Re: DCI Andy Redwood is to retire later this year and PJ now believes it was a foreigner who committed a crime whilst he was in Portugal.

by DurhamGuy1967 07.06.14 9:30

With no news everyone seems to be twisting the meaning of every word from unofficial sources, many of these translated backward and forward that just confuse the situation more. We just have to wait for the tests, but the body language doesn't look positive.

Of cause Andy can retire.... when is his book out?

by Cheshire Cat 07.06.14 9:41

tiny wrote:
endgame wrote:
NickE wrote:Dogs, a geo-radar and probes used in the search for Maddie McCann
Sandra Felgueiras / Carlos Pinota / Nuno Castro on Jun 06, 2014 21:35 / Updated on Jun 06, 2014, 21:35

Dived in case Madeleine and British operation, unprecedented, riding in Praia da Luz since Monday and that will continue until next week.
Thirty British police, equipped with two dogs specialists in detecting victims, a geo-radar and probes you inspect the sewerage component to what should be the last step of the British investigation.
The Friday 9 to know that the head of the operation, Andy Redwood, will retire later this year. For now, the Judicial Police demarcates altogether these clues so far not produced any results.
The PJ does not believe that Madeleine is buried in any of the three campuses of Praia da Luz that Scotland Yard is in sight and therefore did not displace any member of the team investigating the case in Portugal for the Algarve.

PJ now believes it was a foreigner who committed a crime whilst he was in Portugal. (video)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Translated with Google.
Why have you changed the last sentence therefore completely changing the meaning of what was actually said? This is what was said

"The PJ, meanwhile, has discarded Euclides Monteiro as primary suspect, and believes now, that the man who may have taken Madeleine, was a foreigner that has committed an isolated crime, at a time when he was spending his holidays in Portugal."

This strongly suggests that the PJ is also [or at least could well be] pursuing some form of abduction theory and not that they are talking in code that really means "we are right on the heels of the McCanns" which some of the above posters seem to believe based on your misquotation.
Sounds like they still think its gerry

or Payne.

by ChippyM 07.06.14 9:43

DurhamGuy1967 wrote:With no news everyone seems to be twisting the meaning of every word from unofficial sources, many of these translated backward and forward that just confuse the situation more. We just have to wait for the tests, but the body language doesn't look positive.

Of cause Andy can retire.... when is his book out?

You're right, just endless speculation from 'sources' beause SY are not commenting.

by Truthandjustice 07.06.14 9:48

It is clear that SY are not looking at the MCs, never have been and probably never will. It seems as if the PJ too are not pursuing that route, but even if they do, the SY 'conclusion' will almost certainly ensure that no extradition will ever take place.

by DonNewbery 07.06.14 9:56

ChippyM wrote:
DurhamGuy1967 wrote:With no news everyone seems to be twisting the meaning of every word from unofficial sources, many of these translated backward and forward that just confuse the situation more. We just have to wait for the tests, but the body language doesn't look positive.

Of cause Andy can retire.... when is his book out?

You're right, just endless speculation from 'sources' beause SY are not commenting.

Absolutely agreed.

by DonNewbery 07.06.14 9:58

Truthandjustice wrote:It is clear that SY are not looking at the MCs, never have been and probably never will. It seems as if the PJ too are not pursuing that route, but even if they do, the SY 'conclusion' will almost certainly ensure that no extradition will ever take place.

Your claim here seems to me to be without any foundation whatever,

by ChippyM 07.06.14 10:06

It's not clear at all who SY are looking at.

Quite a while ago Andy R said the parents were not under suspicion.

Since then we have endless stories of imminent arrests, arrests within weeks etc. from the media which have never actually happened, which indicates those reports had no factual basis.

So all we can say logically is that at one stage SY were not looking at the parents but we have no idea who they are looking at now.

by Hongkong Phooey 07.06.14 10:08

DonNewbery wrote:
Truthandjustice wrote:It is clear that SY are not looking at the MCs, never have been and probably never will. It seems as if the PJ too are not pursuing that route, but even if they do, the SY 'conclusion' will almost certainly ensure that no extradition will ever take place.

Your claim here seems to me to be without any foundation whatever,

The foundation of this argument would be AR himself. He stated at the beginning (and during Crimewatch) that the remit was stranger abduction and none of the T9 were suspects (not his exact words). Nothing they have done so far leads me to believe anything has changed.

by russiandoll 07.06.14 10:12

plus since then, HKP, Redwood is on record as saying that Maddie might have been dead when she left 5a and that abduction did not necessarily follow all of Grange's thinking on the case.

They both indicate to me that Grange has no choice but to consider the parents as persons of interest, so maybe their status as POIs changed during the investigation.

by DonNewbery 07.06.14 10:12

ChippyM wrote:It's not clear at all who SY are looking at.

Quite a while ago Andy R said the parents were not under suspicion.

Since then we have endless stories of imminent arrests, arrests within weeks etc. from the media which have never actually happened, which indicates those reports had no factual basis.

So all we can say logically is that at one stage SY were not looking at the parents but we have no idea who they are looking at now.

I think we can say equally logically, perhaps more logically, that A R was, and still is, doing everything he can to mislead the public and the McCann's that they are in fact the main suspects. I am still (v optimistic admittedly) that they will arrest the McCanns once they feel they have a complete scenario with some forensic evidence to back it up. Plus the evidence that I believe someone may have given them over the last year.

by Hongkong Phooey 07.06.14 10:13

ChippyM wrote:It's not clear at all who SY are looking at.

Quite a while ago Andy R said the parents were not under suspicion.

Since then we have endless stories of imminent arrests, arrests within weeks etc. from the media which have never actually happened, which indicates those reports had no factual basis.

So all we can say logically is that at one stage SY were not looking at the parents but we have no idea who they are looking at now.

So far we do know who SY are looking at: anyone else in the world other than the parents (as seen by their official communications and actions).

by Truthandjustice 07.06.14 10:15

DonNewbery wrote:
Truthandjustice wrote:It is clear that SY are not looking at the MCs, never have been and probably never will. It seems as if the PJ too are not pursuing that route, but even if they do, the SY 'conclusion' will almost certainly ensure that no extradition will ever take place.

Your claim here seems to me to be without any foundation whatever,

Firstly the searches currently underway are based in ILORs that are based on the theory of burglar abduction. Secondly redwood stated that GM had been eliminated as suspect based on forensic analysis of timeline. Thirdly there is political pressure to 'conclude' the case as stated by David Cameron. Lastly, the PJ got their fingers badly burned last time they followed that line of enquiry with the case coordinator nearly destroyed through litigation for purporting a theory based on available evidence. I founded my statement on this evidence.

by cass7 07.06.14 10:18

nobody and i mean nobody should be in the clear till this case is solved , or closed and then still nobody is in the clear , someone was the last person to see madeleine alive , unless the mcanns and friends didnt do any checks at all for the scent to form what eddie and keel indicated to gives a fact that checks was not done . wasnt there a policeman on record as saying 15 out of 19 markers enough for conviction ? i believe in those wonderful dogs and only thing that will make me change my mind is if there was something planted

by russiandoll 07.06.14 10:19

T and J.. you replied to another member :

Your claim here seems to me to be without any foundation whatever,Firstly the searches currently underway are based in ILORs that are based on the theory of burglar abduction. Secondly redwood stated that GM had been eliminated as suspect based on forensic analysis of timeline. Thirdly there is political pressure to 'conclude' the case as stated by David Cameron. Lastly, the PJ got their fingers badly burned last time they followed that line of enquiry with the case coordinator nearly destroyed through litigation for purporting a theory based on available evidence. I founded my statement on this evidence.

The burglar related ILORs are press reports and nothing about the reasons for the ILORs has been stated by SY as far as I know.

Have never heard of this " redwood stated that GM had been eliminated as suspect based on forensic analysis of timeline."

Could you provide a source for this, please?

I do agree that there is pressure to close this and conclude it, but a shelving does not indicate a whitewash to me, that would have been done under the radar not with public fanfare and huge expense.

Sky has just reported that the police are not saying what has made them decide that this search area is significant. They are keeping their cards close to their chest. Meanwhile the media speculate and we are all speculating on the speculation !

by Hongkong Phooey 07.06.14 10:21

russiandoll wrote:plus since then, HKP, Redwood is on record as saying that Maddie might have been dead when she left 5a and that abduction did not necessarily follow all of Grange's thinking on the case.

They both indicate to me that Grange has no choice but to consider the parents as persons of interest, so maybe their status as POIs changed during the investigation.

It seems a bit controversial whether the abduction statement was made as reported, however I expect the end result to point the finger elsewhere, all the digging etc. doesn't put the parents in the frame necessarily.

by **PeterMac** 07.06.14 10:28

Is he retiring, or have then used regulation A 19

Reg A19 of the Police Pensions Regulations 1987 (A19)

A19 permits police authorities to require a police officer of the range of chief superintendent or below to retire if their retention would not be in the general interests of efficiency,

How much has he cost the Met ?
How long has he taken ?
How much has he delivered ?
Efficiency ?
Hmmmmm !

by Benion 07.06.14 10:33

This is my first post on this forum, so apologies if I have put it in the wrong place....

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

I was really hopeful when Op Grange started that they were going to do a thorough review of the case. Whether or not an abduction took place, surely the police should examine all lines of enquiry, which would include the hypothesis the parents concocted the abduction. This has not been done, it is a total waste of time.

by Truthandjustice 07.06.14 10:41

russiandoll wrote:T and J.. you replied to another member :

Your claim here seems to me to be without any foundation whatever,Firstly the searches currently underway are based in ILORs that are based on the theory of burglar abduction. Secondly redwood stated that GM had been eliminated as suspect based on forensic analysis of timeline. Thirdly there is political pressure to 'conclude' the case as stated by David Cameron. Lastly, the PJ got their fingers badly burned last time they followed that line of enquiry with the case coordinator nearly destroyed through litigation for purporting a theory based on available evidence. I founded my statement on this evidence.

The burglar related ILORs are press reports and nothing about the reasons for the ILORs has been stated by SY as far as I know.

Have never heard of this " redwood stated that GM had been eliminated as suspect based on forensic analysis of timeline."

Could you provide a source for this, please?

[size=40]He said officers had carried out a forensic analysis of the timeline of events, and had identified opportunities when the child could have been taken in a criminal act.[/size]

[size=40]Dismissing conspiracy theories about Madeleine's parents' involvement, Redwood said he believed the girl's disappearance was the result of "a criminal act by a stranger".[/size]
[size=40]--- End quote ---[/size]
[size=40][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] do agree that there is pressure to close this and conclude it, but a shelving does not indicate a whitewash to me, that would have been done under the radar not with public fanfare and huge expense.

Sky has just reported that the police are not saying what has made them decide that this search area is significant. They are keeping their cards close to their chest. Meanwhile the media speculate and we are all speculating on the speculation !

by Riddlemeree 07.06.14 10:51

Of course the police know it was the Mccanns .

by russiandoll 07.06.14 11:14

anything to add to that, as there is much debate here about how honest they are?

by ChippyM 07.06.14 13:41

russiandoll wrote:T and J.. you replied to another member :

Your claim here seems to me to be without any foundation whatever,Firstly the searches currently underway are based in ILORs that are based on the theory of burglar abduction. Secondly redwood stated that GM had been eliminated as suspect based on forensic analysis of timeline. Thirdly there is political pressure to 'conclude' the case as stated by David Cameron. Lastly, the PJ got their fingers badly burned last time they followed that line of enquiry with the case coordinator nearly destroyed through litigation for purporting a theory based on available evidence. I founded my statement on this evidence.

The burglar related ILORs are press reports and nothing about the reasons for the ILORs has been stated by SY as far as I know.
.....

True. The letters exist, but what they were requesting or who they were regarding has never been made public. Any reference to burglars was all speculation cleverly snaked around the ILOR by 'sources'.

by SixMillionQuid 07.06.14 14:03

Benion wrote:This is my first post on this forum, so apologies if I have put it in the wrong place....

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

I was really hopeful when Op Grange started that they were going to do a thorough review of the case. Whether or not an abduction took place, surely the police should examine all lines of enquiry, which would include the hypothesis the parents concocted the abduction. This has not been done, it is a total waste of time.

Welcome to the forum and great first post.

"The Met will look for a face saving exercise and by pushing for arrests that the Portuguese authorities may not support, could give them a neutral way out.

By promising to solve the case in a fire engine fashion, overtaking and by implication deriding the work of other investigators on the
case, then it has perhaps, set itself up to fail and to fall from a great height."

I think they anticipated failure a long time ago. So how do you spin failure into a success?
A couple fake arrests and a few select parazzi photos showing pixilated British officers questioning a burglar in PdL. Then the headline in the MSM will be "Hero Brit Cops Catch Maddie Snatcher - while the sardine munchers look on!". Operation Grange quietly disappears in a high, in the MSM.

by endgame 07.06.14 14:05

ChippyM wrote:
russiandoll wrote:T and J.. you replied to another member :

Your claim here seems to me to be without any foundation whatever,Firstly the searches currently underway are based in ILORs that are based on the theory of burglar abduction. Secondly redwood stated that GM had been eliminated as suspect based on forensic analysis of timeline. Thirdly there is political pressure to 'conclude' the case as stated by David Cameron. Lastly, the PJ got their fingers badly burned last time they followed that line of enquiry with the case coordinator nearly destroyed through litigation for purporting a theory based on available evidence. I founded my statement on this evidence.

The burglar related ILORs are press reports and nothing about the reasons for the ILORs has been stated by SY as far as I know.
.....

True. The letters exist, but what they were requesting or who they were regarding has never been made public. Any reference to burglars was all speculation cleverly snaked around the ILOR by 'sources'.

Given the press track record of stating things that are rubbished but later turn out to be correct [about 50/50] I'd say that either of these views is equally possible but given that the reporting comes from the Portuguese press and has a ring of authority about it and it broadly ties in with the way AR has progressed the case I don't find it difficult to accept that the ILOR's are quite likely based on the theory of burglar abduction. Posters generally accept that press reports about three sites in the ILOR's etc. are correct so you can't just pick and choose. I do accept however that the use of the term "burglar" as such may be "imaginative".

by riskybuisness 07.06.14 14:11

The case may fail but I do not believe that there is any powerful government type conspiracy taking place and ordering a cover up. If the government or other very powerful group were involved in Madeline disappearance, as some on here seem to think, then the mccanns would have met their demise a long time ago - they would have been portrayed as unable to live without her- thus the end of the whole saga and the "powers that be" would just have walked away. As this did not happen I truly believe that its just a mccann/tapas issue.

by Okeydokey 07.06.14 14:42

Woofer wrote:Retiring - that`s hard to believe - he`s only about late 40s surely?

Police can retire after 25 years' service, so he could easily be retiring at 44 onwards. This current operation, with all the supine approbation of the UK media, will do him no harm in finding new work after retirement to add value to his pension e.g. TV punditry, the lecture circuit etc.

by Guest 07.06.14 14:52

Okeydokey wrote:
Woofer wrote:Retiring - that`s hard to believe - he`s only about late 40s surely?

Police can retire after 25 years' service, so he could easily be retiring at 44 onwards. This current operation, with all the supine approbation of the UK media, will do him no harm in finding new work after retirement to add value to his pension e.g. TV punditry, the lecture circuit etc.

If he can crack this I will personally pay his pension out of my own pocket.

I hope that this development, and the retention of Exclusivepix to record events for posterity, suggest that a career defining outcome to this investigation is anticipated.

by gbwales 07.06.14 15:06

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

I hope that this development, and the retention of Exclusivepix to record events for posterity, suggest that a career defining outcome to this investigation is anticipated.

Your take on the photo pros there is interesting - very much hope you're right :)
Got to be honest, retiring with a whitewash that will one day - one day - come unstuck, would surely be pretty foolish.

by tasprin 07.06.14 15:09

Whichever way it goes, he'll always be remembered for this case.

by CynicAl 07.06.14 15:43

@riskybusiness

Completely correct. Asserting that the past seven years are the evidence of a grand conspiracy at the highest levels which is so completely harmonised and in which success is assured is as ridiculous as asserting that the world's richest men achieved their success by tossing bucketloads of pound coins out of a plane and hoping that some of them would land fruitfully in the slots of one-armed bandits. The very reason that I have no truck for the belief in a big bang and the spontaneous generation of life is because it has never, ever been demonstrated that any form of fruitful organisation and order can arise from chaos. For something to run to plan, for something to even have the appearance of accomplishing a complex and intelligent purpose, the appearance of having been designed, it necessarily has to have been directed - even in its chaos, directed.

The melodramatists on sites like this might try to sell you on the idea of the overarching conspiracy. They're selling the idea that the appearance of chaos and confusion over the last seven years is deliberate, intended to confuse and obscure, to allow the perpetrators to make their getaway. These same people utterly resist the idea that an intelligent plan might create and utilise the appearance of chaos and confusion over the past seven years to confuse and obscure, to lull the perpetrators into a false sense of security.

They'll tell you the latter, which is logical, is preposterous and the former, which is illogical, is a near-certainty.

If such a conspiracy existed with such complete power to hide, protect, cover-up, manipulate, disappear, misdirect, mislead, deceive and indeed indoctrinate, then could we reasonably expect to be able to find a single scrap of evidence anywhere which pointed at the very situation that the conspiracy existed to cover-up? A cover-up that leaks inconvenient information like streams from a cracked dam is no cover-up at all. It, like Savile, is only a matter of time; the time waiting for the dam to crumble with age, fractured by weakness, giving way and pouring forth the evidence of its own failure.

If the conspiracy existed it would have been far more effective. You would not have a media that seems to be champing at the bit to unleash a flood of 'I told you so's'. Indeed, the media would have been harmonically joined in chorus, celebrating the virtues and innocence of the family and their friends from the beginning, and the evidence of their culpability would never have been raised. More than that the PJ would never have received any kind of advice from any British police forces to cause them to refocus their attentions on the family. No sniffer dogs would have been called in, and the public would have been sold a breadcrumb trail of false sightings prompting an ultimately fruitless chase across the planet in which, sadly, the authorities would have always been two steps behind until eventually the search had to be called off, leaving only a missing girl and a remote location into which one of many ruthless child traffickers had disappeared for all time. That would have been a plan of conspiracy that no rogue journalist or altruistic cop could have possibly endangered. Instead what we have, if conspired at all, is a comedy of errors. There is no evidence to support the idea that even our own hideous government is so inept, our police so ridiculous that such an episode of keystone cops was anything but par for the course. And that's without mentioning how insulting the insinuation that the Portuguese government and police force are equally incompetent, by nature or by design.

Indeed, the corruption to cover-up must certainly cost more than the £10M spent on the latter investigation? Which budget paid for all the bungs that must have been required to keep every curious journalist, every sensationalist editor, every police officer, judge, lawyer, politician, representative, government figure all singing from the same songsheet? What about one of the many co-conspirators deciding to get greedy and demanding more money for continued silence? Where are the piles of bodies of those made an example of? Or coercion? Where are the police officers who quit under the strain of having been told 'cover up for these two doctors, or we'll kill you and your family...' Are there really so many dozens of personnel who've actively handled this case who go home every night and kiss the wife and kids and bear not a second thought to the murder they're covering up for people they don't know which might be a case cracked open any day now by an internet blogger or a disgruntled ex-journalist?

This is a fragile, fragile thing. One person to speak is all it takes. And lets face it, there are no shortage of people to speak, or to hint at, their skepticism. Hardly a secure conspiracy.

If a cover-up at all, it can only be a time-dependent one. A delaying of the inevitable.

If it is a cover-up, it is Lt. Frank Drebin stood before an exploding ordnance factory saying 'Nothing to see here... please... nothing to see here.' In fact, even worse than that, he waits until the crowd are nearly out of sight before screaming 'Look over here!' and then, having waited for the people to flock around again, repeats calmly 'nothing to see here.' Inexplicable. Preposterous.

I can't say there's a master plan to solve the crime, and all of this is diversion and strategy. I just don't know. But I definitely can say that this is not a master plan to make the crime fade into the mists of distant memory, because what's happening is the opposite.

If a conspiracy, flawlessly executed from a high level, then the Mc's are the most dispensible piece of the puzzle. Easier to eliminate them and lay the blame where the available evidence becomes satisfied by the narrative, and let that which can be hidden be laid to rest. Very easy to simplify their involvement, and then find a terminal solution to bring closure for the public, and security for the high level people apparently in need of protection.

I might be frustrated by being unable to tell what this investigation is. But I can tell what it isn't, far more easily.

Only one thing I can think of will change my mind.

If Redwood announces that he's retiring from the Met in order to take up a leadership role on behalf of a private venture... FindMadeleine.

by jeanmonroe 07.06.14 15:46

Okeydokey wrote:
Woofer wrote:Retiring - that`s hard to believe - he`s only about late 40s surely?

Police can retire after 25 years' service, so he could easily be retiring at 44 onwards. This current operation, with all the supine approbation of the UK media, will do him no harm in finding new work after retirement to add value to his pension e.g. TV punditry, the lecture circuit etc.

We MIGHT even see him doing the 'rounds' of the TV studios, commentating on, as a 'former' Met Police Detective Chief Inspector, the 'mysterious disappearance' of Madeleine McCann!

DCI Andy Redwood is to retire later this year and PJ now believes it was a foreigner who committed a crime whilst he was in Portugal.