Maddie cops pursue mysterious woman in purple?

[Brietta]

Circumstantial evidence is only consequential if real tangible evidence is unavailable.  In the Madeleine disappearance, there was no indication of an intruder, no valuables were disturbed or missing, no ransom was demanded and the investigation of every trail and possible suspect proved futile.

I am intrigued by the notion that an indicator of abduction is a ransom demand; regrettably in my lifetime I have heard of many child abductions but can only think of two occasions when a ransom was demanded one being a member of the Getty family and another being a German industrialist based in Northern Ireland ... both adults.

What cases are there of abducted children having a ransom demanded for their return?

[stephen25000]

Bottom line.

There is no forensic evidence of anyone else in the apartment has been found.

As to abduction, just one of the unproven theories.

[slartibartfast]

Police Dogs cannot be cross-examined!


R v Pieterson and Holloway, (1994) The Times, 11th November

There was no authority hitherto in English law as to the admissibility of evidence concerning a tracker dog. There were a number of authorities from other jurisdictions including R v Te Whiu and Buckton [1964] NZLR 748 where it was held that a person giving evidence of a tracker dog's actions must not express his opinion about what the dog was thinking at the material time. This decision, R v Pieterson and Holloway, (1994) The Times, 11th November should blaze an English trail and set a precedent for any future dog tracking.


The case concerns the admissibility of tracker dog evidence. Within minutes of a robbery, Ben, a police dog, searched an area surrounding a club and picked up a track. Both appeals were based on the contention that the judge was wrong to admit evidence concerning the tracker dog's actions.

The submission was that that evidence was, in effect or certainly analogous to, hearsay because there was only the handler's evidence of the actions or reactions of the dog; which could not be cross examined.

Alternatively it was submitted that the evidence with regard to such tracker dogs was unreliable, that a dog had a will of its own and might act mischievously or, even without that, might act in a way inconsistent with the Pavlovian reaction sought to be induced in the dog by its training.

The Court of Appeal ruled, (with safeguards); that if a dog handler could establish that the dog had been properly trained and, over a period of time, the dog's reactions indicated that it was a reliable pointer to the existence of a scent of some particular individual then that evidence should properly be admitted.

Thanks for that.

[Mr Gray]

Bottom line.

There is no forensic evidence of anyone else in the apartment has been found.

As to abduction, just one of the unproven theories.

As I have said it may well be the forensic examination was poor....Maddie's sheets being sent to the laundry
You cannot state there was no evidence of an intruder....only that none was detected

[Mr Gray]

Thanks for that.

So what evidence is there that the canines in question were reliable...or are you just assuming they were

[stephen25000]

I am afraid without tangible evidence of an intruder into the apartment, abduction is a dead duck.

[Mr Gray]

I am afraid without tangible evidence of an intruder into the apartment, abduction is a dead duck.

That's your opinion....and you are totally wrong imo...and in SYs official opinion

[Mr Gray]

I M O the circumstantial evidence points to anything but abduction.

The list is endless.

I'm fairly sure Kizzys evidence will feature the dog alerts and blood in the boot of the car

[stephen25000]

That's your opinion....and you are totally wrong imo...and in SYs official opinion

They haven't solved the case by looking only at abduction.

[Mr Gray]

They haven't solved the case by looking only at abduction.

The parents have been ruled out ..w and w... highly unlikely
So they have looked at other scenarios

[G-Unit]

All the circumstantial evidence points to abduction...
As I understand the dogs trail is not considered evidence according to a post by Alice
If we knew why the final report considered woke and wandered highly unlikely we might understand why SAY seem so convinced in abduction

I don't know what Teresa May thought about the case, but I know that her predecessor, Alan Johnson,was 'enormously sympathetic to their case'' and 'absolutely clear that they (the McCanns) were the victims in all of this'. His opinion of how the Portuguese police treated the McCanns was 'disgraceful'. He thought they ;hadn't had the benefit of a proper police investigation into Madeleine's disappearance'. From 5:12 on the video;

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/60april12/PANORAMA_20_04_2012.htm

Quite how he reached his conclusions he doesn't explain. Indeed, he acknowledges that press reports suggested the opposite and that he had no real knowledge of the PJ investigation. All he says is he met with the McCanns in 2009. Is that when he decided they were victims? This seems to have led to the request for CEOP's scoping exercise, completed in March 2010.

It's strange how many people seem convinced of the McCann's innocence just by meeting them. Either they are incredibly persuasive or the people they meet are incredibly naive in my opinion.

It seems possible that government ministers were clear about what SY were required to do. HELP THE FAMILY, as Cameron put it.

[pathfinder73]

Doesn't mean an abduction didn't take place...it may well have been the forensic examination of the apartment was poor
Maddie's sheets being sent to the laundry for instance...they should still be available

In this search the following was recovered:
- various hairs from the floor in the area of the doorway of the bedroom with two single beds from where the minor disappeared, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #1;

- various hairs from the floor area next to the bed where the missing child was sleeping, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #2;

- various hairs from the top of the bed where the missing child was sleeping, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #3;

- various hairs from the floor area next to the bed opposite to the bed from which the sleeping child disappeared, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #4;
- various hairs from the floor of the living room, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #6;

- various hairs from the floor of the main door entrance hallway of the apartment, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #7;
On the single bed opposite to that from which the child disappeared, despite it being impregnated the red-coloured chemical product referred to, the search for hairs proceeded,that search having been negative.

After the recovery of hairs described above there proceeded the search for possible traces of semen, using a variable-wave light source appropriate for the task, there being identified various [several] areas where fluorescence characteristic of this type of trace evidence was seen.

The areas where the fluorescence was seen were submitted to a "Phosphatise test" search there being a slightly positive reaction (purplish colour) only in area of the bed-cover of the single bed opposite to the bed from where the minor disappeared, a piece of that bed-cover being collected and placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC, it being referenced as trace evidence #5;

A search was also made for possible biological traces and fibres on the single bed from where the minor disappeared, using a variable-wave light source appropriate for the task, the result obtained having been negative.

The area of the pillow of the bed from the minor disappeared was inspected with the intention to detect the presence of some smell [aroma] characteristic of volatile substances typical of chloroform or ether, this search proving negative

There proceeded the search for possible blood traces in all of the apartment, using a variable- wave light source appropriate for the task.This search resulted in the detection of several spots having a red-brown tone that suggested blood, which were subjected to a "Kastle-Mayer" peroxidise test, the result obtained, in all cases, being negative.

There also proceeded the observation and search for blood traces inside the apartment using a chemical product to find latent blood traces. In the application of the referred product no results characteristic of the presence of blood traces were found.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

[jassi]

In this search the following was recovered:
- various hairs from the floor in the area of the doorway of the bedroom with two single beds from where the minor disappeared, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #1;

- various hairs from the floor area next to the bed where the missing child was sleeping, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #2;

- various hairs from the top of the bed where the missing child was sleeping, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #3;

- various hairs from the floor area next to the bed opposite to the bed from which the sleeping child disappeared, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #4;
- various hairs from the floor of the living room, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #6;

- various hairs from the floor of the main door entrance hallway of the apartment, they being placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC and referenced as trace evidence #7;
On the single bed opposite to that from which the child disappeared, despite it being impregnated the red-coloured chemical product referred to, the search for hairs proceeded,that search having been negative.

After the recovery of hairs described above there proceeded the search for possible traces of semen, using a variable-wave light source appropriate for the task, there being identified various [several] areas where fluorescence characteristic of this type of trace evidence was seen.

The areas where the fluorescence was seen were submitted to a "Phosphatise test" search there being a slightly positive reaction (purplish colour) only in area of the bed-cover of the single bed opposite to the bed from where the minor disappeared, a piece of that bed-cover being collected and placed inside a paper envelope in accordance with instructions issued by the Biology Section of the LPC, it being referenced as trace evidence #5;

A search was also made for possible biological traces and fibres on the single bed from where the minor disappeared, using a variable-wave light source appropriate for the task, the result obtained having been negative.

The area of the pillow of the bed from the minor disappeared was inspected with the intention to detect the presence of some smell [aroma] characteristic of volatile substances typical of chloroform or ether, this search proving negative

There proceeded the search for possible blood traces in all of the apartment, using a variable- wave light source appropriate for the task.This search resulted in the detection of several spots having a red-brown tone that suggested blood, which were subjected to a "Kastle-Mayer" peroxidise test, the result obtained, in all cases, being negative.

There also proceeded the observation and search for blood traces inside the apartment using a chemical product to find latent blood traces. In the application of the referred product no results characteristic of the presence of blood traces were found.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

Does that mean that there were no traces of Madeleine found on her bed ?

[pathfinder73]

Does that mean that there were no traces of Madeleine found on her bed ?

Well you know my theory.

[Mr Gray]

I don't know what Teresa May thought about the case, but I know that her predecessor, Alan Johnson,was 'enormously sympathetic to their case'' and 'absolutely clear that they (the McCanns) were the victims in all of this'. His opinion of how the Portuguese police treated the McCanns was 'disgraceful'. He thought they ;hadn't had the benefit of a proper police investigation into Madeleine's disappearance'. From 5:12 on the video;

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/60april12/PANORAMA_20_04_2012.htm

Quite how he reached his conclusions he doesn't explain. Indeed, he acknowledges that press reports suggested the opposite and that he had no real knowledge of the PJ investigation. All he says is he met with the McCanns in 2009. Is that when he decided they were victims? This seems to have led to the request for CEOP's scoping exercise, completed in March 2010.

It's strange how many people seem convinced of the McCann's innocence just by meeting them. Either they are incredibly persuasive or the people they meet are incredibly naive in my opinion.

It seems possible that government ministers were clear about what SY were required to do. HELP THE FAMILY, as Cameron put it.

SY said they looked at the evidence the PJ had gathered and were happy with it.....there is no real evidence against the parents...