecution authorities concerned.

by Cristobell 30.03.14 14:22

ultimaThule wrote:
Bishop Brennan wrote:UT is correct that AR's statement allows that she could have died in or before reaching the apartment. Nevertheless, even to quietly acknowledge that "she may not have been alive when she left the apartment" is significant. In the early days and even in CW, the focus appeared to be exclusively about abduction and a potentially alive Maddie. There has been a subtle but important change in official statements, even though it is only one of many lines of enquiry.

Personally I agree with aiyoyo that the police deliver facts and operate away from the media glare. Of course the recent appearances by BHH on radio, and AR on various CW programs, along with the current plebgate, Lawrence, hillsborough, document-shredding stories caution us to remember that this is not always the case.

IMO AR's acknowledgement is hugely significant, Bishop.

IME those in the upper eschelons of power can be out of touch with what the rest of the population is thinking and I see this introduction to the possibility that Madeleine wasn't alive when she left the apartment as little more than an exercise in testing the water, as I have no doubt that the governments of two countries have no wish to see a return to those few months in 2007 when the McCanns were able to influence public opinion in their favour.

IMO its the most significant announcement if nearly 7 years! The last detective who suggested that has been pursued to hell and back by the McCanns and to this day there is one man in the UK who cannot say death, or the euphemistically worded 'not alive' and Madeleine in the same sentence!

Lets not play it down, its the first suggestion of death from the detective leading the SY investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance. It is of course obvious that they are not looking for a live Madeleine, that much is clear from the CW programs, but no matter how many interpretations we put on DCI Redwood's words, at some point Madeleine must have been dead in the apartment and it must have been for at least the 60/90 minutes it takes for cadaverine to develop. Not just in one place, but in two. Behind the sofa and in the wardrobe. Gerry claims Maddie was alive at 9.10 when he had his proud father moment. At 9.30 Matt claims he went into the apartment and noticed nothing unusual, though he didn't see Maddie, and the Kate claims at 10.00pm Maddie had disappeared. Even if we accept that Matt saw nothing, that only leaves 50 mins tops, and for some of that 50 minutes Gerry was outside the apartment chatting to Jez.

In addition, it was not only the McCanns' apartment the dogs reacted to, the smell of cadaverine was on a number of McCann related items and in the car they hired 28 days later. If SY's theory is based on the alerts of the dogs (and I believe it is and has been from the start) then there a number that cannot be accounted for if an intruder was responsible for Maddie's murder.

by j.rob 30.03.14 15:01

As this case has been so politically driven from the outset, I would imagine that the way in which the case unravels (I do believe it will, eventually) will also be governed by political interests. Timing is everything in politics. There are good times to bury bad news and there are bad times to bury good news. And so on. Politicians want to gain votes. The Government of the day have a need to keep at least a semblance of law and order and that means the public having at least some level of confidence in the police force, the NHS, our legal system and other professional/state bodies. I think this case demonstrated just how much sleaze there had been under B LIAR and it carried on under Brown. It happened at a very sensitive time politically and provided a convenient platform for many people to jump on. I think the unfolding of the case will also be governed at least in part by what else in going on politically and the prevailing mood and climate of the economy generally. There is also diplomacy to be considered - not just relations with Portugal but how the UK is perceived internationally. To continue to allow a bunch of mediocre and neglectful doctors to lead a major crime investigation, control and gag the media, launder money around in a fraudulent fund which finances libel suits against detractors would not be good for the UK's image. It's quite ironic really that Clarence Mitchell used to be involved in media relations for the Government. The zeal with which he attached himself to the McCann wagon from practically the outset was proof, in one were needed, that politics was always a defining feature of this case. Quite sickening really when you consider what the case SHOULD really be about.

by **tigger** 30.03.14 15:30

@j.rob. Clarence Mitchell controlled what came out in the news - therefore he also has privileged knowledgeof those things which were prevented from reaching the media. The last may yet help him to a blossoming career in politics.

Although - he seemed to be a perfect example of the Peter Principle, meaning that he occupied a position where he'd gone beyond his capabilities.
Personally I would think he'd reach the Peter Point by becoming an estate agent.

by Guest 30.03.14 15:39

tigger wrote:@j.rob. Clarence Mitchell controlled what came out in the news - therefore he also has privileged knowledgeof those things which were prevented from reaching the media. The last may yet help him to a blossoming career in politics.

Although - he seemed to be a perfect example of the Peter Principle, meaning that he occupied a position where he'd gone beyond his capabilities.
Personally I would think he'd reach the Peter Point by becoming an estate agent.

Can you please explain? I've got no problems with Textusa, nor with Blacksmith, but this is simply beyond me.
What's your point?

kindest regards

parapono

by **tigger** 30.03.14 15:42

parapono wrote:
tigger wrote:@j.rob. Clarence Mitchell controlled what came out in the news - therefore he also has privileged knowledgeof those things which were prevented from reaching the media. The last may yet help him to a blossoming career in politics.

Although - he seemed to be a perfect example of the Peter Principle, meaning that he occupied a position where he'd gone beyond his capabilities.
Personally I would think he'd reach the Peter Point by becoming an estate agent.
Can you please explain? I've got no problems with Textusa, nor with Blacksmith, but this is simply beyond me.
What's your point?

kindest regards

parapono

From wiki:
In an organizational structure, the assessment of the potential of an employee for a promotion is often based on their performance in the current job which results eventually in their being promoted to their highest level of competence and potentially then to a role in which they are not competent, referred to as their "level of incompetence". The employee has no chance of further promotion, thus reaching his or her career's ceiling in an organization.

by HelenMeg 30.03.14 17:02

Woofer wrote:@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."

But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?

I dont think this is about the protection of two not very likeable doctors from Rothley - but more about the protection of the very important 'other' guests and their links to big establishment. That is why political courage will be needed. If the decision is made to cease the protection of certain high ranking individuals there will be no going back for DC. If he can get away with just punishing the Mc Canns he will have done a good job.

Log in for more topics