Lying in the Sun

Dead or Alive



Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood Metropolitan Police: speaking of the Review of the Madeleine McCann case:



May 2012

“Two clear areas we focused on:-  

One -
   That Madeleine is alive,

2.   And the second is that sadly she is not.”


“Two key elements of it, is to go -

   Madeleine is alive,

2.   And, the other is, sadly she is not.”





July 2013 - Review of Madeleine McCann case




“What I should say though - over the last two years – what the review has told me, is that there is no clear, definitive proof that Madeleine McCann is dead and so on that basis I still genuinely believe that there is a possibility that she is alive.”

Naturally then it follows, if we finish off that trend of thought for Redwood, he must equally genuinely believe there is a possibility then that she is dead!

So no change!  

In 2012 Redwood stated that Madeleine is either dead or alive, one year on, and £2m  + more,  he has stated likewise!

Redwood's "focus" and his "two key elements"  - remain the same he believes the child to be either alive or dead!

Now for two years this man Redwood and his team have not been sitting focusing only on their belief that Madeleine is either alive or dead.

Redwood and his team must know absolutely after delving 2/3 of the way through the police files what they really feel/know, based on the evidence therein, what has become of this child, they must have a theory based on that evidence/information.  After TWO years they did not simply reach the conclusion -  that there is 'a possibility that she is either alive or dead'  and nothing more

How much of a possibility?   A 50/50 chance?  

The odds, on one or the other,
alive or dead, according to the evidence in the files, has to be much greater than 50/50!   And the Metropolitan Police know which is the greater possibility.  How could they not after two years, and now 2/3 of the way through a Review?

And of the 38 people he wishes to speak with he doesn't know what role
if any they played in Madeleine's mysterious disappearance.

They are
not suspects though once more, in UK this is how it is being reported.

Just as Madeleine may be alive or may be dead...they, the 'thirty eight''  may
have information which could lead to the culprits who committed crimes against Madeleine, or they may not!

As Redwood said -
he cannot guarantee anything...  

He tells us that during the 2 years he has been Reviewing the case, that what he can tell us, is, what the Review "told" him -  that there is no clear definitive proof that Madeleine is dead.

What that tells me/us is, that quite clearly, and most obviously, he has
NO clear and definitive proof the child was abducted!

Until he unravels the untruths in the police witness statements given by the McCanns and their companions and their reasons for same, starts listening to what the police files are actually "telling" him, his team/his Review turned "investigation" is going nowhere...

As the Leicestershire police officer said of the McCanns:

“While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence which clears them of involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.”

Until the McCanns, and their companions can explain to not only the police, but the public
"why" the untruths, a deliberate attempt on their part to mislead, and which did greatly hinder the Portuguese Police investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine, and so much more besides, that is awry in this case, they will remain suspects in the minds of many...

Redwood has said what he believes the Review has "told" him, he has omitted to explain what the McCann party told him, as to their statements, in particular the tales they told the Portuguese police re checking of the children - which do NOT ADD UP -  clearly not true...

He has omitted to state what the McCann party police witness statements "tell" him...and as we know, they speak volumes...they don't make nice reading!

Is Redwood really the clumsy incompetent Inspector Clouseau character heading a chaotic Review, the clown who misses the obvious clues - which he is coming across as - or has he been "asked" to compromise his integrity..?

'clear evidence' does he have which demonstrates and proves that the McCanns and their companions played no part in the disappearance of Madeleine, which further explains why they were not honest with Portuguese Police?

The dogs have "told" us what they know....they cannot be manipulated...

Why cannot the McCanns and their companions do likewise, give us the
'innocent' explanations which Clarence Mitchell their spokesman said they are able to, in ANY event or circumstance..?
6th July 2013

Website Builder