Lying in the Sun

Metropolitan Police

Metropolitan Police 

Keeping it simple - When police question persons in connection with a crime, if those persons have something to hide in connection with said crime, those persons will:

  •  not give truthful answers when questioned
  •  may refuse to answer when questioned.

In the case of missing Madeleine, the McCanns and their holiday buddies fall into both categories! 

Stands to reason then the Metropolitan Police, having had the advantage as DCI Redwood stated, of being able to bring together, for the first time on British shores, three threads of investigation -  

  • The Portuguese Police Files
  • Leicestershire Police Files
  • McCann Private Detective Files 
- that they could not have failed to notice that the McCanns and their buddies had been less than truthful in their accounts of the events of the night they reported Madeleine as missing. 


  • The Portuguese Police Files are vast, this confirmed by DCI Redwood, 30,000 documents, some having as many as 100 pages. 

30,000 documents put together in the course of a six month investigation.   The Portuguese Police didn't mess around by the looks of it!  Quite clearly they worked their socks off! 

30,000 documents which the Metropolitan Police have been pouring over for the past 4 years! 

  • The Leicestershire Police, well they worked the UK end, corresponding with Portugal.   They also were responsible for interviewing the McCann buddies in the UK - though not the McCanns themselves? 

The buddies were allowed at the time of these interviews to read the statements given by each other? 

The Leicestershire Police also put to the buddies, at the request of the McCanns certain question/s.  How extraordinary!  

One such questions being:

Is there any supplementary explanation which you consider relevant or pertinent to establishing the material truth?


What would make the McCanns want that particular question asked? 

I imagine that this type question is one that police would always put to a witness, ask them if they had any further information which they thought would be of relevance to an investigation.

  • Why would the McCanns specifically request that this question be asked of their buddies by the Leicestershire Police?

  • Why would the Leicestershire Police allow the McCanns to dictate to them as to what they should ask?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id219.html


  • And we have the McCann Private Detective Files (and so many different detectives they did hire?) which we are led to believe contained the E.Fits of DCI Redwoods/Metropolitan Police now main suspect in the case.  That is the E.Fits which the McCanns DID NOT MAKE PUBLIC! 

How extraordinary is that?   

Why would the McCanns for YEARS not disclose them? 

What that tells us IS that some dodgy stuff was going on between McCanns and their private detectives.  Or DCI Redwood has been playing games in this regard!


Let's face it.  Why would they have had the E.Fits put together, and then NOT made them public?    


THAT ONE ACT BY McCANNS DEMONSTRATES HOW MUCH THE McCANNS WANTED MADELEINE'S ALLEGED ABDUCTOR TO BE FOUND. 

And they have had the nerve over the years since this child's disappearance to accuse many of hindering their private investigation!

And what was it the private detectives said, the dodgy Edgar and his dodgy sidekick Cowley in the documentary Madeleine Was Here, of how if they found any evidence against Kate and Gerry McCann they would do what was right and inform the police proper?

Edgar: 


If we had any evidence that Kate and Gerry were involved, we'd hand it over to the authorities. 

Interviewer:  

And did you find anything?


Edgar: 

 
No!

LONG PAUSE

Edgar:

Nothing.  Not a shred of evidence that they were involved.


Cowley - When I had the interview for the job I made it quite clear that I would only take the job if it was an independent investigation, that if there was evidence against anybody no matter who it is then we give that information to the police.

(do view dodgy Dave Edgar declaring he found no evidence, 20 second in on the recording at  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRQQWmpiO3s )


  • Did these two private detectives NOT know of the E.Fits sitting in their own files? Not suggest to the McCanns that they use them?

  • Were these two not around when the E.Fits were put together? 

  • Were the E.Fits put together before they arrived on the scene? 

IF SO - Did the McCanns conceal the E.Fits from them? 

IF NOT - then these guys, dodgy Dave Edgar and his little sidekick creepy Cowley, FAILED also to do what was right and proper, make them known to the public, so as to help Madeleine, discover what became of her, the whereabouts of her remains.    

And more importantly - How was it possible for these two private detectives to miss the many lies told, the many holes in the stories told by their employers and their buddies in the case of Madeleine?

And where are they NOW?


And of course we now have the  FOURTH STRAND OF THE INVESTIGATION - THE METROPOLITAN POLICE FILES!   WHO IS KEEPING TAGS ON THE MET?

And after 4 long years of investigating, what exactly do they contain? 

  • The E.Fits which the McCanns failed to make public, the E. fits of a man who the Metropolitan Police now consider to be their main suspect in the case. 
  • Crecheman - Redwood's Revelation Moment - which wiped out Jane Tanner's sighting of the alleged abductor (and which made nonsense of Gerry McCanns claim, that Jane Tanner ALMOST CAUGHT the alleged abductor, which he stated in interview with Sandra Felgueiras - but did Redwood even know of McCanns claim in this interview?)
And of course we have Redwood from the outset of this FOURTH STRAND declaring that neither the McCanns or their buddies, or anyone who knew them before travelling to Portugal, were suspects in the Metropolitan Police Investigation. 

He also declared that he was taking the case back to ZERO but also stated he would treat the ABDUCTION as though it had happened on British soil. 

Back to zero?  The abduction?

What evidence did or do the Metropolitan Police have of any abduction?

Back to zero surely meant that all avenues were open, yet he spoke of abduction only? 

IF someone in the McCann group was responsible (with McCanns knowledge) for removing Madeleine from the apartment, would DCI Redwood consider this to be abduction? 

But no, he cannot mean to include the group, as he has declared them not to be suspects, or persons of interest. 


HOW EXACTLY DID THE METROPOLITAN POLICE RECONCILE THE STATEMENTS, AND UNTRUTHS AS STATED BY THE McCANNS THEIR GROUP WHEN THEY WERE INTERVIEWED, GAVE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO POLICE IN PORTUGAL, AND WHEN BEING QUESTIONED BY LEICESTERSHIRE POLICE? 

THOSE LEICESTERSHIRE POLICE INTERVIEWS/STATEMENTS WERE QUITE SOMETHING!   

THE GROUP STAMMERED, STUTTERED, LIED, AND POINTED THE FINGER AT OTHERS.   AND QUITE CLEARLY THEY HAD COLLUDED WITH EACH OTHER BEFOREHAND, NOT TO MENTION THE LEICESTERSHIRE POLICE HELPING THEM OUT BY ALLOWING THE GROUP TO READ OVER THE STATEMENTS GIVEN BY OTHER MEMBERS IN THE GROUP TO PORTUGUESE POLICE! 

So WHAT DO do the Metropolitan Police believe happened to Madeleine?

Do they believe:


  • Gerry McCann, his story of entering the apartment using his key to open the front locked door.  A story he changed 7 days later, then claiming, he entered by an unlocked patio door?

COURSE THEY DON'T!  Big red flag Gerry McCanns tale!

  • How about Kate 'I did my check about 10 o'clock'  McCann, and her whooshing curtain story?  A story which she changed many times, each time adding a bit, so as to account for all the errors she had made in the earlier telling of her tale.  If on a forum a point was made with regards the flaws in her story, courtesy of Clarence Mitchell up he or they would pop with the new version.

COURSE THEY DON'T!   Another big red flag.  Biggest load of guff out there!

  • Oldfield and his checks of the McCann children, something he had NOT done on that holiday, because no one was checking on each others kids, and because he didn't know McCann kids, yet we are to believe he turned into the 'main checker' of the McCann kids on the night Madeleine vanished?' 
 Kate McCann - one check.
      Gerry McCann - one check
      Matthew Oldfield - TWO CHECKS?

Who could believe old TWO CHECKS OLDFIELD eh?



COURSE THEY DON'T!  Red flag flying again!



  • Jane Tanner's sighting of man with child?


COURSE THEY DON'T!


  • How about Russell 'the laundry man' O'Brien? Can see him doing his packing check list - 
  passport? - check
        tickets? - check
        tennis racquet? - check
        detergent? -
check  


COURSE THEY DON'T!  



  • And David Payne, must be the only guy on the planet having knocked on the door of his best friend's apartment, to then be met by his best friends wife, dressed in nothing more than her towel as she had just stepped out of the shower, to NOT remember this?  Oddly he could remember how this female's THREE young toddler children were dressed.  Children who were sitting on a sofa, so he said. Like little angels, dressed in predominantly white he recalled.   What kind of guy would pay MORE interest to the kids what they were wearing and not remember that the female standing in front of him was standing in only a towel?  Hmm!   And what kind of kids of this very young age would sit happily on a sofa while their mother was showering?   What kind of kids when there was a knock on the door would not have hopped off that sofa to see who was at the door.  Madeleine, this lively child at least would have done so, one would imagine. Hopped off the sofa to see Uncle David who she knew well, the Uncle David who said this little girl was great fun was it?   How many mothers of young children when they are trying to do something, something as simple as chat to someone who had called round, would not have had her three little ones, round her feet in minutes, arms wrapped round her legs, tugging at her clothing (or her towel) that is what little ones do.  How many mothers would leave three tots sitting on a sofa while she showered, especially when in a holiday apartment which had not been made child safe?   Story stinks!

COURSE THEY DON'T!   Kate's towel, Payne's disinterest in her wearing her towel, and the kids angel like dressed in white - BIG RED FLAGS!

  • And not forgetting Rachael Oldfield, the long suffering wife, who when ill, her husband Dr Oldfield went off and left her on her own while he went running (an activity he loathed, unless he was doing a little role play on the beach, pretending he was the Hoff from Bay Watch said he) with Kate McCann, a female that neither he nor his wife Rachael knew before this holiday.  Having only met her briefly when Madeleine was a very young baby, and who had never seen the McCann family since, and never the twin children. No one does a road run, and not the distance Oldfield claims to have done with Kate McCann when it is not something they are used to doing!   And good old Matthew didn't stop at that.   He then decided he would check on the McCann kids, and take Kate McCanns turn too!   And Mrs Oldfield didn't bat an eyelid!  Oh YEAH? Pull the other one Rach - got bells on!  Up to her neck in this nonsense too!
COURSE THEY DON'T!

  • And BEST FRIEND FIONA.  The anaesthetist.   Who didn't bat an eye when Kate McCann repeatedly, so they say, checked the twin kids, their breathing (after Madeleine's reported disappearance) the BEST FRIEND who said that Kate McCann told her that they, the McCANNS had left that patio door unlocked so as to let Madeleine GET OUT OF THE APARTMENT, should she wake.  Oh she has lied through her teeth, just as best friend Kate has.   Trouble is, they didn't get their lying stories in sync!
COURSE THEY DON'T!   That patio door story, together with the open bedroom window and shutter,  BIGGEST RED FLAG IN THE ENTIRE McCann tale!  No matter how hard they try, they cannot fit that open window and shutter into their story.   THEY MESSED UP BIG TIME WHEN THEY INCLUDED IN THEIR TALL TALE OF ABDUCTION, THAT OPEN WINDOW AND SHUTTER.   THEY OPENED IT, NOW THEY CANNOT CLOSE IT!  

  • Granny, 'little old wine drinker me' Webster.  Whether she really is a bit of a boozy old female or it suited the group to make her out to be at the time of Madeleine's disappearance (it was her who guzzled all the wine at the table would you believe, the others not getting a look in, yeah right) as having an alcohol soaked brain is anyone's guess.   Has to be noted though that back on UK soil when interviewed by police there, she sang like a little birdie, but in tune with the McCann story, and pointed her pointy finger too at others!   What a difference a chat with Gerry, and Clarence, can make eh?  
COURSE THEY DON'T - They recognise when someone has been primed, and in this case to follow the McCann agenda.

So NO, the Metropolitan Police have not, for a second swallowed the McCann tale.  They do not believe a burglar killed Madeleine and then carried her dead body through the town.  And NO the public, I am sure do not believe the many officers from the Met working on this investigation are fools.

Same big fat NO - the public have not been fooled by what DCI Redwood has dished up from when he took over the Met Investigation in saying the McCanns and their buddies are not suspects, not persons of interest.  Not been fooled by press stories.

The public clearly understand that such a situation in any investigation could change at any given moment, and that in this case, that it is something which DCI Redwood may have stated so as to get on with his investigation.

Equally he may have MEANT EXACTLY THAT, THAT THEY ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE McCANNS WITH REGARDS INVOLVEMENT IN MADELEINE'S DISAPPEARANCE.

But the public, know too FROM THE POLICE FILES, AND THE MANY INTERVIEWS THE McCANN'S have given, and the many lies their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell has created for press publication, that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for police, to not regard the McCanns and their buddies as suspects or persons of interest, persons who have involvement at some level in this little girls disappearance.  They have not been fooled.

THE FACT THAT THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE HAVE LIED, makes this so.

ONE LIES TO COVER UP.   

SO WHY HAVE THEY LIED WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?

  • The fact that DCI Redwood during his time on the case, his officers too quite obviously could not have missed the lies, does not mean that they are following them up!

  • It does not mean that he is looking to charge the McCanns with anything.  

  • It does not mean, that is the agenda he is following.

One would hope that the Metropolitan Police are indeed investigating the reasons why so many lies by this group of people, genuinely investigating the crimes committed against this child as they should be, but I won't hold my breath on that one.

Yes we could say Redwood has played a blinder, he is about to pounce, make arrests (or rather the new DCI is about to) has silenced the McCanns, but the truth is - he HASN'T!

When, during the years of this Metropolitan Police Investigation, have the McCanns kept quiet?

When Redwood was prancing around in Praia da Luz, his officers poking their heads down old pipelines, the McCanns were out RUNNING, enjoying a day out back in the UK, full of bright smiles for the press!  They were not silent.

They weren't giving a monkey's that the remains of their missing child could possibly be discovered.   And I would say that is because they knew she was not buried there, and knew that Redwood wasn't really looking!

When Redwood and the Met said that Tannerman did not exist and replaced him with Crecheman - McCanns continued and still do with Tannerman on their site.   They didn't give a monkey's what Redwood said.  

In fact they may have welcomed it.  Tanner came out of it okay.  Not as a liar, but as someone who had as she said, seen a man carrying a child.   Just not a man carrying Madeleine!

Redwood introducing Crecheman helped them enormously!   Helped Tanner.  Helped Oldfield, and helped Gerry McCann out of a tight corner!

Smithman if he existed and is Gerry McCann WHAT EXACTLY HAS REDWOOD DONE ABOUT THIS?

NOTHING TO BE PRECISE!

Redwood hasn't silenced the McCanns -  Have McCanns silenced Redwood?

Redwood when on the brink of solving, what arguably is the most well known missing child case in the world, stepping down and retiring?

Not a chance in hell that any officer would do so!  That would have been some feather in his cap!

Far as I am concerned at this stage in the game, Redwood has fooled no one.  The public have not swallowed HIS tales, just as he DID NOT swallow the McCann tales.   

The Met investigation is looking absolutely like a whitewash!

And whitewash is not something unheard of within the Metropolitan Police!

Why should the case of missing Madeleine McCann be any different? The disappearance of a child which DID NOT happen on UK soil?

If the McCanns are silent at this point in time, it has not a jot to do with the Met Investigation SILENCING them, more to do with the death of Brenda Leyland, the hounding of this woman by Brunt, which the McCanns had to know was about to take place.  The Inquest into her death, and the Lisbon trial, more reason for them wanting to lie low for the moment.  And not forgetting their twin children, now ten years old I believe, will be taking much more note of what is going on around them.

McCanns need an exit before these kids start not only asking about their missing sister, but before they start watching their parents on their TV screen, and WANT PROPER ANSWERS.

They are way past the age, when telling them a burglar took her, will be believed by them.

If McCanns go silent it is because they choose to for whatever reason.

This has got to be the quietest pre anniversary since the disappearance of Madeleine, usually their pantomime has started before this time, but that is not to say, that they will not pop up soon though perhaps not with the usual fanfare.

Dr Amaral I understand has no faith in Operation Grange, and that for me, points to whitewash!

But not to forget the FIFTH strand of this case - The CURRENT Portuguese Investigation!

Where do they stand in all of this?

We all concentrate on the Met.   The Met are not the lead!

And what of the McCanns constantly telling us this alleged paedophile abductor is still out there, that he could strike again at any time.

Funny that.  This paedophile child abductor never struck before Madeleine's disappearance and has never struck in the EIGHT YEARS since!

And DCI Redwood said this alleged abductor may be a petty burglar!   

And the mighty Met cannot catch up with a petty burglar?

No, Redwood has not silenced the McCanns, he has not fooled the public either with his tales of petty burglars who it would appear on the surface have fooled the METROPOLITAN POLICE, a petty burglar who they cannot trace?  Yeah right!

And there is not going to be any imminent arrests in this case either!

Redwood retire if that was about to happen?  Not a chance!

It is not a question of what the Metropolitan Police believe, know of the McCanns, their buddies.  It is not a question of the Metropolitan Police fooling the public, or making themselves look foolish.

It is a question of the agenda they are following, being forced to look foolish, not choosing to make themselves look foolish, and after 4 years, with no arrests imminent, no evidence of any abduction, no suspects, whitewash has to rate highly as being the agenda!




l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com
19th April 2015
Website Builder