Andy Redwood...?

And the board on the door to Andy's office says MIT.
(Murder Investigation Team)

Also the 'Maddie Cop' at Operation Strange, whose son was arrested for dodgy dealing 'bets' IS a Homicide 'detective'.

fuzeta wrote:"it is possible that Madeleine is still alive or she may have been murdered or She could be dead."

What powers of detection he has, who would have thought it??  Thank God we have him on the job.



.

Hedging all bets here methinks.

Lioned wrote: Defective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood has refused to comment on the latest revelations in the Times (19th May 2014) that Madeleine was murdered !

However a spokesperson for SY has said they will continue to dig up new leads as it is possible that Madeleine is still alive or she may have been murdered or She could be dead.

It says a spokesperson for SY. That could mean anything. And if the spokesperson used the word 'dig' that is the most unfortunate of puns.

However, it matters not who speaks or what words they choose, it is actions that count for they speak louder than words.

What on earth is going on in Britain? I've been reading more and more about certain individuals who, because of their so-called "celebrity status", have been getting away with offences/crimes they should have been charged with years ago. The really disturbing thing is, now that some of been charged with these long ago offences, it appears that many people are not surprised and some actually claim to have known of this "stuff" for years. It just makes me wonder how much longer the McCanns can get away with all that they have been up to for the past seven years having had the benefit from the start from their political friends.

interested wrote:What on earth is going on in Britain?  I've been reading more and more about certain individuals who, because of their so-called "celebrity status", have been getting away with offences/crimes they should have been charged with years ago.  The really disturbing thing is, now that some of been charged with these long ago offences, it appears that many people are not surprised and some actually claim to have known of this "stuff" for years.  It just makes me wonder how much longer the McCanns can get away with all that they have been up to for the past seven years having had the benefit from the start from their political friends.

Take heart then. The big success of cold case investigations is it hammers home a message to all criminals out there - don't ever think you have got away with it.

Unfortunately though, we can go on and on and on about how there was a smell of death in the apartment, how the dogs indicated towards Kate's clothes, how there were fluids indicated in the hire car, but it only indicates that Madeleine died. Its not enough to charge the parents or anyone else with though. Unfortunately, none of it is enough to form a rock solid prosecution and there would be no point in pursuing that line just for it to get thrown out of court. That Madeleine is dead goes without saying but absolutely proving who was responsible beyond a shadow of doubt, enough to satisfy a court of law, is another matter and that, for me, is the stumbling block.

What SY are striving to do, imo, is they are trying to maximise the evidence. There are strengths and weaknesses in every single case that goes to court and the stronger the case, the better.

It may or may not be the parents who are finally charged or it may be deemed to be someone who is now deceased; but whoever, there has to be presented adequate evidence to satisfy the Crown Prosecution Service or similar organisation. Prosecutors, Defence Lawyers, the Courts themselves and Police often come into conflict with one another over what is admissible in a court of law and what is not and no matter how convenient at times it would be to just pin a guilty verdict onto someone, it doesn't work like that. Things have to be done 100% properly, to satisfy all the services and agencies involved at court, or it will just get thrown out.

If they wanted to pin this on someone deceased they could have done this before now if it was that simple. Even when someone is deceased, they have to be proven to be guilty through an official enquiry.

LJC wrote:

interested wrote:What on earth is going on in Britain?  I've been reading more and more about certain individuals who, because of their so-called "celebrity status", have been getting away with offences/crimes they should have been charged with years ago.  The really disturbing thing is, now that some of been charged with these long ago offences, it appears that many people are not surprised and some actually claim to have known of this "stuff" for years.  It just makes me wonder how much longer the McCanns can get away with all that they have been up to for the past seven years having had the benefit from the start from their political friends.

Take heart then.  The big success of cold case investigations is it hammers home a message to all criminals out there - don't ever think you have got away with it.

Unfortunately though, we can go on and on and on about how there was a smell of death in the apartment, how the dogs indicated towards Kate's clothes, how there were fluids indicated in the hire car, but it only indicates that Madeleine died. Its not enough to charge the parents or anyone else with though. Unfortunately, none of it is enough to form a rock solid prosecution and there would be no point in pursuing that line just for it to get thrown out of court. That Madeleine is dead goes without saying but absolutely proving who was responsible beyond a shadow of doubt, enough to satisfy a court of law, is another matter and that, for me, is the stumbling block.  

What SY are striving to do, imo, is they are trying to maximise the evidence.  There are strengths and weaknesses in every single case that goes to court and the stronger the case, the better.

It may or may not be the parents who are finally charged or it may be deemed to be someone who is now deceased; but whoever, there has to be presented adequate evidence to satisfy the Crown Prosecution Service or similar organisation.    Prosecutors, Defence Lawyers, the Courts themselves and Police often come into conflict with one another over what is admissible in a court of law and what is not and no matter how convenient at times it would be to just pin a guilty verdict onto someone, it doesn't work like that.  Things have to be done 100% properly, to satisfy all the services and agencies involved at court, or it will just get thrown out.

If they wanted to pin this on someone deceased they could have done this before now if it was that simple. Even when someone is deceased, they have to be proven to be guilty through an official enquiry.

If the PJ had been allowed to proceed with the case, without interference from the British and Portuguese Governments, the case would have been done and dusted by now. The McCanns would have been prosecuted for their part in Madeleine's disappearance and if as I suspect, they were helped by someone known to them, the McCanns would have squealed.

I'm sick and tired of McCann supporters, lauding Andy Redwood and his team. If Redwood really wanted the perpetrators of Madeleine's disappearance, brought to justice, he would have worked with the PJ, instead of mouthing off to the media, about information in the files, that the PJ had missed. If Redwood had half a brain, he would have realised that the PJ files, are the result of the PJ investigation.

Andy Redwood has used the McCann friendly media, to make fools out of the PJ. This is music to the McCann supporters, none of them give a stuff about any suffering that Madeleine endured, thanks to her parents cruel behaviour. All they want is anyone but the McCanns brought to justice and if it means a patsy being brought to justice so be it.

When are the McCann supporters, going to get it into their brains, that whatever part the McCanns played in Madeleine's disappearance, the part they played, was child abuse. There is no two ways about it, anyone who has read the PJ files, listened to the McCanns televised interviews, where they've lied through their teeth and most importantly, read the information in the link below and still state the McCanns are innocent, is a supporter of child abuse.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

I've said the following before and I'll keep saying it, until the McCann supporters wake up and smell the coffee. If there was any information in the files, that the McCanns deemed to be untrue, the McCanns would have taken out a lawsuit by now. The McCanns have taken out a lawsuit against Goncalo Amaral, for stating in his book, the contents of the PJ files, one would have thought that the McCanns would have taken out a lawsuit against the source of the PJ files, if there was anything in them that was untrue.

The report that the PJ Chief Inspector, Tavares de Almeida, sent to the Coordinator of Criminal Investigation, was damning. If the McCanns were innocent, they would have taken out a lawsuit, immediately they had read Mr Almeida's report. The McCanns have remained strangely silent, just as Gerry McCann and David Payne, remained strangely silent, when Katherine Gaspar, made those allegations against them.

"DCI Andy Redwood, the senior investigating officer, and his team will be in Portugal carrying out various lines of enquiry.

"“Thorough serious crime investigations work systematically through all credible possibilities and therefore it should not be assumed that this substantial upcoming phase of work in Portugal will immediately lead us to the answers that will explain what has happened.

“What you will see is normal police activity you would expect in any such major investigation.

“Similarly, this should not be seen as a sign that the investigation is nearing a conclusion. I fully expect that there will be much more work to do when this particular phase of activity comes to an end. It is helpful that any reporting of activity in Portugal is set in this context.

“We will be updating Mr and Mrs McCann throughout the activity as we have been throughout the investigation.

“We will not be giving information on when this activity is to occur.

"The very fact that we are in the position of moving towards substantial activity in Portugal shows that the relationship between the MPS and Portuguese colleagues is working."

AC Rowley issued a letter to media on 6 May 2014 stating that the advice he was receiving from Portugal was that their approach to media handling was different and they do not brief the media on current investigations.

They clearly stated that if the MPS provide any briefings or information on the work they are undertaking on our behalf, or if reporters cause any disruption to their work in Portugal activity will cease until that problem dissipates.

Assistant Commissioner Rowley reiterated that position today:

"We have made it clear to colleagues in Portugal that we will not be giving operational updates. I appreciate this will be frustrating to you (the media) especially given the help you have provided to us with public appeals so far which has added significant evidence into our files. However, if this was an investigation in London I would not be making public details of operational investigative activity that we were planning or how it might link in to the investigation.

"Of course complications are added when an investigation is taken abroad.

“My letter last month did map out where we stood in terms of how we could manage the media demand in this investigation. If media interfere with police work, that work will stop. I suspect that the boundaries around what that is will be apparent and I asked you to cooperate with the requests of the Portuguese authorities as the most important thing is to make this inquiry go as smoothly as possible.

“On a recent visit to Portugal DCI Redwood was surrounded by a large media group asking for comments from him.

“I appreciate that media group may not solely be UK agencies, and other media may state they are unaware of our repeated requests.

"DCI Redwood and his team will not be giving comment.

“Please allow them the room to manoeuvre and work on what is a live investigation into the disappearance of a young girl. If you get any information ahead of our actions do not publish anything that may give suspects advance notice.

The family have also made their wishes clear about allowing us and the Portuguese the room to carry on with our work and this was reinforced this publicly by Kate McCann when Andy and his team were last in Portugal.
“In my initial letter I asked editors to think twice - that advice stands. We all want the same outcome - to do everything possible to try to find answers for the McCann family.

“It is only fair on you I am upfront with you about what you can get and how the media might impact on the investigation.

“I am well aware that updates may help control this investigation and I am committed to doing this in a transparent way but mindful that nothing we do will damage the integrity of the investigation or the best possible chances of bringing it to a conclusion.”


So the 'Oxymoronic' Andy is riding into town.....................


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r18aPCdMp5c

So in other words. A dead paedophile will take the rap!

“We will be updating Mr and Mrs McCann throughout the activity as we have been throughout the investigation".

As I said on another thread!

WTF?!     

wjk wrote:“We will be updating Mr and Mrs McCann throughout the activity as we have been throughout the investigation".

As I said on another thread!

WTF?!     

Innocent until proven guilty I'm afraid, whether we like it or not. At this stage SY have to treat them as innocent whether we like it or not.

'Innocent' as in not yet proven guilty in Court but certainly not Innocent as far as being implicated as the main suspects in the only proper investigation so far.
Yet SY say they are not suspects !

And how do SY know they are Innocent/not suspects.

Tuesday, 10 July 2007
Portuguese CID spokesman: "The McCann are not suspects"
"Policia Judiciaria hasn't changed its position and does not consider Madeleine's parents as suspects", Chief-Inspector Olegario de Sousa said today, after being questioned by Gazeta Digital. The Portuguese weekly "Sol" wrote, last week, that "Madeleine parents and their holiday friends were suspects in this crime investigation" and the group has made a "pact of silence". Almost two months ago, Olegario de Sousa made a statement about this subject, at a Press Conference, and said that Gerry and Kate were not suspects in the abduction of Madeleine.

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2007/07/portuguese-cid-spokesman-mccann-are-not.html

But come September ......

almostgothic wrote:Tuesday, 10 July 2007
Portuguese CID spokesman: "The McCann are not suspects"
"Policia Judiciaria hasn't changed its position and does not consider Madeleine's parents as suspects", Chief-Inspector Olegario de Sousa said today, after being questioned by Gazeta Digital. The Portuguese weekly "Sol" wrote, last week, that "Madeleine parents and their holiday friends were suspects in this crime investigation" and the group has made a "pact of silence". Almost two months ago, Olegario de Sousa made a statement about this subject, at a Press Conference, and said that Gerry and Kate were not suspects in the abduction of Madeleine.

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2007/07/portuguese-cid-spokesman-mccann-are-not.html

But come September ......

Thanks,good point i suppose.

almostgothic wrote:Tuesday, 10 July 2007
Portuguese CID spokesman: "The McCann are not suspects"
"Policia Judiciaria hasn't changed its position and does not consider Madeleine's parents as suspects", Chief-Inspector Olegario de Sousa said today, after being questioned by Gazeta Digital. The Portuguese weekly "Sol" wrote, last week, that "Madeleine parents and their holiday friends were suspects in this crime investigation" and the group has made a "pact of silence". Almost two months ago, Olegario de Sousa made a statement about this subject, at a Press Conference, and said that Gerry and Kate were not suspects in the abduction of Madeleine.

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2007/07/portuguese-cid-spokesman-mccann-are-not.html

But come September ......

Hi almostgothic

While you are right in stating that the McCanns were not suspects, they were still suspected of being more involved with Madeleine's disappearance, than leaving her alone.

I've stated previously that Robert Murat, asked for the arguido status, because he was under the impression that the PJ were trying to pin Madeleine's disappearance on him and he needed to have a lawyer present, when he was questioned. He could only have this facility if he was an arguido.

In my opinion, the McCanns status as an arguido, was a complete joke, because they've never had to adhere to the terms of the arguido status. First of all they were given permission to fly home. The PJ tried in vain to block this decision, but were overruled by a higher authority.

The McCanns were given a police escort to the Algarve airport and when they arrived at the airport, they were given a private room where they could await their flight. When they boarded the plane, 3 rows were cleared, to offer the McCanns privacy and when they arrived at the East Midland Airport, a car containing Special Branch officers, was waiting on the apron at the airport, to take the McCanns home.

http://www.24dash.com/news/communities/2007-09-09-mccanns-vow-to-continue-search-for-madeleine-after-uk-return

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/the-homecoming-the-mccanns-return-to-britain-without-madeleine-401866.html

Although the PJ had no evidence that Robert Murat had played a part in Madeleine's disappearance, he had to adhere to the terms of the Arguido Status, while the McCanns, who were without a shadow of doubt, the perpetrators of Madeleine's disappearance, were free to go wherever they liked whenever they liked.

Lioned wrote:'Innocent' as in not yet proven guilty in Court but certainly not Innocent as far as being implicated as the main suspects in the only proper investigation so far.
Yet SY say they are not suspects !

And how do SY know they are Innocent/not suspects.

They can dress it up anyway they want but in order for anybody to state someone is absolutely innocent, they must provide proof of who the culprit is. They have not done this.

SY will never state the McCanns are suspects. They cannot. They cannot say no comment either, that's as good as saying they are suspects, given that they took a decision to comment on the case thus far, in other respects.

So they will stay not suspects, until such time as they are arrested and charged.

I'm not saying this will happen, simply the statement of them not being suspects is worthless, proves nothing and is a matter of opinion.

mossman wrote:

Lioned wrote:'Innocent' as in not yet proven guilty in Court but certainly not Innocent as far as being implicated as the main suspects in the only proper investigation so far.
Yet SY say they are not suspects !

And how do SY know they are Innocent/not suspects.

They can dress it up anyway they want but in order for anybody to state someone is absolutely innocent, they must provide proof of who the culprit is.  They have not done this.

SY will never state the McCanns are suspects.  They cannot.  They cannot say no comment either, that's as good as saying they are suspects, given that they took a decision to comment on the case thus far, in other respects.

So they will stay not suspects, until such time as they are arrested and charged.  

I'm not saying this will happen, simply the statement of them not being suspects is worthless, proves nothing and is a matter of opinion.  

Andy Redwood should not have told the media, that the McCanns and their mates were not persons of interest to he and his team. In fact Redwood was bang out of order when the discussed with the media, any aspect of this case. He should have taken a leaf out of the PJ's book and kept any discussion about the investigation, between he and his team.

David Cameron made it clear, when Scotland Yard were given permission to review the case, that they would be assisting the PJ. When the review changed to an investigation, the status remained the same. Redwood seemed to have forgotten that fact, when he kept mouthing off to the media, about people he suspected and when he would be visiting Portugal to investigate the suspects.

The Portuguese Authority, reminded Redwood that he and his team were only the PJ's assistants, when they refused Redwood permission to search the houses of the 3 burglars.

Dave Edgar, a former Northern Ireland senior police officer, who was one of the McCanns private detectives, was severely criticised, for not following correct investigative procedures. Edgar was forever speaking to the media about people who he believed were suspects. He told the media that he had passed on leads to the PJ and the PJ weren't following the leads. He even told the media, that he believed Madeleine was being held in a lawless community 10km away from PDL.

Redwood has followed the same stance as Edgar. In my opinion, Redwood should not only have been criticised, he should have been removed from the investigation. In fact if the investigation was bone fide Redwood would have been removed. The fact he is still there, says that the investigation is nothing but a whitewash, designed to exonerate the guilty guilty, guilty, McCanns.

If anyone believes the McCanns have played no part in Madeleine's disappearance, I would love them to tell me.

The reason I believe the McCanns are guilty, is because of what they admitted to the PJ and in many television interviews. The McCanns version of events may be a pack of lies made up by them, but at the end of the day Madeleine either vanished when the McCanns were out, or she vanished due to something that happened in their apartment while they were there. This means that the McCanns are guilty of committing an offence, which led to the disappearance of Madeleine.

If the McCanns never face a court of law, they will always be guilty.

Andy will need to explain this and the rest at some point in the future one would have thought.


Body fluids with an 88 per cent DNA match to Madeleine were found in the spare tyre well under the carpet in the boot of the Renault along with clumps of the youngster’s hair.

During police interviews the McCanns were shown a video of a sniffer dog “going crazy’’ when it approached their hire car.


I do hope we get to know the names of the new doggies that are said to be sniffing around soon.

Hopefully they're called Lewis and Morse.    

Iris wrote:Hopefully they're called Lewis and Morse.    

Grimes was training two new dogs, called exactly that ! I know Morse is with him in America. I don't know what happened with Lewis, perhaps he did not make it through training, or maybe he simply has not been mentioned.

More likely called Inspector Clouseau and Kato !

Lioned wrote:Andy will need to explain this and the rest at some point in the future one would have thought.


Body fluids with an 88 per cent DNA match to Madeleine were found in the spare tyre well under the carpet in the boot of the Renault along with clumps of the youngster’s hair.

During police interviews the McCanns were shown a video of a sniffer dog “going crazy’’ when it approached their hire car.

Interestingly, this quote is from Pat Brown.

Pat Brown wrote:The cadaver dog evidence is not admissable in court. It is great for probable cause for further investigation and it is great as evidence of where to search for a body (since a car was used, the body would be outside of, not in PDL) but it is not proof in a court of law that Maddie died in the apartment and was disposed of by the McCanns.

If she is right, what would Andy have to explain? Or is she wrong?

mossman wrote:

Iris wrote:Hopefully they're called Lewis and Morse.    

Grimes was training two new dogs, called exactly that !  I know Morse is with him in America.  I don't know what happened with Lewis, perhaps he did not make it through training, or maybe he simply has not been mentioned.

Exactly.

Iris wrote:

mossman wrote:

Iris wrote:Hopefully they're called Lewis and Morse.    

Grimes was training two new dogs, called exactly that !  I know Morse is with him in America.  I don't know what happened with Lewis, perhaps he did not make it through training, or maybe he simply has not been mentioned.

Exactly.

Sorry Iris, I thought you were a fan of the tv show and being sarcastic   

Mr Grimes WON'T be going to Portugal.


He works in the USA now , a country that doesn't ridicule you or your work and believes in the dogs, people are jailed because off their intelligence.

There are lots off people that do the same work as Mr Grimes in this country .



I would think even if offered to do it he wouldn't ...

kitti wrote:Mr Grimes WON'T be going to Portugal.


He works in the USA now , a country that doesn't ridicule you or your work and believes in the dogs, people are  jailed because off their intelligence.

There are lots off people that do the same work as  Mr Grimes in this country .



I would think even if offered to do it he wouldn't ...

When you say WON'T Kitti, is that his official response?

I would think if he works in the USA chances are he is too busy, too far away, all of those things, or perhaps he hasn't been approached in the first place, for you do go on to say 'even if offered to do it he wouldn't' which suggests you are not sure if he's been given the opportunity to start with.

I think personally if he's in business, if its his livelihood, he would consider all offers of work. However, as is usual in re-investigations, it is usual to start afresh with personnel who were not involved in the original investigation. That goes for the people now involved as well as dogs, for it cannot be a fresh approach if its the same investigating team all over again.

As for Martin Grimes being ridiculed, why would he feel like that? Was it Leics Police who ridiculed him or was it Team McCann. I would think that Mr Martin Grimes can hold his own as far as the McCanns are concerned. His findings never came to anything in Jersey either, but again I doubt he felt ridiculed over it.

Perhaps he can simply earn even more money in the USA for which I personally would not blame him. I am sure the intelligence produced by his dogs have jailed people in the past but, as in any line of work, you don't win them all. It happens all the time in the justice system.

But I doubt these people feel ridiculed because they are professionals. Jury's don't always agree with Prosecution evidence for instance but do the CPS feel ridiculed?

That's just how things go sometimes.