Monday, March 31, 2014

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.


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.

 Cover for 'Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann'

By Pat Brown
Rating: 1 star1 star1 star1 star1 star
(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.


Anonymous said...

Redwood had to say what he did Pat. He had to stick with the way the British press spun the conclusions of the Portuguese in 2008. If he hadn't - and the Metropolitan Police also don't reach any firm conclusions - then Redwood would have been the only person in authority since 2007 to say they might still be suspects. That would make him vulnerable - personally.

I expect he did, and still does, say exactly what lawyers tell him to say.

Anonymous said...

When he spoke on TV he was not speaking officially for the Met and therefore was (possibly) himself responsible for the words he used.

I don't think we should underestimate how tricky the position is for anyone speaking about the case publicly.

Pat Brown said...

To both Anonymouses,

I totally disagree! If Andy Redwood is saying the McCanns are not suspects, he may be required to do so, but it is not for any investigative purposes. IF he was is not doing a whitewash and truly looking at the McCanns, he can say, as is done all the time, that since Scotland Yard is going to review the case thoroughly as is professional and required, they will be looking at everything and everyone, no one being eliminated from being suspects until they can do so through the proper elimination methods. Many times this is said and it does not mean the parents of a missing child are suspects, just that they haven't properly been cleared. It is not such a big deal to say that but it IS a huge deal to CLEAR people without the evidence to do so or to even pretend to do so.

Anonymous said...

There was so much press spin between 2008 and 2011 Pat (so many thousands of articles saying they were cleared in 2008) if he'd said what you suggest people would take it as "UK police think they're suspects".

He'd be forever exposed as the only person to have said the unsayable since the UK press capitulated in 2008. He'd be vulnerable.

I definitely agree with the conclusions of your previous blog (if for slightly different reasons). I'm in no way in agreement with the blogger you wrote about today.

Anonymous said...

@PAT, Very well put, and I do agree they should follow the evidence pat, not exspensive changes to amend the evidence, in any error its found in, we can only hope.

Anonymous said...

SY are looking for an abductor who scrubbed an apartment before leaving with a child in his arms

peter claridge said...

Spot on Pat! How nice to read a voice of reason when so much drivel is spouted.

guerra said...

Where do I start? This review which supposedly turned into an investigation is nothing more than a project which has a large public relations component. The greater part of the media onslaught was planned to coincide with the libel trial. The goal of the project is to disparage the conclusions of the original investigators.

Remember, it was Mrs. McCann who requested a review in an open letter to Mr. Cameron in the Sun newspaper; it was Mr. Cameron who responded to Mrs. McCann, on the eve of her book release, in an open letter of his own in the same paper, saying that Scotland Yard (SY) would be undertaking the review. So if Mrs. McCann asked for the review don't you find it strange that Mr. Redwood in his first appearances in the media found it necessary to state publicly that the couple are not suspects? Not only did he state that the McCanns are not suspects he also said that anyone who thinks otherwise are conspiracy theorists, in other words nuts.

The very reason that SY was chosen for this project is because of their fabled reputation; people have a hard time accepting that SY is corrupt. And that is why that those who believe that the couple is guilty try to convince themselves that Mr. Redwood's strange behaviour is nothing but a ploy, which is absolute nonsense. In the end when Mr. Redwood gives his final narrative, which will be accepted by the majority of the public, those who are convinced that the couple is guilty and that the case is not political will say that SY couldn't solve the case so they came up with a story to save face.

With regard to the Portuguese police, they are part of the project. The McCanns will never be brought to justice. I'm only concerned about Mr. Amaral's welfare. I hope that the judge in the libel trial has not been corrupted in someway or influenced by the nonsense that has been disseminated in the media. Mr. Amaral will win in the end I just hope he doesn't have to resort to the appellate courts again.

Himself said...

I could not agree with you more.
And it's a pity more don't wake up to the fact.

But regarding the accountant.

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.

Something which more than he seems to overlook.

But it is this that is the crux of the matter, and until people wake up to it, everybody will blithely carry on in the same old way. Giving Redwood and the Met, the free pass that they are enjoying, and have enjoyed since day one of this nonsense.

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.

Anonymous said...

Agree 100%

The media strategy of Team McCann meant turning the homicide of their eldest daughter into a global 'psychodrama' that enabled them to evade process.

A legitimate investigation would move to reverse this.

I think that too many people are caught up in this as 'drama' rather than what it really is: a sordid catalogue of exploitation and failure.

Redwood belongs to those who dramatise, fabricate and exploit.

Amaral, on the other hand, asked questions. He did this under the privacy of a proper investigation; and he addressed these questions to the only people who can answer for what really happend on that night in PdL.

There is a strange bipolar phenomenon in the UK. Hardly a day passes without some new revelation of Met corruption and incompetence. And yet when the xenophobic buttons are pressed (and Redwood deliberately presses those buttons) people leap to the Met's defence as though an arrogant, exploitative DCI was capable of wonders.

He's following orders, and no doubt he'll be rewarded.

Anonymous said...

@PAT, Anonymous above me does have a valid point about a psychodrama, have you seen the article by Natasha donn in the maccann files latest about luz the village, resident speaks out, concerning stuff not just here either.
Best wishes to amaral and them that are concerned about his health.

trustmeigetit said...

And at the end of the day, even if they felt the McCann’s were responsible and killed Madeline. What can they do? Like Pat said… NOTHING.

They have no jurisdiction. This crime occurred in Portugal.

The fact that Scotland Yard is “investigating” to me is just as absurd as it would be if the US decided to investigate the Meredith Kercher murder just because a US Citizen was involved.

I am not aware of any other time this has occurred. Maybe it has?

But Scotland Yard has done nothing but make a mockery of this whole case. They have taken a case that was well documented and acted like page after page was “brand new information” when it was investigated and ruled out for obvious reasons.

I agree with Pat on that and do not believe they have any intention of getting this case resolved.

In fact, who wants to place bets that as soon as this joke of a lawsuit against Goncalo is over and closed… Scotland Yard closes the case.

I think this is a distraction.

And it all comes back to one thing. They have no jurisdiction so what the F#$@ are they doing and what is it that Gerry and or Kate have or know that has given them this support on a political stance.

We may never know but it sure does amaze me how many people don’t see this for what it is.

trustmeigetit said...

Since I think it’s safe to say that Nancy Grace, Jane Valdez and just about every news caster in the US all are refusing to speak of the McCann’s guilt due to the threat of a lawsuit, it would sure be nice if they all got together and decided to air this story at the same time and address it.

It would be too many to sue if they all do it at once and it would send a strong message.

But we all know that will never happen..

BUT…. now if same sex partners love each other and just want to get married… then we will see everyone stand up and fight and march in the streets. Thousands and thousands.

But stand up to guilty people and demand justice? These people go back inside and close the door..

trustmeigetit said...

Something else just dawned on me. So… SY claims the PJ didn’t investigate all these “leads”

Yet….. I have to admit, unless I missed it, have they?

Ill admit I don’t follow the results. I hear about them but they hold no validiting so I don’t follow up for results.

But, while they leak these new leads to the press… err I mean the press has “found out”….. that they are investigating…… I have not seen any follow up on any of them?

Did I miss it?

Just a leak that we are investigating the robbers…… now we are investigating the gypsies. Next… It’s like an weekly show that has no ending….Just continues the next week with a new story line with no ending.

Pat Brown said...


I don't believe that the networks are concerned about lawsuit (publishers, yes, but TV, no). They simply are taking the route that gets them the most viewers with the least repercussions. Once Scotland Yard came on board, the most highly respected police agency in the world (along with the FBI), broadcasters were not about to claim they are conducting a bogus review......they would get massacred by their audience. I can tell you that the blogs I have written about Scotland Yard's mishandling of the review and clear whitewashing of the case have gotten pretty strong negative reaction, mostly from those who believe the McCanns are guilty. So, TV goes where the money is, not where the truth is. Smart business people.

Anonymous said...

SY knows perfectly well who they should be questioning (even if it is just to eliminate them); and the McCanns and their legal team will know that SY knows.

There is no player here who is going to be either fooled or 'lulled' (lulled into what I wonder...trying to repeat the offence?) And if the past 7 years tell us anything, it is that the McCann legal team is never going to just drift into complacency. It's plain ridiculous.

So what are we to presume about SY's media obsession? Is it perhaps an attempt to ratchet up the pressure on the T9, maybe even force a confession? Perhaps all the SY doubters are missing a trick here - failing to interpret Redwood's signals.

To that there is just one question: why publicly signal anything at all? Why knowingly turn the potential homicide of a small child into an Internet plaything of those who would doubt and those who 'believe'?

The people at the centre of this thing aren't going to be fooled either way. Each already knows the cards of the other.

If SY believe themselves to have an ace up their sleeve then it will be played with the suspects under caution (not under TV studio lights).

It either gets real, or it is bullshit.

I think we are a long way from this being real.

Anonymous said...

Honestly, I'm just surprised this
"crack investigative team" hasn't
called in psychic investigator
micki pistorius by now to liven
things up.

This case has been an investigative
mishap since the beginning and
now they're just trying to save

I mean, Golly gee Bum..too bad
Sylvia Brown isn't still alive.
I'm sure she would get to the
bottom of this and lead them
right to the killers. For a nominal fee of course.

(sarcasm implied and intended.)

Anonymous said...

Everything you ever needed to know about a Operation Grange (and a "police officer" acting without jurisdiction):

Anonymous said...

I really hoped for justice when pj reopened the case. After all the b.s from redwood ive given up. Poor madeleine :0(

Anonymous said... least they´re throwing millions of pounds at this case and are keeping the McCanns out of Court...

Anonymous said...

The patio doors were 'never' left unlocked. The mccanns have tailored some things. The portuguese police were correct. The parallels between oscar pistorius story and the mccanns is there to see. Madeline was crying for an hour and half the night before...Well thats not checking on them every half hour is it..The mccanns didnt put enough thought into the shutter..Big booboo..Abit like oscar forgetting about the Ladders..OMW I hope they get re-questioned!

Anonymous said...

I think the police are onto them..