Maddie cops pursue mysterious woman in purple?

[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.

You are making a massive assumption that SY have simply disregard the parents...you are totally wrong imo
They have stated that they looked at the evidence gathered by the pj and were happy that the parents were not involved
You idea that SY are ignoring evidence against the parents is misguided imo

[G-Unit]

You are making a massive assumption that SY have simply disregard the parents...you are totally wrong imo
They have stated that they looked at the evidence gathered by the pj and were happy that the parents were not involved
You idea that SY are ignoring evidence against the parents is misguided imo

The PJ and the Portuguese Prosecutors were unable to identify the crime.
Along come the Metropolitan Police and they can.
Both used the same evidence.
Do you really believe that the Metropolitan Police are so superior?

[Mr Gray]

The PJ and the Portuguese Prosecutors were unable to identify the crime.
Along come the Metropolitan Police and they can.
Both used the same evidence.
Do you really believe that the Metropolitan Police are so superior?

I do believe the met are far superior to the initial investigators who targeted the parents due to their failure to understand the canine and forensic evidence

[John]

I'm not 100    per cent but as I understand its the same as the alerts and not considered reliable evidence
Why would the Portuguese ignore their own dogs

I don't want to pursue this discussion into yet another canine debate but I must point out one major difference between said scent dogs and the CSI dogs deployed by Mark Harrison.  The scent dogs follow the ACTUAL SCENT left by their target whereas the CSI dogs look for various scents UNASSOCIATED with the target.

Consequently, it is beyond doubt that the GNR scent dogs both followed Madeleine's scent, the only question is, when was that trail laid down.

[John]

You are making a massive assumption that SY have simply disregard the parents...you are totally wrong imo
They have stated that they looked at the evidence gathered by the pj and were happy that the parents were not involved
You idea that SY are ignoring evidence against the parents is misguided imo

As previously pointed out, we aren't privy to SY's actual thinking in this case.  Anything they say publicly can be taken with a big pinch of sodium chloride.

[Mr Gray]

As previously pointed out, we aren't privy to SY's actual thinking in this case.  Anything they say publicly can be taken with a big pinch of sodium chloride.

Mark Rowley was very clear and I would be totally astonished if he wasn't speaking truthfully.
It isn't just what SY and the Portuguese have said...
Taken with everything else it's obvious ..imo..the parents are not suspects

[John]

Mark Rowley was very clear and I would be totally astonished if he wasn't speaking truthfully.
It isn't just what SY and the Portuguese have said...
Taken with everything else it's obvious ..imo..the parents are not suspects

Not so, they haven't demonstrated their innocence according to the highest court in Portugal and that is the current situation.

[Mr Gray]

Not so, they have not demonstrated their innocence according to the highest court in Portugal.

I think the ECHR may have something to say about that....it's basically impossible to demonstrate innocence....Barry George still hasn't managed it despite two trials

[John]

I think the ECHR may have something to say about that....it's basically impossible to demonstrate innocence....Barry George still hasn't managed it despite two trials

I doubt it very much, we all know the ECHR cannot overturn decisions by National courts.

Now back on topic please.

[Mr Gray]

I doubt it very much, we all know the ECHR cannot overturn decisions by National courts.

Now back on topic please.

They cannot overturn it but they can rule that the decision contravenes european law and is therefore unlawful

[Mr Gray]

I don't want to pursue this discussion into yet another canine debate but I must point out one major difference between said scent dogs and the CSI dogs deployed by Mark Harrison.  The scent dogs follow the ACTUAL SCENT left by their target whereas the CSI dogs look for various scents UNASSOCIATED with the target.

Consequently, it is beyond doubt that the GNR scent dogs both followed Madeleine's scent, the only question is, when was that trail laid down.

you say beyond doubt,....the dog handlers say different..

- I would like to clarify that a search in a bad area, where a more intense odour perceived by the sniffer dog, such as in an urban area due to the large concentration of external odours, make it possible to confuse the dog. In this situation, search activity is very difficult as is the case when some time has passed since the event in question.

- Because he is asked, he states that in relation to this, it is difficult to evaluate precisely the work of the sniffer dog. It is clear that some conditions involved in this action augment the degree of uncertainty. The signalling of the dog may only signify that they are confirming an intense odour in a zone. On the other hand, given the interest of the dog(s) in some of the apartment doorways, this could signify nothing, but could also very well mean that the dog has caught the odour. The dog did not demonstrate to its owner that it had found the scent it was searching for.


then take this into account..

It should be taken into account that the second sniffer dog may have been conditioned by the first sniffer dog. That is to say that in the case of doubt, the second dog may have followed the second of the first.

that doesnt sound like beyond doubt to me....all taken from the files

[stephen25000]

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

One remit.

Abduction.

Case remains unsolved.

Nuff said.

[G-Unit]

you say beyond doubt,....the dog handlers say different..

- I would like to clarify that a search in a bad area, where a more intense odour perceived by the sniffer dog, such as in an urban area due to the large concentration of external odours, make it possible to confuse the dog. In this situation, search activity is very difficult as is the case when some time has passed since the event in question.

- Because he is asked, he states that in relation to this, it is difficult to evaluate precisely the work of the sniffer dog. It is clear that some conditions involved in this action augment the degree of uncertainty. The signalling of the dog may only signify that they are confirming an intense odour in a zone. On the other hand, given the interest of the dog(s) in some of the apartment doorways, this could signify nothing, but could also very well mean that the dog has caught the odour. The dog did not demonstrate to its owner that it had found the scent it was searching for.


then take this into account..

It should be taken into account that the second sniffer dog may have been conditioned by the first sniffer dog. That is to say that in the case of doubt, the second dog may have followed the second of the first.

that doesnt sound like beyond doubt to me....all taken from the files

Also taken from the files and from the same statement;

He remembers that on the 4th of May of the current year, around 23H00, they attempted to tentatively identify and thus reconstruct the path taken by the missing minor.

Taking into account the aforementioned results, he states that it can be confirmed with a certain degree of certainty that the missing child passed by that location, on that day or on a previous day.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm

These were the tracker dogs from Lisbon. Before they arrived the patrol dogs had already followed the same track.

The tracker dogs had another go on 8th, which is what your quotes mostly refer to.

[barrier]

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

Yet we are supposed to be lead to believe per thread title that SY still want to investigate some one who was also already interviewed as witnessed in the same PJ files.

[Mr Gray]

Also taken from the files and from the same statement;

He remembers that on the 4th of May of the current year, around 23H00, they attempted to tentatively identify and thus reconstruct the path taken by the missing minor.

Taking into account the aforementioned results, he states that it can be confirmed with a certain degree of certainty that the missing child passed by that location, on that day or on a previous day.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm

These were the tracker dogs from Lisbon. Before they arrived the patrol dogs had already followed the same track.

The tracker dogs had another go on 8th, which is what your quotes mostly refer to.

" a certain degree of certainty"...what does that mean exactly and what was the original portuguese....as I have previously said this could have been a trail laid down by maddie on  a previous day....nothing about this is certain as John has claimed...lots and lots of doubt...what we do know for certain is that the final report deemed w and w HIGHLY unlikely....it would be very interesting to know how they reached that decision