Andy Redwood, Scotland Yard, and Santa Claus

::sigh:: A lot of really nice people desperately want to believe that DCI Andy Redwood and Scotland Yard are about to shock the world with a brilliant check and mate that is going to see Kate and Gerry McCann led off in handcuffs, arrested for the death and disappearance of their daughter Madeleine McCann. In fact, they are so desperate for there to be a proper resolution to this case, they actually find sense in the twisted logic of some fellow who spends a good portion of his pro-Scotland Yard blog post slandering me and mocking my grammar abilities (he doesn't recognize a typo when he sees one...but, whatever). Normally, I don't respond to haters (especially if they have something useful to say outside of denigrating me)  but I want to respond to the Kool-Aid he is selling to hopeful folk who normally don't believe in fairy tales.

Yes, of course he (Redwood) is eliminating all other possibilities - that is his job and any scenario he overlooks and fails to eliminate could be used by the McCanns in any future trial to demonstrate police incompetence and could be part of their (undoubtedly extensive) defence.

BWAHAHAHA! 

Dude, it's NOT a British case! It doesn't matter what the heck Scotland Yard detectives do or don't do because it is not going to be an issue in a Portuguese court of law. Secondly, following solid evidentiary leads may well support a prosecutorial case as far as not leaving the door open for the defence to shed doubt on the police work, but ignoring all the evidence and spending a silly amount of time and money on totally unrelated leads is a sign of incompetence; the defence could completely destroy the detectives in court by pointing out that they clearly had so little viable evidence against the defendants that they found it necessary to follow-up on every ridiculous tip and possible alternative scenario.

The solution is determined from the evidence, not Pat Brown's rather less than exhaustive list of options.

I had commented that you can't eliminate every possible scenario because there can always be another ridiculous scenario someone can dream up that could be the cause for the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. So, this fellow is claiming here that it isn't about how many scenarios one can come up with but determining which scenario is correct from the evidence. Evidence? Ummm...yeah, that is the evidence from the apartment and the Tapas 9, so why would one need to eliminate a dozen scenarios to which the evidence does not point? Again, eliminating a whole bunch of scenarios is pointless because this means the detectives are not working FROM the crime scene evidence. In fact, all they are appearing to do is to be searching for that one scenario they can link BACK to the crime (confession, body on property, Maddie's clothing.etc,....but you can bet it will in the end just be confession or circumstantial evidence). This proves, yet again, Scotland Yard is indicating that they have already determined that evidence from the scene and the Tapas 9 has no validity.

Who says that they haven't reviewed the physical behavioural evidence from the crime scene?

Really? Didn't Redwood state that the McCanns are not suspects and that this was an abduction?

Yes, he did, so this could mean only one of two things: one, he is ignoring the evidence, or, two, he is lying about ignoring the evidence. It appears my detractor believes Redwood is telling a piles of lies in order to lull the McCanns into a sense of complacency and then, somehow, come up with enough evidence (from where?) to the arrest the duo....yeah, some awesomely clever police strategy that has no precedent in all of police investigative history.

Alright, let us take a look at how he is trying to trap the McCanns. 

He did a fake reconstruction on Crimewatch during which time he bolstered the McCanns' veracity by "proving" Tannerman to be real and not a kidnapper cooked up by Tapas 9 conspirators.

Ah, yes, you say, but, this now means Tannerman can't be Gerry's alibi! Redwood eliminated Gerry's alibi and then he focused right in on the guy seen by the Smith family, the one they say they think is Gerry. Doesn't that mean that Scotland Yard is cannily pointing to Gerry as the one seen carrying off a Maddie-like child at a time when he has no real alibi? 

Not at all. Think back to the statement by Redwood that the McCanns are not suspects and that this is an abduction. He is TELLING the world that the man the Smiths saw that looked like Gerry cannot possibly be Gerry, so don't call in any tips that would implicate Gerry McCann. If you saw that same man come out of the McCann flat and walk directly toward the point where the Smiths witnessed a man carrying a little girl, it doesn't matter because you will not be believed; you are a fabricator or a McCann hater; it is not Gerry, so don't say it is. Hence, right up front, Redwood has prevented any and all information that might have corroborated the Smith sighting as Gerry from being brought to their attention. Right there is massive proof the McCanns are not being considered in the mix. In fact, it is clear as a bell that Redwood is fishing for a look-alike that will clear Gerry, another version of Tannerman, a man carrying his kid home from some location near the McCanns' flat. It doesn't matter whether anyone really does call in with such a person; Scotland Yard can just say they have received information clearing Gerry just as they did with this supposed Tannerman bloke, the guy carrying his child in the wrong direction (toward rather than away from the creche).

All I see happening with these Scotland Yard shenanigans is an attempt to clear the McCanns bit by bit and, in the process, completely discredit the PJ by constantly pointing out that they did not conduct a thorough investigation, which is why Scotland Yard's investigators have to go back over ever bit of information and every lead (with the exception of the actual evidence); the PJ did NOT find Tannerman, they did not find the Gerry look-alike, they did NOT investigate Tractorman, Binman, the British pedophile, or those charity men.....the PJ simply failed to clear the McCanns properly and they failed to follow-up on the abduction theory with due diligence.

THIS is the reality of what is being played out. It is clear as a bell to me yet I feel a need to ring that bell one more time so folks can see that Santa Claus does not exist and neither does an honest Scotland Yard review. Our only hope lies in the PJ, that they decide to truly conduct their own investigation following the evidence and not the directives of politicians, that they decide truth and justice should prevail and not a myriad of agendas that have nothing to do with what really happened to Madeleine McCann i Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

March 31, 2014

Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann available at Smashwords and Barnes and Noble.


 

By Pat Brown
Rating:
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

Published: July 27, 2011

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

No, Andy Redwood and Scotland Yard are not Trying to Solve the Madeleine McCann Case

Today I want to address some of the questions I have received about what is going on with Scotland Yard's handling of the Madeleine McCann review and DCI Andy Redwood's public appearances sharing the Met's progress on the case, his disemination of information, and his outreach to the public for help.

Q) Is Redwood being a very clever fellow, eliminating all other possibilities one by one (thereby leaving what is left to be the real scenario) and then swooping in on the McCanns? Is he also trying to unnerve them in the process, part of his plan to get them to break down and confess?

A) I wish, but no. I find such investigative strategy hard to swallow or believe, especially since it is so public, so drawn out, and so expensive. First of all, presenting a myriad of possibilities that you actually cannot eliminate means you have not proved that one of them couldn't have happened. It could have been gypsies, it could have been a lone sex predator, it could have been a burglary gone bad with the accidental killing of a child, it could have been a sex ring posing as charity workers, it could have been some insane rich couple hiring a kidnapper to bring them a child of their choice, it could have been an Arab Sheik wishing to add a blonde child to his growing little girl harem, it could have been a psychotic man who thought Maddie was he beloved dead child come to life...and on and on. The only way you can really eliminate certain scenarios is to have absolute ones that can be disproved with evidence and even then, it doesn't prove that the most likely one left is in fact the correct one, it just that maybe you should spend more time focusing on that likelihood.

     Secondly, all this does is actually give the McCann's support for their theory that someone abducted Madeleine. Think about it: every time Redwood opens his mouth, he is proclaiming that abduction is the theory he is basing all his investigative  efforts on; he is reaffirming that the McCann's are not involved in the crime and there is no need to go back and reinvestigate any of the Tapas 9.

    And, finally, it makes no sense to spend millions to investigate pointless avenues when you simply can go straight to the evidence and put your efforts into reanalyzing  what is right in front of your face.

Q) Could the Algarve serial predator have taken Maddie?

A) Sure. I have always believed that if the McCanns were not involved in the disappearance of their daughter, then it was most likely, 99% most likely, that a lone local child sex predator grabbed her, sexually assaulted her, and murdered her within hours. Murat was not a bad suspect due to his somewhat odd behavior, his familiarity with the area, and the location of his mother's home just down the street. He was a great red herring and the police were not unreasonable in making him a suspect in the early days. And, no, Madeleine is not buried on his property.

Q) Since Andy Redwood just recently admitted that Madeleine might have died in the apartment, isn't  he giving credence to cadaver and blood dogs?

A) Not at all. He simply is "admitting" that Madeleine might not be alive, that she may have been killed during the commission of a crime - during sexual assault, abduction, or just to prevent her from screaming because she saw someone in the process of burglarizing the apartment. She would have been only dead for seconds or minutes in those scenarios and have left nothing for the dogs to hit on. Admitting this can eliminate the need to search for Maddie endlessly throughout the world and respond to the many future sightings that will surely pop up from time to time; one can lay blame on a tolerably believable dead or incarcerated suspect and put the case to rest because Maddie can no longer be rescued.

Q) What is the motive of Scotland Yard and Andy Redwood then? If Redwood does not have some brilliant plan to finally bring down the McCanns nor is he really going to catch a predator who abducted Maddie, what is this whole charade about?

A) Well, we are back to some bizarre political issues which I am unable to address. What is clear to me is the evidence still points to the McCanns, the "review" is a sham because even if Scotland Yard leaned away from the McCanns as being involved in the disappearance of their daughter, their incredible refusal to even review the physical and behavioral evidence from the crime scene and days following is astounding and unprofessional and is a standard procedure if to do no more than to clear the parents and search for overlooked clues. Likewise, their astonishing expenditures chasing foolish leads also makes little sense. Redwood's Crimewatch fabrication and his recent outreach to the public for more information on a suspect that already has been investigated by the PJ lead me to believe he is simply playing a part in the drama to which he has been assigned and, being a bit of a ham, he is actually enjoying the role.

It is my belief that Scotland Yard was set out on a mission, not one to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann but to rewrite the history of the case in such a way that the majority of the public simply forgets the past. We can see quite clearly that this plan is working for the media has overwhelmingly presented all the new theories and "developments' with enthusiasm. I have been around long enough to see this kind of game played out before, albeit in a bit milder form, and it works. Eventually, the truth gets buried and those that fight to keep it alive are labeled conspiracy theorists and nuts.

My only hope is that at least Gonçalo Amaral will win his day in court, that Portugal will somehow stand by the law and keep this avalanche of revisionist history from crushing truth and justice. I feel less then confident that the outcome will be what I wish and this whole episode will simply be sealed and delivered into history as the victors desire, but I still keep my fingers crossed for the smallest chance of a miracle.


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

March 25, 2014



Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann available at Smashwords and Barnes and Noble.


 

By Pat Brown
Rating:
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

Published: July 27, 2011

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.

Bollux Media Interviews the Algarve Bogeyman

BREAKING NEWS!  Bollux media has located the Algarve Bogeyman and, over a cup of expresso and  a few smokes, the Algarve Bogeyman has come clean about his criminal activities

Suspect Shirt

Bollux: So, I notice you are wearing a shirt that is very similar to the one that Scotland Yard has released to the media! Don't you think that is a bit dangerous?

Algarve Bogeyman Shirt

AB: No, I am not worried. They can't arrest anyone over here in Portugal and after a few months have passed, they will be back looking for gypsies or burglars.

Bollux: You kind of look like a gypsy.

AB: Right, yeah, true. Well, they will be looking for a sex ring, then.

Bollux: A couple of times you weren't wearing any shirt at all! Were you worried at that time your shirt would be recognized.

AB: No, I was just washing it. Some of the little girls told me I was smelly.

Bollux: Ah, I understand. So, according to reports, you broke in to twelve vacation homes while the the parents were sleeping in the next room.

AB: No, I actually never broke in. Those British parents always leave their front doors unlocked, so I just walked in.

Bollux: And you sexually assaulted five of these children.

AB: Not really, I just sort of looked at them. Wouldn't you think there would have been a big deal made if I was raping little tourist girls in the Argarve?

Bollux: You spoke to some of the parents. Why?

AB: I wanted to practice my English.

Bollux: Is that why you only broke into....excuse me...accessed the flats of British families and not those of Swedes, Germans, or the Dutch?

AB: Sure, that makes sense.

Bollux: So, according to trusted media reports, you sexually assaulted those five girls between 2004 and 2006, maybe took Madeleine in 2007, and then went on breaking into apartments until 2010 but didn't molest any more little girls and then stopped.

AB: Okay.

Bollux: So, did you take Madeleine?

AB: Sort of. When I came through the open front door, I saw Maddie behind the sofa and I pulled her out. She was dead I don't like 'em dead. I got worried that because I had touched her that I could have left DNA and then be accused of killing her, so I picked her up and ran off with her. I dumped her in the back of the trash truck I work on.

Bollux: But, unlike the other crimes where you hit between 2 and 5 in the morning, this was in the evening. Why would you have a trash truck with you?

AB: Oh, right. Yeah, so I took Maddie down toward the beach and dumped her in the sea.

Bollux: The Smith family saw you? They sure got their description wrong.

AB: Well, you know how bad witnesses can be.

Bollux: True. So, what are your plans now that Scotland Yard is looking for you?

AB: I'm going to have another cup of coffee and a cigarette.


This nearly accurate and mostly truthful report was brought to you by Bollux Media and


Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

March 19, 2014




Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann available at Smashwords and Barnes and Noble.


 

By Pat Brown
Rating:
(5.00 based on 5 reviews)

Published: July 27, 2011

What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007? Was she abducted as the Gerry and Kate have claimed or did something happen to Madeleine on May 3 in the vacation apartment and the incident covered up? Criminal Profiler Pat Brown analyzes the evidence and takes the readers through the steps of profiling, developing a theory that is intriguing and controversial.