Andy Redwood...?

mossman wrote:I believe Redwood is a competent and well meaning police officer.  Even with his "alive or dead" comment, I still believed he was doing the only thing he could do and be politically correct.  What the man can say and what he would like to say are two very different things and I accept and acknowledge that he is working within constraints that I have no knowledge of.

He is a professional and has put himself across very well as far as I am concerned.  Indeed, I thought his demeanour had changed dramatically during Crimewatch, gone was Kate and Gerry, I felt two statements he made were very heartfelt - this has gone on long enough and we are fighting for Madeleine McCann.

I do not doubt he wants to solve this and I think he actually will.  What I would worry about is outside political interference.  He is one man fighting the system.  

He has been given the most difficult case imaginable.  I doubt there were many who wanted it.

So it is frustrating at times and I am sure I have been critical but never to the point of believing he is corrupt, unprofessional or inept.  He is none of these things for sure.  He has my sympathy and my respect to taking on the case.

Its those in the background, the faceless, nameless people I doubt.

So now Redwood is one man fighting the system?

That was Amaral's positioning but everyone who is on this case can't either be one man fighting the system or a part of the corrupt system unless you start from the point that the system - and that includes SY - is corrupt, and has arrived at the conclusion that McCanns are guilty and must have a cover up, prior to doing the work.

In which case the man in charge would be very much on side with that or not chosen to do the job.

His slick detective work so far is supposition - based on the notion that he is craftily setting McCanns up for the fall when in fact he could just be doing his job and uncovering things as he goes.

if he uncovers things negative for McCanns and then is removed from the case or suffers an untimely accident, then we have a reason to suppose he is alone fighting a whitewash. He doesn't work alone but has a team or at least we saw them on CW - are all these people too lone men fighting the system? Redwood as the head of this would be coordinating, not doing everything himself, just as Amaral was coordinating an investigation and the findings he publicized in his book were the work of the investigation, not just of himself?

widowan wrote:

mossman wrote:I believe Redwood is a competent and well meaning police officer.  Even with his "alive or dead" comment, I still believed he was doing the only thing he could do and be politically correct.  What the man can say and what he would like to say are two very different things and I accept and acknowledge that he is working within constraints that I have no knowledge of.

He is a professional and has put himself across very well as far as I am concerned.  Indeed, I thought his demeanour had changed dramatically during Crimewatch, gone was Kate and Gerry, I felt two statements he made were very heartfelt - this has gone on long enough and we are fighting for Madeleine McCann.

I do not doubt he wants to solve this and I think he actually will.  What I would worry about is outside political interference.  He is one man fighting the system.  

He has been given the most difficult case imaginable.  I doubt there were many who wanted it.

So it is frustrating at times and I am sure I have been critical but never to the point of believing he is corrupt, unprofessional or inept.  He is none of these things for sure.  He has my sympathy and my respect to taking on the case.

Its those in the background, the faceless, nameless people I doubt.

So now Redwood is one man fighting the system?

That was Amaral's positioning but everyone who is on this case can't either be one man fighting the system or a part of the corrupt system unless you start from the point that the system - and that includes SY - is corrupt, and has arrived at the conclusion that McCanns are guilty and must have a cover up, prior to doing the work.

In which case the man in charge would be very much on side with that or not chosen to do the job.

His slick detective work so far is supposition - based on the notion that he is craftily setting McCanns up for the fall when in fact he could just be doing his job and uncovering things as he goes.

if he uncovers things negative for McCanns and then is removed from the case or suffers an untimely accident, then we have a reason to suppose he is alone fighting a whitewash. He doesn't work alone but has a team or at least we saw them on CW - are all these people too lone men fighting the system? Redwood as the head of this would be coordinating, not doing everything himself, just as Amaral was coordinating an investigation and the findings he publicized in his book were the work of the investigation, not just of himself?

The post you have quoted was in response to a question / comment made earlier in the thread which related to him personally, in so far as he is head of the investigation.

It had nothing to do with him being one man fighting a system.

mossman wrote:

widowan wrote:

mossman wrote:I believe Redwood is a competent and well meaning police officer.  Even with his "alive or dead" comment, I still believed he was doing the only thing he could do and be politically correct.  What the man can say and what he would like to say are two very different things and I accept and acknowledge that he is working within constraints that I have no knowledge of.

He is a professional and has put himself across very well as far as I am concerned.  Indeed, I thought his demeanour had changed dramatically during Crimewatch, gone was Kate and Gerry, I felt two statements he made were very heartfelt - this has gone on long enough and we are fighting for Madeleine McCann.

I do not doubt he wants to solve this and I think he actually will.  What I would worry about is outside political interference.  He is one man fighting the system.  

He has been given the most difficult case imaginable.  I doubt there were many who wanted it.

So it is frustrating at times and I am sure I have been critical but never to the point of believing he is corrupt, unprofessional or inept.  He is none of these things for sure.  He has my sympathy and my respect to taking on the case.

Its those in the background, the faceless, nameless people I doubt.

So now Redwood is one man fighting the system?

That was Amaral's positioning but everyone who is on this case can't either be one man fighting the system or a part of the corrupt system unless you start from the point that the system - and that includes SY - is corrupt, and has arrived at the conclusion that McCanns are guilty and must have a cover up, prior to doing the work.

In which case the man in charge would be very much on side with that or not chosen to do the job.

His slick detective work so far is supposition - based on the notion that he is craftily setting McCanns up for the fall when in fact he could just be doing his job and uncovering things as he goes.

if he uncovers things negative for McCanns and then is removed from the case or suffers an untimely accident, then we have a reason to suppose he is alone fighting a whitewash. He doesn't work alone but has a team or at least we saw them on CW - are all these people too lone men fighting the system? Redwood as the head of this would be coordinating, not doing everything himself, just as Amaral was coordinating an investigation and the findings he publicized in his book were the work of the investigation, not just of himself?

The post you have quoted was in response to a question / comment made earlier in the thread which related to him personally, in so far as he is head of the investigation.

It had nothing to do with him being one man fighting a system.

If he's the head of the investigation then how is he one man fighting anything, necessarily? We don't know what he is fighting for or against, as he has not done anything but open the investigation under the supposed assumption that it was an abduction and the parents are not suspects, and reveal as new evidence an efit his team uncovered in McCann files from Oakley. He might not have known prior to CW that Exton would come forward - now he could be one man as part of the system struggling to fit that puzzle piece into place as to why McCanns would have this suppressed.

You quoted my post and asked the question is redwood one man fighting the system.

I have explained my post had nothing to do with my saying or suggesting he is one man fighting the system.

It is my opinion on his performance on the case in so far as I have seen, taking account of comments he has made in previous interviews and the CW programme. Nothing more.

For some reason I am feeling quite optimistic tonight that they will eventually get to the truth. I was thinking all over Europe and the rest of the world people including policemen are watching this. I think nothing less than the truth won't do now.

MaryB wrote:For some reason I am feeling quite optimistic tonight that they will eventually get to the truth.  I was thinking all over Europe and the rest of the world people including policemen are watching this.  I think nothing less than the truth won't do now.

I agree MaryB. We have never seen the like of so much coming into the public eye. If it had started off a whitewash ...think its drawn more people than ever to find the truth.
People are speaking out now on the sites like never before ...think it will be a very hard job now at this stage to contain it.
Think lots of people were not really bothered to much before ...just another case gone cold. Now with all the talk of the expense and other families of missing children demanding there rights to help.. and rightly so .. think it will need an ending sooner rather than later.

Given his history of getting a conviction of Barry George on DNA evidence, a conviction which was subsequently overturned, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that this played a significant role in his superior's motive for appointing Redwood to lead this Scotland Yard team. In other words, I can imagine his superior making it quite clear that the dogs reactions and DNA evidence in this case are a no go (as is interviewing the parents or their friends). In fact Redwood's history would be a Godsend for the smart lawyers that the parents have at their disposal should Redwood be instrumental in putting a case together against them based on DNA evidence alone. IMO therefore you don't need a whitewash as such - just make it as difficult as possible to solve the case. In fact I had the same impression way back in 2007 when Prior and his colleagues on the ground were most definitely operating in pure detection mode and quite clearly advising the PJ to go after the parents. At that time I could imagine Prior's superior (who later went on to be promoted by G. Brown to head of the constabulary in N. Ireland for services rendered) bawling down the phone, "You'd better be right on this Prior or you'll be back on traffic duty for the rest of your life", or words to that effect. Having had the rug pulled out from under both his own and the PJ's feet with the sudden change of the initial evaluation of the DNA from certain to inconclusive, thus letting the parents off the hook, Prior had no alternative than to return home with his team and grovel to the parents and friends. IMO Redwood is in the same position as Prior was then - hence his (unfounded) statements that neither the parents nor their friends are suspects. But I would like to believe that Redwood is somewhat sharper than the majority of us or indeed his superiors believe and that he is seeking to solve the case without DNA evidence and (at least initially) without having to have a serious go at the parents or friends. I am strengthened in this belief by recent events where we have seen the Sunday Times for example printing an article which was hugely damaging to the parents, their legal team and PR monkey. Things have definitely changed since Redwood's appearances and they could be going in the right direction. IMO this is Redwood's achievement to date Let us hope that he can play the internal politics better than Prior when things get rough and that he turns out to have more guts.

mossman wrote:You quoted my post and asked the question is redwood one man fighting the system.

I have explained my post had nothing to do with my saying or suggesting he is one man fighting the system.

It is my opinion on his performance on the case in so far as I have seen, taking account of comments he has made in previous interviews and the CW programme.  Nothing more.

OK, we'll leave it at that. I don't know what system he may be fighting or aligned with.

T4two wrote:Given his history of getting a conviction of Barry George on DNA evidence, a conviction which was subsequently overturned, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that this played a significant role in his superior's motive for appointing Redwood to lead this Scotland Yard team. In other words, I can imagine his superior making it quite clear that the dogs reactions and DNA evidence in this case are a no go (as is interviewing the parents or their friends). In fact Redwood's history would be a Godsend for the smart lawyers that the parents have at their disposal should Redwood be instrumental in putting a case together against them based on DNA evidence alone. IMO therefore you don't need a whitewash as such - just make it as difficult as possible to solve the case. In fact I had the same impression way back in 2007 when Prior and his colleagues on the ground were most definitely operating in pure detection mode and quite clearly advising the PJ to go after the parents. At that time I could imagine Prior's superior (who later went on to be promoted by G. Brown to head of the constabulary in N. Ireland for services rendered) bawling down the phone, "You'd better be right on this Prior or you'll be back on traffic duty for the rest of your life", or words to that effect. Having had the rug pulled out from under both his own and the PJ's feet with the sudden change of the initial evaluation of the DNA from certain to inconclusive, thus letting the parents off the hook, Prior had no alternative than to return home with his team and grovel to the parents and friends. IMO Redwood is in the same position as Prior was then - hence his (unfounded) statements that neither the parents nor their friends are suspects. But I would like to believe that Redwood is somewhat sharper than the majority of us or indeed his superiors believe and that he is seeking to solve the case without DNA evidence and (at least initially) without having to have a serious go at the parents or friends. I am strengthened in this belief by recent events where we have seen the Sunday Times for example printing an article which was hugely damaging to the parents, their legal team and PR monkey. Things have definitely changed since Redwood's appearances and they could be going in the right direction. IMO this is Redwood's achievement to date Let us hope that he can play the internal politics better than Prior when things get rough and that he turns out to have more guts.

Good details t4two

however, Given his history of getting a conviction of Barry George on DNA evidence, it is also not beyond the bounds of possibility that SY would have chosen him for this case despite the conviction being over turned.

You probably know more than I do on how detectives are chosen based on their success in similar cases or cases involving similar forensics. I think my cat knows more than I do about that. However, people are chosen to prosecute cases they've lost before, based on their experience - you aren't going to win every case.

With detectives it could be the same, no? He has experience in what to not get tripped up by. Perhaps this time he'll do better. He's not in charge of how the jury interprets dna evidence when it is all in - only in uncovering it.

The dna evidence wasn't certain - it was interpreted as certain DESPITE the lab saying that it was too early - at that point they had 15 of 19 matches but warned that that was too early to be making determinations, and indeed this turned out to be the case since the sample contained strands from multiple individuals (or they are lying, it was certain, and from one individual, however in that case you would expect 19 of 19 although maybe not from LCN because that implies you are repeating a small strand and extrapolating from it).

if it is not certain and not admissible in any case, then his best bet is to ignore those findings - although maybe not the dog alerts in general. Did the handler also subliminally convince the cadaver dog to alert to a key fob? And a Bible? And clothes? And the apt in several places? I don't think a handler would be much good to a police force if he trained the dogs to be rewarded for finding things where he wanted them found instead of where they were found.

The video of Eddie practically breaking the door down to get into the apt tells me he was keen to get to work and was on the trail of something, if that video was Eddie that had him straining to get in.

DNA evidence is not going to solve this case. That IMO is the message put out by the chief constable of the Met in appointing Redwood to head the review/investigation. Now to the dogs' indications. As far as those people with the power to dictate what happens in this case are concerned, the dogs have already been discredited by the investigation at the Jersey children's home. The Jersey case is continuously quoted as the example of false indications of specialized dogs. Whether this is right or wrong - it is the status quo. Why is it thus? Probably because too much is at stake as far as Jersey is concerned, which incidently does appear to have been a whitewash to cover widespread paedophile behaviour. Be that as it may, IMO Redwood and his team are left with only one option namely, to solve the case without using DNA evidence or the indications from specialized dogs. Of course there is always the possibility that the same grounds for suppressing the truth that applied in Jersey, apply here as well - in which case we may see Redwood discredited and forced into early retirement as was his counterpart in the Jersey investigation.

Whatever way you look at it,short of a confession,perhaps a body or some other piece of compelling evidence,DCI Redwood is going to struggle to present a case to the CPS i would have thought.
I cant imagine where that piece of compelling evidence will come from after all this time.
I think his best shot at solving this is to break down the T9 and theres no reason to believe that after 6 years thats going to get any easier.

Lioned wrote:Whatever way you look at it,short of a confession,perhaps a body or some other piece of compelling evidence,DCI Redwood is going to struggle to present a case to the CPS i would have thought.
I cant imagine where that piece of compelling evidence will come from after all this time.
I think his best shot at solving this is to break down the T9 and theres no reason to believe that after 6 years thats going to get any easier.

Lioned, will he need to present to the CPS or will it be the Portugese equivalent. I suppose my question is can this case be heard in the British courts or will it go to Portugal, do you know. If Portugal, then I assume it is their requirements that will need to be met.

T4Two, Widowan et al:

All the talk here is centred on Andy Redwood (yes, this thread is titled such). THIS CASE WILL BE PROSECUTED, IF AT ALL, IN PORTUGAL.

If AR can assist in achieving this, I'm sure he will. He is a decorated policeman, and he is now, never before seen, in the public eye (along with his team). I personally believe, I am allowed as I pay my taxes, a whitewash is not on the agenda. Information is now seeping through. Don't knock it, sit back and wait.

dagobert wrote:T4Two, Widowan et al:

All the talk here is centred on Andy Redwood (yes, this thread is titled such).  THIS CASE WILL BE PROSECUTED, IF AT ALL, IN PORTUGAL.  

If AR can assist in achieving this, I'm sure he will. He is a decorated policeman, and he is now, never before seen, in the public eye (along with his team).  I personally believe, I am allowed as I pay my taxes, a whitewash is not on the agenda.   Information is now seeping through. Don't knock it, sit back and wait.  

Sorry to disagree but where a crime has been committed in a foreign jurisdiction against a British national by British nationals, then prosecution in a British court can be made irrespective of whether that case has been already tried in the foreign jurisdiction and the perpetrators convicted and sentenced.

I think SY are clutching at straws and the fact that they are investigating seperately from the Oporto Team suggests a bit of friction.

If DNA evidence is not admissable and after 6 yrs there is no indication of what happened to Madeleine , the McCanns cannot be charged, just why are SY still in Portugal wasting taxpayers money.? Remember JonBenet was never found , nor anyone charged and it was only the McCanns who pushed for a review and were heartless enough to plead through the Press, posting a letter to Cameron in the Sun and reminding him that he had lost a Son that brought this about.

There was also the case of the 3 yr old British Girl whose Father was stationed in Germany . Her Mother and Aunt had gone to a supermarket to buy something for the child's birthday and she disappeared without a trace many years ago. Ben Needham is another case but his Mother never opened up a Company to receive donations and didn't have the advantage of knowing people with the power to do their bidding .

Panda wrote:

I think SY are clutching at straws and the fact that they are investigating seperately from the Oporto Team suggests a bit of friction.

If DNA evidence is not admissable and after 6 yrs there is no indication of what happened to Madeleine , the McCanns cannot be charged, just why are SY still in Portugal wasting taxpayers money.? Remember JonBenet was never found , nor anyone charged and it was only the McCanns who pushed for a review and were heartless enough to plead through the Press, posting a letter to Cameron in the Sun and reminding him that he had lost a Son that brought this about.

There was also the case of the 3 yr old British Girl whose Father was stationed in Germany . Her Mother and Aunt had gone to a supermarket to buy something for the child's birthday and she disappeared without a trace many years ago. Ben Needham is another case but his Mother never opened up a Company to receive donations and didn't have the advantage of knowing people with the power to do their bidding .

Jon Benet's body was found inside the Ramsey home. They decided to indict the Ramseys, but then decided not to prosecute. The indictment is supposed to be made available to the public after 14 years, even though John Ramsey fought tooth and nail not to have it released. I am not sure if it is available yet. I can just imagine how many people will want to read it.

Lioned wrote:Thats the spirit.   

What has moved me away from the 'whitewash' theory for the moment at least is the intensity of the spin !

Why would they need all this spin if it was going to be a whitewash ?

Its easy to wash it away very quickly as i have said before a number of times all they have to do is blame Hewletts Gypsy friend.Sure us internet nutters will cry foul but how can we ever prove otherwise.

indeed, the stories this week have been somewhat entertaining compared with that which i believe triggered them off.

 

mossman wrote:

Lioned wrote:Whatever way you look at it,short of a confession,perhaps a body or some other piece of compelling evidence,DCI Redwood is going to struggle to present a case to the CPS i would have thought.
I cant imagine where that piece of compelling evidence will come from after all this time.
I think his best shot at solving this is to break down the T9 and theres no reason to believe that after 6 years thats going to get any easier.

Lioned, will he need to present to the CPS or will it be the Portugese equivalent.  I suppose my question is can this case be heard in the British courts or will it go to Portugal, do you know.  If Portugal, then I assume it is their requirements that will need to be met.

The answer is a very definite yes it can - provided the accused are British nationals.

Who decides? The CPS

Scotland Yard whitewash or clutching at straws? I don't think so

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/jurisdiction/#an02

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/100

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/relevant-offences-list-for-england-and-wales

T4two wrote:

mossman wrote:

Lioned wrote:Whatever way you look at it,short of a confession,perhaps a body or some other piece of compelling evidence,DCI Redwood is going to struggle to present a case to the CPS i would have thought.
I cant imagine where that piece of compelling evidence will come from after all this time.
I think his best shot at solving this is to break down the T9 and theres no reason to believe that after 6 years thats going to get any easier.

Lioned, will he need to present to the CPS or will it be the Portugese equivalent.  I suppose my question is can this case be heard in the British courts or will it go to Portugal, do you know.  If Portugal, then I assume it is their requirements that will need to be met.

The answer is a very definite yes it can - provided the accused are British nationals.

Who decides? The CPS

Scotland Yard whitewash or clutching at straws? I don't think so

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/jurisdiction/#an02

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/24-25/100

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/relevant-offences-list-for-england-and-wales

Thank you for that. We were told back in April / May the CPS were in Portugal. Perhaps a way forward was agreed at that point in time and now we are seeing the wheels being put in motion.

If they think they know who the Exton efit is - some Scottish pedophile? - then they may have been there for that reason. Similarly if it were one or more of the T9.

They've got to have some kind of proof of the crime though. just the child being missing isn't enough, there are several theories - of interrupting a burglar and being killed by him or falling and breaking neck (parents hide body for reputation reasons?) abduction by sex predator or pedophile ring, or manslaughter from parents - Sy has said they've ruled out the parents though

And how can they rule out the parents,that is the question ?

Is it normal for the police to rule out suspects just because they are nice middle class doctors who couldn't possibly have done it ?

What evidence is there that the mccanns couldn't have possibly done it. ?

I don't think we know for certain they were ruled out.

When do police ever tell the public who they may or may not suspect. Also, when are the police ever asked the direct question, do you suspect Mr & Mrs.

Of course I cannot say they are still ruled in but in order to be 100% certain they were not involved, then they must know who was. If they know who was, why are we in the middle of this mess.

I cannot see where all this is going right now. How much longer will this go on for ? Are we looking at days, weeks or years. It's gone nuts.

Well i will give Andy Redwood until after the trial and then maybe wish him a happy Christmas but if he hasn't sussed out Smithman by the end of January then i fear it will be 'Deadwood' again.

I know someone who wrote to Theresa May about the expenditure this case has incurred and after over 2 yrs with so many Detectives involved and the spiralling cast when will it end???   Mrs May's Aide replied that the prime consideration was to find Madeleine and he was sure most people would wish for this. I assume that the 38 "persons of interest" will be tracked down , say in  another 3 years time?????

It's all a bit of a mess.

SY have spent so much money, they need a result, it has to end with some explanation, not just a we don't know, after all of the millions poured in. But it is going to have to stop and soon. There will be uproar because of the cost, it cannot continue, with no budget limit.

The Portuguese apparently working on a different line, yet would appear to have evidence now considered sufficient to re-open. They will look like right muppets if they shelve it again as unsolved, not to mention the cost that will be involved.

So it has to be solved.

Is it possible that two countries will join together and essentially commit fraud and lie to the masses and just leave Madeleine somewhere ? What is so bad that could require a cover up of such a scale, is it even logistically possible ?

It just seems to be the most difficult route to take, the easier option is surely Scotland Yard finding a dead paedophile back at the review stage. Case closed, take it or leave it.