Blacksmith

Saturday, 28 April 2012
Benny Hill's Alive Too
The Review Leader in action

Andy Redwood might have hidden talents as a whizzbang investigator, though if his role in the shockingly botched Jill Dando murder inquiry, which ended in the long and tragic incarceration of a helpless mentally handicapped victim is anything to go by, these talents must be hidden very well indeed. But at communication he is not just a disaster but a slow-talking, slow-thinking, slow-burning horror show. All he lacks is a suicide vest.
What he said
In his Scotland Yard April 24 official interview, available on You-Tube, Mr Redwood gave his reasons for going public now. The primary reason for the initiative, he said, is a public appeal for assistance and information that might be of value in terms of sightings etc, complete with a photo projection of what the child would look like now. The other, subsidiary, reason is to prompt the memories of those who were staying in the Praia da Luz area during that week in 2007, an appeal, by the way, first made over four years ago.
He said nothing whatever about wanting the case re-opened now, and it was clearly no part of his brief to do so. He spoke of increasing co-operation between both police forces and “working together towards a position where we would very much like the case to be re-opened”. This peculiar prose, found at 2 minutes 10 or so on the video and sadly typical of Mr Redwood’s mode of conversation, obviously refers to a position which has not yet been reached.
What he then said - or did he?
At the official media conference to launch the appeal the hapless Redwood was ambushed by questioners into enlarging on this aim and proceeded, with great West Country determination and dexterity, to slowly winch his foot upwards and sideways until it was jammed firmly into his mouth. Before actually swallowing it and putting us all out of our misery, he managed to give the impression to the hacks that the Yard definitely wanted the case re-opened now – the precise opposite of his formal scripted policy announcement on April 24. And off rushed the Guardian, the Independent and the tits and bum papers to write inflammatory stories on that basis without once quoting him actually saying so. Not once.
An international debut
Quite an achievement, isn’t it? A Scotland Yard detective has single-handedly started a diplomatic incident on his first major media appearance. Until that press conference the word was that the UK and the Portuguese authorities were working well together; now this witless buffoon has triggered off the UK press into one of its uncouth chauvinist outbreaks with all the consequences that anyone not embalmed in scrumpy could forecast, including a frosty statement from the Portuguese Attorney General, political grunting noises from the former postman Alan Johnson and a clearly perceptible frisson of resentment from Portuguese people which bodes very badly for the future.
Redwood has nobody to blame but himself. It is quite right that the Yard should issue a definitive appeal on the child’s behalf and this anniversary was the obvious time to do so – after all even Mr Redwood might gag at waiting until the sixth anniversary, still only halfway through his task, to appeal for more information. It is quite right also that he should treat the McCanns as innocent victims of a terrible event. But the man has the diplomatic sensitivity, nous, finesse and awareness of a walrus.
Obviously he couldn’t make an age-progression-picture-based appeal for sightings of the child while simultaneously stating that she was dead, could he? So what was his plan for handling this potential contradiction when he was asked about it, as he was bound to be? Oh, he hadn't thought of that, or rather, oh, 'e adn't thorra that. Instead we received his revelation that Madeleine McCann was definitely, yes definitely, certainly, er, aloive or dead, an insight which went straight round the world, fuelled by a wave of mockery. Goncalo Amaral might have been forgiven for just a little schadenfreude behind his sleeve, although he was too decent to twist the knife on a fellow cop in distress - no not just distress but buried up to his neck with his foot in his mouth, his boots in the air, his pants on his face, in a giant brown mound of steaming Somerset cowshit.
Andy Redwood's cold, ruthless hitman killer Barry George
Eaten for Breakfast
The Madeleine McCann affair involves some of the most highly paid professional communicators in the world, as well as brilliant media and communication lawyers. All are waiting for their next engagements in the case. Mr Redwood has made his first venture into this snake pit and it has not been a pretty sight. Wait till the heavies get to work on him! Whether he will still be around when the Yard actually have to get to grips with the investigation, which they have certainly not done yet, must be a matter of some doubt.
Lastly, for those of the belief that Mr Redwood is in some way carrying out a policy determined for him by others, just pause and think over what you have witnessed. Mr Redwood, a man unable to remember the scripted priorities he had laid out just three days before on April 24 is not the sort of man that David Cameron, or whoever the supposed puppet-master is, would entrust with a sensitive cover-up. On this performance he wouldn’t entrust him with calling a taxi.

I LOVE Blacksmith.

me a Blacksmith fan too.

DCI Andy Redwood causes political furore. Perhaps the postman could use his delicate political charm offensive on DCI Andy, or would Andy find it offensive. jimo

I wonder then why Detective Chief Inspector Redwood was appointed if the general consensus is such.

Maybe he fits perfectly the required mouthpiece.

If I might be so bold to put an alternative view. Its not a view that I am wedded to forever and a day but one that I need persuading from otherwise so I put this forward for debate.

I am afraid am one of those 'of the belief that Mr Redwood is in some way carrying out a policy determined for him by others'

Why? Well its the track record really. Briefly, British Dogs pick-up the scent of death and find blood, British Police come to the conclusion that the parents are involved and communicate that, British FSS find the DNA match, the parents are made Arguidos and Brunt reports that charges are imminent.

Then what? Some hand intervened as the FSS change their report to - inconclusive, the evidence indicated by the dogs is dismissed as insufficient, the case is shelved - Amaral says due to intervention of the British Government and the parents Arguido status is lifted. Quite a shift eh?

Its amazing that the very day I see GM on tv asking for - NO! DEMANDING a review that Cameron announces that very thing funded from special funds. Seemingly Cameron was also under pressure form NI and I think he agreed to a review under that pressure but without thinking it through - I believe he painted himself into a corner but I will come back to that in a mo! Note also the Mc's wanted a review and not the re-opening of the case.

At first we were told the brief for the Review and the findings of the Review would not be made public. Questions were raised on why the secrecy and for whose benefit the Review was for if public money was funding it. Eventually we were told the brief was to conduct the Review as if the abduction took place in this country. Note - abduction not disappearance. This might lead a reasonable person to think the Review was being pointed away from one thesis and in the direction of another. Working to the direction of a brief seems not to give the MET a free hand in how they conduct things or what they consider IMO!

Lets skip to more recently, Kate says she's writing an epilogue including progress on the Review and ahead of this CI Redwood participates in a BBC programme that bashes Portugal, the PJ, Amaral and the dogs. You cannot tell me that no one in the MET knew he was going to do this or what he was going to say. I believe the MET had to say something before Kate spilled the beans on what she know of what's happening (or not) What's wrong with doing a good old fashioned police press conference with a bank of officers sat behind a table, officers that tell you what they want to tell you and no more, answer what questions they can without jepodising the inquiry and go home. Who agreed CI Redwood could sit on the sofa and be exposed by himself on a prog like that?

As CI Redwood reveals the findings of the Review so far we learn that 195 new opportunities for investigation have been identified - a quarter a way through the available information. Also he comes up with the classic that they are working on two strategies that the girl is alive or dead but he firmly believes she is alive fuelling the Mc's PR campaign just in time. He also seems to indicate he wants the PJ to re-open the case now which the PJ will not do as they have nothing new to work on - no one new to look for in their inquiries. More fuel for Mc's to bash the PJ.

It all looks really impartial doesn't it?

So what of the Review - my thoughts that Cameron painted himself into a corner with this - not having thought it through before committing. What ever was the outcome of the Review going to achieve? Reviewing the old evidence will not come up with anything really really significant that was missed by the PJ (or the British Police in their initial conclusions) how could it. Neither could it cut across the PJ conclusions or the shelved case. It could never instigate new interviews or open up a new investigation. All it could ever do is what it has done so far and spot missed opportunities to investigate. IMO the Review could only ever come up with what we have now, support for the Mc's campaign to bolster the find her she's still alive fund!

Sorry I cannot see anything that indicates impartial in what's happened so far!

Now you might say the MET have asked for information to be passed to them esp from anyone who was on holiday at the time. What exactly will they do with this information? Put it on the pile of 195 fresh investigative opportunities and hand it to the PJ at the end of the Review? Is this not re-opening the investigation in which case I thought the MET were not allowed to do that as the PJ have primacy. All more questions about how the Review is being conducted and where it might lead.

So to the question. Some in the forums think CI Redwood a genius who is working to a clever agenda to trap the perpetrators. Others have him as a buffoon with not long to go on the case. Could this be another person who's life is ruined by the curse of the Mc's - time will tell?

The question:-

'Lastly, for those of the belief that Mr Redwood is in some way carrying out a policy determined for him by others, just pause and think over what you have witnessed. Mr Redwood, a man unable to remember the scripted priorities he had laid out just three days before on April 24 is not the sort of man that David Cameron, or whoever the supposed puppet-master is, would entrust with a sensitive cover-up. On this performance he wouldn't’t entrust him with calling a taxi.'

Well hang on a min as there is an alternative view here. If you know you are heading into a corner and a real mess with millions of public £'s at stake, what better way to avoid the embarrassment by scuppering the whole process. Someone that messes up so big that it ends the process early, puts further irreversible strain on the relationship with the Portuguese and at the same time - plays even more into the Mc's hands - fuelling their campaign for the next 5 years?? A scapegoat? What we need is a Clouseau. Wind him up and point him in the right direction and wait for him to put his big size 9's in it!

Someone hand picked CI Redwood for the job and if he was not up to it then its their fault - but who would that be? Someone agreed the Beeb could put together a PJ bashing prog with CI Redwood at the centre of it. But who? And then of course there is the endorsement of the prog from Alan Johnson MP. Who exactly was he representing when he spoke on that day?

So I am sorry but until I see some real indications coming from politicians, the police, the press that everything is being conducted even handedly, then I will remain of the opinion that it is not! If that's ok!

certainly its ok No Stone, thats what this Forum is for for people to have their own thoughts and opinions based on what they see and hear and express them, so for me valid points. jimo

Wasn't DeadWood involved in the Barry George stitch-up? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Redwood reports to Hamish Campbell who was in charge of the Dando case where it
appears they may have stitched up Barry George.

tanszi wrote:certainly its ok No Stone, thats what this Forum is for for people to have their own thoughts and opinions based on what they see and hear and express them, so for me valid points. jimo

TY tanszi - sometimes the txt is a little too patronising!!

cherry1 wrote: Redwood reports to Hamish Campbell who was in charge of the Dando case where it
appears they may have stitched up Barry George.

Yes and Ian Horrocks who wrote the article in The Sun also worked on the Dando case too

thats interesting wjk