Strange Witness Statements

[Eleanor]

In what way might he have found it to be "one of the slight positives?"

Because the leaks from The PJ were being exposed as lies.

[faithlilly]

Because the leaks from The PJ were being exposed as lies.

But that's not what he says.

[Benice]

But that's not what he says.

So what was the point he was making IYO Faith?

[Eleanor]

But that's not what he says.

Neither does he say, "Confusion is good."  So all a trifle pathetic, don't you think?

[pathfinder73]

Neither does he say, "Confusion is good."  So all a trifle pathetic, don't you think?

That's what he meant. Confusion is good for the person(s) who did it because they don't know if they're on to them or not. But if the ones who did it could influence the investigation in any way then they could easily confuse it

[Anna]

That's what he meant. Confusion is good for the person(s) who did it because they don't know if they're on to them or not. But if the ones who did it could influence the investigation in any way then they could easily confuse it

Are you a mind reader too?
Nobody knows why he uttered those words and it is ridiculous to speculate on what he meant. Have you never said something and then been concerned that it may have been misunderstood?

[mercury]

So Gerry never actually said, "Confusion is good?"

That's right, as I said. But the gist of what he said can easily be interpreted like that. Not sure why so much umbrage is taken tbh.

[mercury]

Because the leaks from The PJ were being exposed as lies.

Were they? What in August 07? If so, that would be good, but it is clear Gerry McCann is saying a) there's rumours going around (presumably talking about the dogs findings) b) but he can't correct them as he is under judicial secrecy and c) it's good in that the abductor doesn't know what they know and can't know what is true or false from reading the papers or watching TV.

Do you interpret it any other way?

Ps Here you go Benice:-(wasn't not quoting what he said on purpose, I just didn't have the quote and the STV video seems to have been wiped off YouTube)

Gerry McCann: "The current level of activity, you know, I think you're absolutely right, there is a huge amount of innuendo which is being presented in various ways, suggesting that there may be evidence or facts behind it and there are none, and our opinion of what happened that night has not changed. We know certain facts, unfortunately because of the criminal investigation, we can't divulge them, and I want to make it absolutely clear, the reasons why we're not divulging the information; we will not make it easier for the perpetrator to cover their tracks. The police have all the information and we have bared our soul to them, and we'll continue to assist them in any way possible, but, you know, we have to keep silent.  And, in fact, one of the slight positives in... in all of this is that there is so much rumour about what did and didn't happen, it's actually very difficult, if you're reading the newspapers, watching TV, to know what is true and what's not."
 

[pathfinder73]

Are you a mind reader too?
Nobody knows why he uttered those words and it is ridiculous to speculate on what he meant. Have you never said something and then been concerned that it may have been misunderstood?

We know certain facts, unfortunately because of the criminal investigation, we can't divulge them, and I want to make it absolutely clear, the reasons why we're not divulging the information; we will not make it easier for the perpetrator to cover their tracks. The police have all the information and we have bared our soul to them, and we'll continue to assist them in any way possible, but, you know, we have to keep silent.  And, in fact, one of the slight positives in... in all of this is that there is so much rumour about what did and didn't happen, it's actually very difficult, if you're reading the newspapers, watching TV, to know what is true and what's not. GM

[pathfinder73]

The FSS has still not provided the result of the technical analysis of the hair found in the boot of the car. Once more, Stuart has to contact the laboratory. Nothing has been done. We want to know two things: if the hair is indeed Madeleine’s, and if it comes from a living or a dead person. The FSS can only answer the first question. English colleagues present at the meeting raise the possibility of the hair being sent to other European laboratories which have the resources to clear up the second point for us: hair from a living or a dead person. But the FSS does not seem to want to part with the hair. They claim that using a colour comparison test they can establish if the hair belongs to Madeleine and in a second stage, identify the DNA profile. None of that will happen. We never find out if the hair was Madeleine’s or her parents’ or her brother’s or her sister’s, even though the laboratory has the DNA profiles of each member of the family.

Let’s remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine’s DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance. (TOTL)

Why didn't the FSS give the hair found in the car boot back so they could test if it was from a dead person?

[Mr Gray]

The FSS has still not provided the result of the technical analysis of the hair found in the boot of the car. Once more, Stuart has to contact the laboratory. Nothing has been done. We want to know two things: if the hair is indeed Madeleine’s, and if it comes from a living or a dead person. The FSS can only answer the first question. English colleagues present at the meeting raise the possibility of the hair being sent to other European laboratories which have the resources to clear up the second point for us: hair from a living or a dead person. But the FSS does not seem to want to part with the hair. They claim that using a colour comparison test they can establish if the hair belongs to Madeleine and in a second stage, identify the DNA profile. None of that will happen. We never find out if the hair was Madeleine’s or her parents’ or her brother’s or her sister’s, even though the laboratory has the DNA profiles of each member of the family.

Let’s remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine’s DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance. (TOTL)

Why didn't the FSS give the hair found in the car boot back so they could test if it was from a dead person?

That is totally not true....

[pathfinder73]

That is totally not true....

Then you can show me in the files the actual test to see if it was hair from a living or dead person? Are you saying these tests don't exist?

[pathfinder73]

Goncalo Amaral has stated in an interview that when the blanket is found the case is solved.

[Anna]

The FSS has still not provided the result of the technical analysis of the hair found in the boot of the car. Once more, Stuart has to contact the laboratory. Nothing has been done. We want to know two things: if the hair is indeed Madeleine’s, and if it comes from a living or a dead person. The FSS can only answer the first question. English colleagues present at the meeting raise the possibility of the hair being sent to other European laboratories which have the resources to clear up the second point for us: hair from a living or a dead person. But the FSS does not seem to want to part with the hair. They claim that using a colour comparison test they can establish if the hair belongs to Madeleine and in a second stage, identify the DNA profile. None of that will happen. We never find out if the hair was Madeleine’s or her parents’ or her brother’s or her sister’s, even though the laboratory has the DNA profiles of each member of the family.

Let’s remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine’s DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance. (TOTL)

Why didn't the FSS give the hair found in the car boot back so they could test if it was from a dead person?

When the car was rented, I believe that Madeleine's belongings were transported to the villa, in that car. So it is very possible Pathfinder that some of her hair was there. Were any of her hairs found, or were they found to be possibly from the twins and therefore inconclusive?

[pathfinder73]

When the car was rented, I believe that Madeleine's belongings were transported to the villa, in that car. So it is very possible Pathfinder that some of her hair was there. Were any of her hairs found, or were they found to be possibly from the twins and therefore inconclusive?

It is not reasonable to find hair from a cadaver in that boot. Why haven't the tests happened?