Author Topic: Amaral and the dogs  (Read 844263 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5745 on: September 15, 2015, 03:31:18 PM »
In my opinion it does, and as we know all opinions are equally valid. ?>)()<

That sounds fair enough to me; so you play to your opinion and I'll play to mine.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5746 on: September 15, 2015, 03:39:52 PM »
You mean the FSS sent a report saying:
Nil.

Zilch

Blank.

Odd that.

The FSS had as much clue about what might have happened to Madeleine after processing material forwarded to the laboratory as they had before: that is, none.

Offline Jean-Pierre

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5747 on: September 15, 2015, 03:56:58 PM »
What was the DNA taken from?

I thought you were well informed about the background to the case.

here is the FSS report.

Enjoy (if that's the right word?)

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id268.html

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5748 on: September 15, 2015, 04:00:32 PM »
The FSS had as much clue about what might have happened to Madeleine after processing material forwarded to the laboratory as they had before: that is, none.

So by that token they could neither rule anything in nor rule anything out.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5749 on: September 15, 2015, 04:07:37 PM »
So by that token they could neither rule anything in nor rule anything out.

They could rule nothing in.

They could rule out that anything they analysed progressed the investigation.

Nothing did.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2015, 04:09:59 PM by ferryman »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5750 on: September 15, 2015, 04:16:06 PM »
So by that token they could neither rule anything in nor rule anything out.
so maddie could have been abducted by aliens

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5751 on: September 15, 2015, 04:25:10 PM »
What was the DNA taken from?
unless it is confirmed that the dna was taken from a dead person then it was not from human remains

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5752 on: September 15, 2015, 04:44:13 PM »
unless it is confirmed that the dna was taken from a dead person then it was not from human remains

So?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5753 on: September 15, 2015, 04:48:10 PM »
So?

then Stephen is wrong to say human remains were found

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5754 on: September 15, 2015, 04:56:39 PM »
I thought you were well informed about the background to the case.

here is the FSS report.

Enjoy (if that's the right word?)

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id268.html

I do not believe I ever said that. I just get p****d off with people playing duck and drakes with reports we have all read, by quoting from the body not the conclusions and making inane comments like "I understand it better than you my dad works in the court/police station/hospital/laboratory (delete as necessary)so I should know". So asking questions is always good for a laugh if somewhat like pulling teeth.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5755 on: September 15, 2015, 05:15:29 PM »
I do not believe I ever said that. I just get p****d off with people playing duck and drakes with reports we have all read, by quoting from the body not the conclusions and making inane comments like "I understand it better than you my dad works in the court/police station/hospital/laboratory (delete as necessary)so I should know". So asking questions is always good for a laugh if somewhat like pulling teeth.
What's your opinion of those who quote from the Interim Report to try and make a case for the McCanns' guilt?

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5756 on: September 15, 2015, 05:33:58 PM »
What's your opinion of those who quote from the Interim Report to try and make a case for the McCanns' guilt?
Pretty much the same old stick. Likely to come up with the wrong or right answer by accident rather than design if all the info is not available.

This is Lowes conclusion btw:
Conclusion
In my opinion, the laboratory results that were attained did not help to clarify whether or not the DNA results obtained within the scope of this case were from Madeleine McCann.
Now that is not too hard to understand is it.

"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5757 on: September 15, 2015, 05:34:45 PM »
then Stephen is wrong to say human remains were found

So?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5758 on: September 15, 2015, 05:52:43 PM »
Pretty much the same old stick. Likely to come up with the wrong or right answer by accident rather than design if all the info is not available.

This is Lowes conclusion btw:
Conclusion
In my opinion, the laboratory results that were attained did not help to clarify whether or not the DNA results obtained within the scope of this case were from Madeleine McCann.
Now that is not too hard to understand is it.
It's easy to understand but as usual posters put different interpretations on it

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #5759 on: September 15, 2015, 05:53:43 PM »
So?

so it looks like you've given up trying to defend his absurd claim