Ten years since Maddie disappeared without a trace. Have we learnt anything ten years on?I was thinking how much researching this case has taught me. Individually it is teaching us skills that we may not have had. I watched a YT on how to do fingerprinting, I learned about the "not proven" verdict in Scottish courts, DNA analysis was a big study too.
I was thinking how much researching this case has taught me. Individually it is teaching us skills that we may not have had. I watched a YT on how to do fingerprinting, I learned about the "not proven" verdict in Scottish courts, DNA analysis was a big study too.
Whether it has taught us anything across the whole of society that would be a harder thing to measure.
I must admit that when the discussion in the McCann case gets into areas of government cover-up I am left feeling helpless. These would be issues that the general person feels we could not influence, so we would tend to not change our behaviour, because the workings of the government is beyond our control (Q. Were there national security issues involved in the case?).
I was thinking how much researching this case has taught me. Individually it is teaching us skills that we may not have had. I watched a YT on how to do fingerprinting, I learned about the "not proven" verdict in Scottish courts, DNA analysis was a big study too.
Whether it has taught us anything across the whole of society that would be a harder thing to measure.
I have leaned a lot about PR and spin. It worked for Thatcher and Blair, but a lot of people can spot it easily now so unless PR professionals can come up with new methods they're on their way out imo.
answer...look at the evidence...no..imoTell that to Amaral.
Tell that to Amaral.as I stated today...he doesnt listen to experts
as I stated today...he doesnt listen to experts
as I stated today...he doesnt listen to expertsIn your opinion!
Ten years since Maddie disappeared without a trace. Have we learnt anything ten years on?
I believe we have learned many lessons from the Madeleine McCann case, the most important being not to take things at face value.
"Things are not always as they seem; the first appearance deceives many."
Roman Poet Phaedrus
Good oneAs far as I can see the simplest is to believe Kate. Occam's razor then why complicate it? It doesn't account for everything that's why.
OR
Occam's razor.
Definition :a scientific and philosophical rule that entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily which is interpreted as requiring that the simplest of competing theories be preferred to the more complex or that explanations of unknown phenomena be sought first in terms of known quantities.
In other words: The simplest explanation is usually the right one. Detectives use it to deduce who's the likeliest suspect in a murder case - Doctors use it to determine the illness behind a set of symptoms. This line of reasoning is called Occam's razor.
http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-occam-s-razor.html
As far as I can see the simplest is to believe Kate. Occam's razor then why complicate it? It doesn't account for everything that's why.
As far as I can see the simplest is to believe Kate. Occam's razor then why complicate it? It doesn't account for everything that's why.
The only evidence found on the open window is the simplest explanation i.e. Kate opened the window.So we will never know.
1. On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?
KM: No comment
So we will never know.
Evidence will prove what happened and you don't spend 12+ million on a case with no evidence.
I totally agree
As far as I can see the simplest is to believe Kate. Occam's razor then why complicate it? It doesn't account for everything that's why.
Certainly I think it shows how difficult it can be to conclude a case where forensics and technology don't provide a lot of the evidence.
I think SY will have learned a hard lesson at the British taxpayers expense on how not to solve a case by proxy in a foreign country. They still have to work out their end game because at nearly £12 million there will be questions to answer.
The first question being, on what basis did DCI Redwood undertake digs in Praiua da Luz prior to his departure?
I think SY will have learned a hard lesson at the British taxpayers expense on how not to solve a case by proxy in a foreign country. They still have to work out their end game because at nearly £12 million there will be questions to answer.
The first question being, on what basis did DCI Redwood undertake digs in Praiua da Luz prior to his departure?
I dont think any blame can be put on SY...it was the politicians who decided that SY should investigate. They then have 40,000 pieces of information to translate and analyse....that is a massive task and where as I understand most of the money has gone. I doubt Redwood would ahve orgainised the digs without very good reason but I
agree with you that it would be good to get some answers and hopefully we will
I think it is money well spent - as even if Madeleine isn't found - at least her parents know that everything that could be done has been done and don't have to spend the rest of their lives wondering if some vital piece of evidence was missed because of an investigation disadvantaged by having no official protocol/procedures in place on how to deal with such cases.
If the investigations have resulted in greatly improved knowledge and/or new methods which can now be implemented which improve the chances of recovering a missing child - then as a taxpayer that's fine by me.
£12m is peanuts in the scheme of things imo. Just In London alone it costs taxpayers £100m per year to remove graffiti.
AIMHO
I think it is money well spent - as even if Madeleine isn't found - at least her parents know that everything that could be done has been done and don't have to spend the rest of their lives wondering if some vital piece of evidence was missed because of an investigation disadvantaged by having no official protocol/procedures in place on how to deal with such cases.
If the investigations have resulted in greatly improved knowledge and/or new methods which can now be implemented which improve the chances of recovering a missing child - then as a taxpayer that's fine by me.
£12m is peanuts in the scheme of things imo. Just In London alone it costs taxpayers £100m per year to remove graffiti.
AIMHO
£100 million gets more space to apply graffiti again,£12 million police investigation into a crime in a foreign country where you have no jurisdiction brings what?It must give all the parents in the country reassurance that if their child went missing the community will do sufficient to solve the case.
Obviously some piece of vital information was missed or the case would have been solvedOpinion as fact...and total rubbish...imo
Obviously some piece of vital information was missed or the case would have been solved
Opinion as fact...and total rubbish...imo"Obviously some piece of vital information was missed or the case would have been solved"
It must give all the parents in the country reassurance that if their child went missing the community will do sufficient to solve the case.
I don't think this case will have any effect on how other cases are approached.Well why think that? The lesson I've heard several of the police and PIs say was to do with "clearing the ground beneath your feet", implying the importance of checking out the parents and the immediate group of acquaintances first. Maybe that is the lesson.
I don't think this case will have any effect on how other cases are approached.I think you are wrong on that. I think the Portuguese will never again conduct a missing child investigation in the manner Madeleine's was.
I think you are wrong on that. I think the Portuguese will never again conduct a missing child investigation in the manner Madeleine's was.They began putting up roadblocks and alerted ports. Quite a response.(https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/pri_47941041.jpg)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4736208/British-boy-goes-missing-Praia-da-Luz.html
I think you are wrong on that. I think the Portuguese will never again conduct a missing child investigation in the manner Madeleine's was.(https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/pri_47941041.jpg)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4736208/British-boy-goes-missing-Praia-da-Luz.html
I don't think this case will have any effect on how other cases are approached.
Surely it should make a difference in Portugal G. For instance AFAIK it was the GNR who decided when to contact the PJ when a child was reported as missing. IMO any report of a missing child should immediately be conveyed to the PJ detectives. This would eliminate the recurrence of what happened to LC when - on approaching a GNR officer whilst searching for her daughter - was told to go home and if she hadn't turned up by morning to come into the police station. I can't remember how long it was before the PJ were informed by the GNR, but I believe it was quite a long time.I emphasise that because missing kids happen quite often, and I'm sure police resources would be stretched if they were to set up road blocks and lock down the parents house every time a child went missing. Interesting thought though if this was the standard approach.
In the McCann case I believe it was also some time before the PJ were informed.
Surely that is something that could and should be changed - as it affects the Golden Hour.
(The above is from memory - so am happy to be corrected if I've got it wrong)
Happy New Year btw. (and to everyone)
Well why think that? The lesson I've heard several of the police and PIs say was to do with "clearing the ground beneath your feet", implying the importance of checking out the parents and the immediate group of acquaintances first. Maybe that is the lesson.
But if information received during the PJ investigation wasn't adequately investigated then there would be no way of knowing what it might have led to. If you know that to be the case then you would always wonder if something of real importance may have emerged if it had been followed up.
It may be that the case will not be solved, but IMO the £12m is justified by the fact that in future missing children will have a better chance of being found as a result of that expenditure.
IMO
What we know is it wasn't done. What we don't know is why it wasn't done.From reading the odd file and statement they all emphasise that there didn't appear to have been a forced entry. Had there been a broken door or jemmy marks on the windows the response hopefully would have been different.
There is no way of knowing so the McCanns, unless the case is solved, will never know that every lead has been followed up.There were many "sightings" of MM so there is never going to be a claim every lead was followed up. To follow up every lead became virtually impossible IMO. Solving the case will never fix this.
I emphasise that because missing kids happen quite often, and I'm sure police resources would be stretched if they were to set up road blocks and lock down the parents house every time a child went missing. Interesting thought though if this was the standard approach.
In child disappearance cases it can usually be determined quite quickly whether a youngster has been abducted, wandered off on their own or were the victim of something more sinister. The Madeleine case is interesting in that despite claims that the bedroom shutter had been raised and the window opened, a search was conducted on the basis of a child who had wandered off and it was only later after the Tanner revelation that this switched to searching for an abductor.What I couldn't make out was the continual emphasis on tracker dog searching till they had searched and area (of was it 7 km around Ocean Club?). I could never imagine Madeleine walking this distance on her own so either someone would have needed to carry her alive or deceased over that distance. For that reason I'm not really convinced they ever believed Madeleine had been abducted for the same search area is covered for an abductor on foot or a person on foot looking for a place to dispose of a body.
What I couldn't make out was the continual emphasis on tracker dog searching till they had searched and area (of was it 7 km around Ocean Club?). I could never imagine Madeleine walking this distance on her own so either someone would have needed to carry her alive or deceased over that distance. For that reason I'm not really convinced they ever believed Madeleine had been abducted for the same search area is covered for an abductor on foot or a person on foot looking for a place to dispose of a body.
PJ final report...it is highly unlikely that maddie left the apartment herself...it would be reasonable to suppose they ahd reasons to believe that...until we understand those reasons...woke and wandered is considerd highly unlikelywhat I found is they the PJ believed the McCanns about somethings but not others. Like it seems the PJ believe the McCanns when they say Madeleine didn't wake up and wander yet they don't believe they weren't involved with her burial.
what I found is they the PJ believed the McCanns about somethings but not others. Like it seems the McCanns say Madeleine didn't wake up and wander yet they don't believe they weren't involved with her burial.
So in my study which has been going on for 19 months now I'm finding there is a possibility she left by the front door but possibly someone closes that door after Madeleine has got out, so Kate does not read the signs correctly. (Normally if she had left by the front door the door would be open but it wasn't. So she thinks she has NOT left on her own by that door. The PJ believe that but fail to realise there could have been a visitor who closes that front door.
you are not taking into account all the evidence because you do not know all the evidence,,,so your conclusions are limitedTrue and that is what I said "I'm finding there is a possibility she left by the front door but possibly someone closes that door after Madeleine has got out, so Kate does not read the signs correctly. (Normally if she had left by the front door the door would be open but it wasn't. So she thinks she has NOT left on her own by that door. The PJ believe that but fail to realise there could have been a visitor who closes that front door.
From reading the odd file and statement they all emphasise that there didn't appear to have been a forced entry. Had there been a broken door or jemmy marks on the windows the response hopefully would have been different.
So every one in authority is lulled into thinking "MM has just wandered off on her own, she'll be found soon enough".
OK should Kate's claim that the shutters were up (even though they are now down) have elicited an immediate and different response from the GNR?
IMO The thought process should have been:
"A kid that age would not have done that on her own - We should activate the kidnapping response rather than the standard missing kid response."
Getting on towards 11 yrs now,that is an all too easy a summation to make.
I think the condition Kate found the window and the blind in was certainly an issue a competent investigation would have studied very carefully indeed.
Instead according to Jose Manuel Olivera, Crime reporter for the 'Diario de Noticias' the Portuguese press immediately began to receive leaks from the police that the witnesses' account of events was not believed and was nothing more than a "badly told story".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
In my opinion knee jerk attitudes like that arrived at so instantaneously and leaked to be prejudicial to the main witnesses, could only have been detrimental to the search for a missing child whoever that child might have been.
Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation.
From reading the odd file and statement they all emphasise that there didn't appear to have been a forced entry. Had there been a broken door or jemmy marks on the windows the response hopefully would have been different.Let me think. What was the GNR response process in 2007? Conduct an initial investigation to verify basic facts, then if it looked like an incident outside their sphere of expertise, escalate it to the PJ?
So every one in authority is lulled into thinking "MM has just wandered off on her own, she'll be found soon enough".
OK should Kate's claim that the shutters were up (even though they are now down) have elicited an immediate and different response from the GNR?
IMO The thought process should have been:
"A kid that age would not have done that on her own - We should activate the kidnapping response rather than the standard missing kid response."
Mark Rowley May 2017:
No matter how much some want it not to be,the first investigation is/was ok with non other than the Assistant Commissioner of the MET police,those tasked with investigating a crime in a foreign country where they have no jurisdiction..
The coordinator of the first investigation was sacked and the investigation taken over by Rebelo whose very first task was to clean up the mess left behind and sort the files into some form of digitised order.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488802/Madeleine-New-police-chiefs-fury-mess-inherited-predecessor.html
Incompetence of that scale in a missing child case ~ any case for that matter is absolutely mind boggling. I think if you study the situation as it was at the time you will find that the bulk of usable material was that recovered after Amaral's departure is entirely due to the Rebelo investigation. Who in my opinion never quite get the credit they are due for the professionalism they showed in extricating the PJ from the disaster they inherited from Amaral.
But even they could not make up the ground that had been lost.
I think the condition Kate found the window and the blind in was certainly an issue a competent investigation would have studied very carefully indeed.
Instead according to Jose Manuel Olivera, Crime reporter for the 'Diario de Noticias' the Portuguese press immediately began to receive leaks from the police that the witnesses' account of events was not believed and was nothing more than a "badly told story".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
In my opinion knee jerk attitudes like that arrived at so instantaneously and leaked to be prejudicial to the main witnesses, could only have been detrimental to the search for a missing child whoever that child might have been.
The coordinator of the first investigation was sacked and the investigation taken over by Rebelo whose very first task was to clean up the mess left behind and sort the files into some form of digitised order.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488802/Madeleine-New-police-chiefs-fury-mess-inherited-predecessor.html
Incompetence of that scale in a missing child case ~ any case for that matter is absolutely mind boggling. I think if you study the situation as it was at the time you will find that the bulk of usable material was that recovered after Amaral's departure is entirely due to the Rebelo investigation. Who in my opinion never quite get the credit they are due for the professionalism they showed in extricating the PJ from the disaster they inherited from Amaral.
But even they could not make up the ground that had been lost.
I think the condition Kate found the window and the blind in was certainly an issue a competent investigation would have studied very carefully indeed.
Instead according to Jose Manuel Olivera, Crime reporter for the 'Diario de Noticias' the Portuguese press immediately began to receive leaks from the police that the witnesses' account of events was not believed and was nothing more than a "badly told story".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
In my opinion knee jerk attitudes like that arrived at so instantaneously and leaked to be prejudicial to the main witnesses, could only have been detrimental to the search for a missing child whoever that child might have been.
And we never did find out the truth of what happened to The Gaspar Statements.
Were they sent by The UK Police, and then buried under the mess left by Amaral?
I have never understood why the decision to publicly denigrate and insult the McCanns and their friends - and with such indecent haste imo - was deemed to be necessary in the first place. What on earth was it meant to achieve?
Hard to know exactly what happened about those, but that the PJ somehow mislaid them would seem to be a reasonable guess. If Paiva didn't even know of their existence, how would this reply make sense?
To: Ricard Paiva
From: DC 1756 Mike MARSHALL
Ref: David Payne
Date: October 24, 2007
Leicester Police Constabulary
Ricardo,
As requested, appended are the statements of Arul and Katherina Gaspar.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATERINA-PAYNE-INCIDENT.htm
The coordinator of the first investigation was sacked and the investigation taken over by Rebelo whose very first task was to clean up the mess left behind and sort the files into some form of digitised order.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488802/Madeleine-New-police-chiefs-fury-mess-inherited-predecessor.html
Incompetence of that scale in a missing child case ~ any case for that matter is absolutely mind boggling. I think if you study the situation as it was at the time you will find that the bulk of usable material was that recovered after Amaral's departure is entirely due to the Rebelo investigation. Who in my opinion never quite get the credit they are due for the professionalism they showed in extricating the PJ from the disaster they inherited from Amaral.
But even they could not make up the ground that had been lost.
Rebelo did everything in his power to bring the party back to do a reconstruction and also insisted on their requestioning. That really doesn't sound like a coordinator who believed Amaral had been looking in the wrong place, and a hand-fed piece by Clarence to a friendly churnalist doesn't change that fact.
Mark Rowley May 2017:
No matter how much some want it not to be,the first investigation is/was ok with non other than the Assistant Commissioner of the MET police,those tasked with investigating a crime in a foreign country where they have no jurisdiction..
Rebelo did everything in his power to bring the party back to do a reconstruction and also insisted on their requestioning. That really doesn't sound like a coordinator who believed Amaral had been looking in the wrong place, and a hand-fed piece by Clarence to a friendly churnalist doesn't change that fact.
I don't know if you're familiar with the pro-PJ media blitz against the Ciprianos, once a certain coordinator took over...
On the leaked diary saga:
Leveson inquiry: Daniel Sanderson Leveson inquiry: Daniel Sanderson gives evidence
12.18pm: Daniel Sanderson the News of the World reporter whose name appeared on the Kate McCann diary story in the News of the World, is up next.
McCann told the inquiry that publication of the diary left her feeling "violated".
12.19pm: Sanderson explains how he got in touch with a Portuguese journalist and they discussed payment for a copy of the diary. Sanderson then liaised with the news editor at the time, Ian Edmondson.
Edmondson hired a freelancer, Gerard Couzens, who is based in Spain to travel to Portugal to meet the journalist and collect the diary.
Sanderson says he wasn't aware at the time that the ultimate source was the Portuguese police.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/blog/2011/dec/15/leveson-inquiry-derek-webb-colin-myler-live
Mr Jay
Was there anything about the diary which caused you to speculate as to its source or was your state of mind the same as it had been previously?
Link in context
Link
Mr Daniel Sanderson
Thinking back, I mean it had obviously been translated from English to Portuguese. I mean, the source was -- I suppose, thinking back, it must have come from the Portuguese police, absolutely.
Mr Jay
Why do you say that?
Mr Daniel Sanderson
From memory, when I was looking through the documents, I believe there were comments on certain pages, I think. I can't remember.
Mr Jay
Which -- obviously you don't speak Portuguese --
Mr Daniel Sanderson
No, but there were notes and comments, and I don't know, it looked like some kind of official document, if that makes any sense.
Mr Jay
So was it at that point that you realised that the source was probably the Portuguese police?
Mr Daniel Sanderson
Oh yes, no absolutely, absolutely.
Mr Jay
Did that cause you any concerns?
Mr Daniel Sanderson
The whole thing caused me concern. The whole thing caused me concern.
http://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-15-december-2011/mr-daniel-sanderson
Prior to the NoTW more "sympathetic" extracts, "choice" extracts (from the pro-PJ persective) did the rounds as soon as the McCanns left for the UK
Kate 'complained frequently'
2007-09-13 14:25
Lisbon - Portuguese newspapers on Thursday quoted what they said were extracts from the personal diary of Kate McCann, portraying her as a woman worn out by her three children, including missing toddler Madeleine.
The daily Publico said a copy of the diary had been seized during a police search of the Portuguese holiday home of the couple, who have been named as official suspects in the search for Madeleine.
Jornal de Noticias said the diary and other personal documents were now in the hands of examining magistrate Pedro Danielo dos Anjos Frias, who under Portuguese law must rule if they can be used as evidence.
Correio da Manha said that Kate McCann complained frequently in her diary that her children were "hysterical" and Madeleine in particular was hyperactive, while her husband Gerry did not help in household tasks.
According to Publico, events following the disappearance of Madeleine from the family's holiday apartment on May 3 while her parents were dining nearby with friends, are also described.
They include "the mother's anguish and despair, the solidarity of friends and the impact in the media", Publico said, adding that the police were interested in making comparisons or checking for contradictions in the various entries.
Publico said Portuguese prosecutors had asked the judge to summon Kate McCann back to Portugal from Britain, where they returned on Sunday.
According to Philomena McCann, Kate's sister-in-law, police suspect her of accidentally killing Madeleine then hiding her body.
https://www.news24.com/World/News/Kate-complained-frequently-20070913
ETA: I'd forgotten that there's a thread on the topic:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5973.60
Interesting.
Having waded through the contents of the link and to precis, we seem to have a very junior journalist saying he knew nothing about the provenance of the document [diary] but later on says he thinks it was leaked by the Portuguese police, he not understanding a word of the language, and giving no cogent reason for that belief. Some of the exchanges between Mr Danielson and Lord Leveson are revealing.
You wouldn't want to bat on strength of that would you?
Let me think. What was the GNR response process in 2007? Conduct an initial investigation to verify basic facts, then if it looked like an incident outside their sphere of expertise, escalate it to the PJ?What I am saying is a type of role playing. The play involves the GNR. The author of the play assumes rightly or wrongly that the GNR have sets of procedures to follow in different situations.
Wasn't that what the GNR did?
Kindly explain what the GNR 'kidnapping response' was in 2007. I have never heard of that one before.
What I am saying is a type role play. The play involves the GNR. The author of the play assumes rightly or wrongly that the GNR have sets of procedures to follow in different situations.
Would you know if the GNR have a different response plan to a kidnapping as opposed to a wandering child?
If they don't there is a problem.
If they are always going to respond to a missing child as if it has wandered off and fallen asleep under a tree somewhere, we have a problem for they will be behind in the potential abduction cases.
It appears in the latest case their response was a bit more proactive toward a possible abduction even though on the surface it was 100% a wandering off scenario.
I think we've been through this before, Faith. Why didn't Amaral organise a reconstruction while the group was there? It can hardly be because he didn't want the McCanns to know he suspected them when the "badly told story" article appeared on 5 May.Is that right by the 5th of May the PJ were leaking that the McCanns were telling a badly told story. Previously I have pointed out the influence Silvia Batista had on this view. (FACT) She was right inside the McCann camp listening to the conversations and doing the first translations of those "badly told stories". Were they that bad or were they just painted bad for some reason?
"Esta é uma história muito mal contada"
por José Manuel Oliveira e Paula Martinheira
05 maio 2007
Uma criança inglesa desapareceu do quarto de hotel onde dormia com os irmãos mais novos, na Praia da Luz, no Algarve, enquanto os pais jantavam num restaurante do aldeamento. Autoridades e populares lançaram-se em megaoperação de busca, já alargada a Espanha.
O desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann, a criança inglesa de três anos que se encontrava de férias em Lagos, "é uma história muito mal contada", confidenciou ao DN fonte da Polícia Judiciária de Portimão. A afirmação reflecte as dúvidas das autoridades face aos depoimentos "confusos" expressos ontem pelas testemunhas ao longo de todo o dia.
(...)
http://www.dn.pt/especiais/interior.aspx?content_id=977892&especial=Caso%20Maddie&seccao=SOCIEDADE
What I am saying is a type role play. The play involves the GNR. The author of the play assumes rightly or wrongly that the GNR have sets of procedures to follow in different situations.
Would you know if the GNR have a different response plan to a kidnapping as opposed to a wandering child?
If they don't there is a problem.
If they are always going to respond to a missing child as if it has wandered off and fallen asleep under a tree somewhere, we have a problem for they will be behind in the potential abduction cases.
It appears in the latest case their response was a bit more proactive toward a possible abduction even though on the surface it was 100% a wandering off scenario.
Have a look at the news24 article I posted after the Sanderson / Leveson bit.
How did the PT press start publishing (distorted) extracts of it by Sept 13 07?
What do you mean by 100%. Is this your opinion"It appears to me" means it is my opinion, it is like "I think" or "the way I see it". If that is not clear that is opinion I will try and be clearer in the future.
We need the rules to be clear
It appears to me means it is my opinion, it is like I think or they way I see it. If that is not clear that is opinion I will try and be clearer in the future.
Didn't you think it was just a child wandering off? Where was the hint of abduction in the more recent case?
What I couldn't make out was the continual emphasis on tracker dog searching till they had searched and area (of was it 7 km around Ocean Club?). I could never imagine Madeleine walking this distance on her own so either someone would have needed to carry her alive or deceased over that distance. For that reason I'm not really convinced they ever believed Madeleine had been abducted for the same search area is covered for an abductor on foot or a person on foot looking for a place to dispose of a body.
what I found is they the PJ believed the McCanns about somethings but not others. Like it seems the PJ believe the McCanns when they say Madeleine didn't wake up and wander yet they don't believe they weren't involved with her burial.
So in my study which has been going on for 19 months now I'm finding there is a possibility she left by the front door but possibly someone closes that door after Madeleine has got out, so Kate does not read the signs correctly. (Normally if she had left by the front door the door would be open but it wasn't. So she thinks she has NOT left on her own by that door. The PJ believe that but fail to realise there could have been a visitor who closes that front door.
That visitor does not want to own up for he would be accused of her death, so we never hear about that visit.
I know someone will say that is speculation but the exact same scenario happened to someone I know.
It is an option that can't be discounted.
They have considered it "highly unlikely" but we shouldn't.
The GNR wouldn't handle a kidnapping. Any serious crime goes to the PJ.I know there was a time even our organisation went through a process of writing up procedures. There were procedures before hand but they may not have been written up in the detail that followed.
The GNR were the first responders and organised searches. The PJ handled the rest.
And the PJ didn't have a crime scene manual until May 2009.
Today, at the PolÃcia Judiciária’s School, in Lisbon, a crime scene practises manual is launched, establishing rules on how to enter, how to mark the investigators’ passage, how to photograph and/or draw a crime scene, among other procedures. “The potentialities in the collection of a certain type of residues are incommensurably different today from what they were years agoâ€, said Carlos Farinha, according to whom “nowadays the level of collection of elements on location is scarily superiorâ€. Hence, he adds, the need to “reorganise and think about the manner to proceed on a crime sceneâ€.
source: Diário de NotÃcias, 20.05.2009
And from Harrison's report:
GNR Searches Conducted within 7 days of Madeleine McCann's Disappearance.
On Saturday 21.07.2007 I met with Major Luis Seqeuira, GNR Portimao who was the search coordinator for all search activity that was under taken in the physical search for Madeleine McCann.
Major Seqeuira has not benefited from any formal training or accreditation in the management of searching for missing persons. The search officers with the exception of the search and rescue team dispatched from Lisbon had not benefited from any formal training in search procedures. The teams available and deployed by Major Seqeuira were drawn from unit of the GNR, Civil Protection, Fire Brigade, Red Cross and Urban Police. Each team numbered
around 10 and between 80 to 100 personnel were involved in search activity.
The searches were based on a strategy of searching in "rescue and recovery mode? to locate the missing girl alive or if dead, not as a victim of crime. This search phase lasted for 7 days from the date M McCann went missing.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
They were wrong to say it was unlikely and several very senior former British detectives agree with you. An almost 4-year-old child is very capable of opening a door and walking out and anyone who says otherwise is deluding themself.
I think we've been through this before, Faith. Why didn't Amaral organise a reconstruction while the group was there? It can hardly be because he didn't want the McCanns to know he suspected them when the "badly told story" article appeared on 5 May.
"Esta é uma história muito mal contada"
por José Manuel Oliveira e Paula Martinheira
05 maio 2007
Uma criança inglesa desapareceu do quarto de hotel onde dormia com os irmãos mais novos, na Praia da Luz, no Algarve, enquanto os pais jantavam num restaurante do aldeamento. Autoridades e populares lançaram-se em megaoperação de busca, já alargada a Espanha.
O desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann, a criança inglesa de três anos que se encontrava de férias em Lagos, "é uma história muito mal contada", confidenciou ao DN fonte da Polícia Judiciária de Portimão. A afirmação reflecte as dúvidas das autoridades face aos depoimentos "confusos" expressos ontem pelas testemunhas ao longo de todo o dia.
(...)
http://www.dn.pt/especiais/interior.aspx?content_id=977892&especial=Caso%20Maddie&seccao=SOCIEDADE
The daily Publico said a copy of the diary had been seized during a police search of the Portuguese holiday home of the couple, who have been named as official suspects in the search for Madeleine.
Jornal de Noticias said the diary and other personal documents were now in the hands of examining magistrate Pedro Danielo dos Anjos Frias, who under Portuguese law must rule if they can be used as evidence.
We seem to have a few choices:
1) An English speaking Portuguese policeman read the diary then told what was his understanding of his translation, to a hack.
2) Before passing the diary to examining magistrate Pedro Danielo dos Anjos Frias the PJ:
a) copied the diary then passed the copy to the press leaving the press to have it translated.
b) had the diary translated into Portuguese then passed the content to to the press.
3) Examining magistrate Pedro Danielo dos Anjos Frias:
a) read the diary then told what was whis understanding of his translation,to a hack.
b)had the diary translated into Portuguese then passed the content to to the press.
I would want to ask a fair few questions before coming down heads or tails on that lot.
They were wrong to say it was unlikely and several very senior former British detectives agree with you. An almost 4-year-old child is very capable of opening a door and walking out and anyone who says otherwise is deluding themself.It is Kate finding the front door closed that confuses her. I would say they know Madeleine was capable of opening the front door on her own, but she was incapable of closing it. It is the thought that someone else closed that door after Madeleine had exited that door that is like a "break through" in the case.
In fact, the only real and tangible evidence there exists in the case is the two independent trails recorded by the GNR tracker dogs just hours after Madeleine disappeared. Trails which strongly suggest the child walked out the front door, around block 5 and back to mini reception where she crossed the road before the trail ended abruptly. This in itself is very string evidence that a barefooted child walked out of that apartment and was lifted by someone directly opposite mini reception. The other factor which supports this theory is that Madeleine was very well acquainted with that route having used it every morning, at times running off ahead of her parents and siblings.
The senior detectives don't have all the evidence...it would be interesting to know why the PJ rated woke and wandered highly unlikely...they must have a reason...imoWell the only clue is what Kate and Gerry said. Well put yourself in their shoes (the PJ shoes) see if you can think of a reason? I bet you can't. The only reason is that the door was found shut and that required a key to do that. But that reason falls apart if someone else shut the door from inside after Madeleine left.
I know there was a time even our organisation went through a process of writing up procedures. There were procedures before hand but they may not have been written up in the detail that followed.
You say:
"The GNR wouldn't handle a kidnapping. Any serious crime goes to the PJ.
The GNR were the first responders and organised searches. The PJ handled the rest."
So at some stage they call in the PJ, hours too late if it is an abduction case. That is why I asked about their initial response, was it always going to be the same.
Well the only clue is what Kate and Gerry said. Well put yourself in their shoes (the PJ shoes) see if you can think of a reason? I bet you can't. The only reason is that the door was found shut and that required a key to do that. But that reason falls apart if someone else shut the door from inside after Madeleine left.
And we never did find out the truth of what happened to The Gaspar Statements.
Were they sent by The UK Police, and then buried under the mess left by Amaral?
The PJ didn't receive Crecheman's questionnaire in 2007 re Tanner sighting - LP incompetence is suspicious! If Amaral had seen the Gaspar statements then things would have changed much sooner. Amaral should have seen those statements from LP - urgently faxed to the SIO in May! He never saw them and left the case in October. UK police have a lot to answer for so all eyes are on SY.
The PJ didn't receive Crecheman's questionnaire in 2007 re Tanner sighting - LP incompetence is suspicious! If Amaral had seen the Gaspar statements then things would have changed much sooner. Amaral should have seen those statements from LP - urgently faxed to the SIO in May! He never saw them and left the case in October. UK police have a lot to answer for so all eyes are on SY.
I cannot see that the pj would make such a claim without good reason....we don't know what that reason is.....it may well be a very good reason...we just do not knowJust think of one. These are a few I thought of
This is Opinion as Fact. But I will let that pass. We don't know if Amaral saw The Gaspar Statements before he was sacked. But Paiva obviously knew of their existence. How could that be?
Just think of one. These are a few I thought of
1. The door was nailed shut.
2. The door had been deadlocked and Gerry had the key.
3. The lever was rusted and too stiff for a 4 year old.
4. ....
You could keep on making up reasons but I don't think it is possible to find one that holds up to scrutiny.
If the intruder had a key to open and close the door obviously the front door is an exit point. How did he eliminate that one?
Those statements were given in May. Amaral never saw them. They should be sent straight to the SIO in May for his urgent attention. It never happened. That is FACT.
What I am saying is a type of role playing. The play involves the GNR. The author of the play assumes rightly or wrongly that the GNR have sets of procedures to follow in different situations.Are you having a laugh? This is NOT role-playing, anything but.
Would you know if the GNR have a different response plan to a kidnapping as opposed to a wandering child?
If they don't there is a problem.
If they are always going to respond to a missing child as if it has wandered off and fallen asleep under a tree somewhere, we have a problem for they will be behind in the potential abduction cases.
It appears (IMO) in the latest case their response was a bit more proactive toward a possible abduction even though on the surface it was 100% a wandering off scenario.
Those statements were given in May. Amaral never saw them. They should be sent straight to the SIO in May for his urgent attention. It never happened. That is FACT.
Are you having a laugh? This is NOT role-playing, anything but.Only in my role playing they did.
Why are you asking me about a GNR procedure for kidnapped children?
You proposed they had one. I asked you what it was, because I had never heard of it.
Do you, or do you not, have a 2007 GNR procedure for kidnapped children? The answer is yes or no.
We would need to ask the PJ...just because you cannot think of one does not mean there isn't one.What reason could there possibly be? IMO It is not possible to even imagine one.
I think is highly unlikely they would use the words highly unlikely unless they had a good reason
Only in my role playing they did.We would need to ask the PJ...just because you cannot think of one does not mean there isn't one.
What reason could there possibly be? IMO It is not possible to even imagine one.
We would need to ask the PJ...just because you cannot think of one does not mean there isn't one.The PJ are not going to answer that question. And you don't seem to want to consider trying to explore a possibility yourself. So we might as well move on.
I think is highly unlikely they would use the words highly unlikely unless they had a good reason
The PJ are not going to answer that question. And you don't seem to want to consider trying to explore a possibility yourself. So we might as well move on.Absolutely....perhaps one day we will find out the answer
Absolutely....perhaps one day we will find out the answer8:20 PM Gerry closes the door but doesn't lock it.
8:20 PM Gerry closes the door but doesn't lock it.
Gerry uses the key to open it a 9:05 PM.
Madeleine exits by front door after 9:35 -9:40 but leaves it open.
someone sees it open and closes it from the inside and leaves by the patio door.
Kate finds the door closed so can't imagine Madeleine leaving by the front door.
PJ and GNR see no sign of break in through the front door. (Admit key could be used).
Dogs track Madeleine from the front door.
there is something that has conviced the PJ that maddie did not wake and wander.....we dont know what it is...but they seem convinced....its pointless guessing imo...the dogs are not real evidence of woke and wanderedI have just looked at a previous 5A occupant PA gordon
I have just looked at a previous 5A occupant PA gordon
The doors, windows and shutters were in perfect working order.
There was no sign of the doors, windows and blinds ever having been broken into, but also there was no need to examine [them]. The front door had a double lock that was difficult to lock, but we managed to do it. The patio door did not lock from the outside, only from the inside of the apartment and for that reason when the family left [went out] together we always used the front door."
That is tantamount to admitting it was faulty. for it to be difficult suggests faulty IMO.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAUL_GORDON.htm
there is something that has conviced the PJ that maddie did not wake and wander.....we dont know what it is...but they seem convinced....its pointless guessing imo...the dogs are not real evidence of woke and wandered
You don't like the dogs obviously but on this occasion we know the dogs followed Maddie's scent. The only unknown is whether it was her scent from that night or scent previously laid down each morning. As she wore shoes in the morning and had no shoes on the night she disappeared, I tend to go with the latter. Or to put it another way, just a little more evidence to support woke and wandered out the front door.
What a lot of people seem to have learned is to believe and repeat the stories in the British newspapers. Clarence Mitchell freely admits that he worked hard, meeting newspaper editors privately.
We had to establish our own narrative and key messages,"
"For the first anniversay we had to offer the press something decent to keep the interest going so we did Panorama and Hello!. For the second anniversary Oprah had been chasing us for some time so we worked with her.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id291.htm
Part of his role was reputation management, so that should always be remembered when his name appears.
https://mumbrella.com.au/clarence-mitchell-madeleine-mccann-disappearance-pr-342797
I have just looked at a previous 5A occupant PA gordonI dont know whether it is in the files or not, but soon after Madeleine vanished, a couple came forward who had stayed in 5A before The Mccanns. I think they were on honeymoon, but not sure about that now.
The doors, windows and shutters were in perfect working order.
There was no sign of the doors, windows and blinds ever having been broken into, but also there was no need to examine [them]. The front door had a double lock that was difficult to lock, but we managed to do it. The patio door did not lock from the outside, only from the inside of the apartment and for that reason when the family left [went out] together we always used the front door."
That is tantamount to admitting it was faulty. for it to be difficult suggests faulty IMO.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAUL_GORDON.htm
Alice posted a link to a court case where tracker dog evidence was deemed inadmissible.....it seems it is not as reliable as some think...nothing against dogs I just like the truth
The PJ said woke and wandered was highly unlikely...it would be interesting to know on what that was based
@ Alice The diary is only one example. There were loads of others.
Where did the "tufts" of hair half-baked leak come from?
Daily Mail
Large amount of Madeleine's hair 'found in tyre well in boot of parents' hire car'
Last updated at 18:03pm on 11th September 2007
• Portuguese prosecutors pass case file onto senior judge
• Madeleine's body 'carried in car storage space'
• Bodily fluids found in tyre well were that of 'a decomposing corpse'
• Leicestershire's top detective visits McCanns' home
• Gerry's blog: last few days have been emotionally draining
Madeleine: DNA in the McCanns' hire care boot is said to be a full match
Substantial quantities of Madeleine McCann's hair were found in the tyre well of the boot of her parents' hire car, it was revealed today.
Investigators are convinced so much hair was found that her body must have been stored in the vehicle, which was hired more than three weeks after she disappeared.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/large-amount-of-madeleine-s-hair-found-in-tyre-w-1-t17442.html#p224818
The FSS report doesn't have a typed name on the PT translation, just a signature. Angela something?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2652a.jpg
Unless the PT tabloids were deliberately making half of it up (at least this one) one possibility is that a PJ officer or employee simply told a relative or spouse, who then repeated it and tabloid ears picked it up and possibly embellished it. At least it could explain why it was so disconnected from the actual findings.
That is irrelevant, the tracker dogs both followed the same trail, Maddie's trail and that is irrefutable.
I have just looked at a previous 5A occupant PA gordon
The doors, windows and shutters were in perfect working order.
There was no sign of the doors, windows and blinds ever having been broken into, but also there was no need to examine [them]. The front door had a double lock that was difficult to lock, but we managed to do it. The patio door did not lock from the outside, only from the inside of the apartment and for that reason when the family left [went out] together we always used the front door."
That is tantamount to admitting it was faulty. for it to be difficult suggests faulty IMO.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAUL_GORDON.htm
I would not rule out either possibility until I had gone through each item carefully to knock it on the head one way or another. Just as I would not assume it was all malice aforethought part of some larger cosmic plot.
The making it up as you go along behaviour is not restricted to tabloids either. UK broadsheets have been known to print complete blx masquerading as "investigative journalism".
And this...Increased coercion measures - I don't like the sound of that!
....snip ..... This information, which was not yet delivered by the Birmingham lab, in England, is crucial in order to decide the following steps in the investigation, and to start new interrogations of Kate and Gerry McCann, as well as an eventual increase in the coercion measures, depending on whether it is Maddie's blood or not.
.... snip ....
They were wrong to say it was unlikely and several very senior former British detectives agree with you. An almost 4-year-old child is very capable of opening a door and walking out and anyone who says otherwise is deluding themself.
In fact, the only real and tangible evidence there exists in the case is the two independent trails recorded by the GNR tracker dogs just hours after Madeleine disappeared. Trails which strongly suggest the child walked out the front door, around block 5 and back to mini reception where she crossed the road before the trail ended abruptly. This in itself is very strong evidence that a barefooted child walked out of that apartment and was lifted by someone directly opposite mini reception. The other factor which supports this theory is that Madeleine was very well acquainted with that route having used it every morning, at times running off ahead of her parents and siblings.
But never at night John - so not familiar to her at all imo. The front door was in a particularly dark corner - would a 4yr old venture out on her own into the darkness and walk any distance in her pyjamas and especially with no shoes on? It sounds unlikely to me.Well if you think John is wrong what do you think happened?
The dogs could have been picking up her scent from journeys made earlier that same day. IMO
The simplest explanation usually ends up being the correct one. The scent from a child wearing shoes is extremely weak and will dissipate after many hours. A barefooted child however leaves behind a very distinct trail which can be easily followed especially when fresh. A child will always go to the light so walking out the front door and going west makes much sense. The lights and noise from the tapas area would have been an attraction imo.You still have to explain why the pj said w and w is highly unlikely....plus I don't think the dog evidence is as reliable as you think....Al my opinion
They were wrong to say it was unlikely and several very senior former British detectives agree with you. An almost 4-year-old child is very capable of opening a door and walking out and anyone who says otherwise is deluding themself.
In fact, the only real and tangible evidence there exists in the case is the two independent trails recorded by the GNR tracker dogs just hours after Madeleine disappeared. Trails which strongly suggest the child walked out the front door, around block 5 and back to mini reception where she crossed the road before the trail ended abruptly. This in itself is very strong evidence that a barefooted child walked out of that apartment and was lifted by someone directly opposite mini reception. The other factor which supports this theory is that Madeleine was very well acquainted with that route having used it every morning, at times running off ahead of her parents and siblings.
Well if you think John is wrong what do you think happened?
Alice posted a link to a court case where tracker dog evidence was deemed inadmissible.....it seems it is not as reliable as some think...nothing against dogs I just like the truth
The PJ said woke and wandered was highly unlikely...it would be interesting to know on what that was based
The simplest explanation usually ends up being the correct one. The scent from a child wearing shoes is extremely weak and will dissipate after many hours. A barefooted child however leaves behind a very distinct trail which can be easily followed especially when fresh. A child will always go to the light so walking out the front door and going west makes much sense. The lights and noise from the tapas area would have been an attraction imo.Madeleine couldn't see the light from the tapas area, cos block 5 building was in the way. Unless bangers were going off, neither would she have heard it.
I'm not saying it happened that way but the evidence certainly supports it.
True.
David Rose is well-respected though.
The claims about the diary's contents were first published on Thursday by Jose Manuel Ribeiro *, crime correspondent for the Lisbon daily Diario de Noticias.
By chance I ran into him that same afternoon, outside the apartment where Madeleine disappeared.
I congratulated him on his scoop, but he shook his head, disconsolate. Already, he complained, it was turning to dust.
Ribeiro said he had been given the story by an impeccable inside source, but already officials in Lisbon were denying it, and the source himself could no longer assure him it was true.
"Why is bad information getting out to the public?" he asked. "Because we're being given it."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz52ykvcRce
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Seems to be this
Diario de Noticias 13.9.07*
PJ traces profile of Kate from her diary
Kate McCann's diary, which was apprehended in early August by Policia Judiciaria in the Vista Mar villa at Praia da Luz, close to Lagos, and which was rented by Madeleine's parents, will not be very useful to the investigation at the moment. It was one of the clues that were used by police in order to help the investigators to trace the "psychological profile" of the English child's mother, namely in terms of her relationship with her children, her husband and other family members, besides friends. And the level of disturbance she felt over her daughter's disappearance.
As DN could find out, PJ has photocopied several pages of that diary when it was apprehended, at the time of Kate's depositions. Those photocopies are in possession of the criminal instruction judge at the Judicial Court in Portimao, so the apprehension is validated. This has to happen because the diary is, just like any private correspondence, considered to be a document which is part of the "intimacy and privacy" of a person.
As DN could establish, the investigation will also focus on the McCanns' car: there will be even more detailed forensic investigation, and probably its interior will be taken apart. But these diligences can only take place after the total analyses arrive, which, according to sources that are connected to the process, has not happened yet.
Policia Judiciaria (PJ) awaits the emission of judicial warrants in order to perform new diligences that will focus on the discovery of the cadaver. The area close to the church of Nossa Senhora da Luz is one of the targets that has already been marked by the investigators.
(...)
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/pj-traces-profile-of-kate-from-her-diary-dn-13-9-0-t2015.html
* Published 13 DE SETEMBRO DE 2007
00:00
JOSÉ MANUEL OLIVEIRA
https://www.dn.pt/arquivo/2007/interior/pj-traca-perfil-de-kate-com-o-diario-984870.html
Followed presumably by this CdaM piece:
Correio da Manha 13.9.07
Diary: PJ wants to add it to the process
Kate calls her children hysterical in the diary
Kate's diary is fundamental for the investigators of the Policia Judiciaria, who found it open in the villa that was rented by the McCanns after the disappearance of Madeleine from the Ocean Club.
The diary was not apprehended because it is included, in juridical terms, within the sphere of private correspondence, but it was analysed by police investigators. As it cannot be valued as evidence, PJ's members asked the lawyer of the Ministerio Publico to ask for its formal apprehension. This has to be done by the instruction judge, in a separate order, so it cannot be rendered invalid later.
CM could further determine that the importance of the diary is considered to be high. In it, Kate reveals traces of her personality. She often complains that her children are "hysterical" and she talks about Madeleine as a child whose excessive activity consumes her strength. She also says that Gerry doesn't help her with family chores, and that it is on her that the obligation to take care of the small ones falls. CM also knows that Kate reveals details of May 3. She confesses to no crime, but she describes the hours before Maddie disappeared.
Yesterday, an English newspaper also said that the PJ also wants to apprehend Gerry's personal computer. The purpose would be to access his mailbox, a diligence that was never performed because it is only now that the parents became formal suspects.
Tests have not arrived yet
The biological tests that are being performed in the Birmingham Lab have not arrived yet. What is missing is the confirmation of the genetical profiles that were collected in the apartment where the child disappeared from, which, if from Madeleine, come to reinforce the theory of death and concealment of a body.
While the instruction judge does not speak about the requests that were made by PJ, authorities continue to work on the case. The diligences are less visible now, but searches in areas which do not require a judicial mandate are not completely excluded.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/kate-calls-her-children-hysterical-in-the-diary-cd-t2017.html
* Correction. The DN article I found is bylined by Oliveira, not Ribeiro as mentioned in D Rose's article. Hmm. Will have another look.
The point still stands re the media blitz on 13 Sept, though.
"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"
http://www.rjerrard.co.uk/law/cases/piet.htm
And this...
Lowe wrote the full report on 6 Sept. Unless it was sent be second-class snail mail to LP who then snail-mailed it to PT, as opposed to faxing it, I don't see how the PJ wouldn't have had it by 13 Sept (the date of the article).
It's possible that they didn't get it for arguido day, but then what did they wave as "evidence"? Lowe's e-mail?
Could these details, even if some are inaccurate, have not come from a PJ-related source?
Jornal de Noticias 13.9.07
English lab delays analyses of residues from apartment
Policia Judiciaria still waits for the results from tests on the samples of bilogical residues that were collected in the Ocean Club apartment where the McCann family was staying. This information, which was not yet delivered by the Birmingham lab, in England, is crucial in order to decide the following steps in the investigation, and to start new interrogations of Kate and Gerry McCann, as well as an eventual increase in the coercion measures, depending on whether it is Maddie's blood or not.
Until now, the PJ has only received the results of the DNA research that concern the residues that were found in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was rented by the couple several days after Madeleine's disappearance. And those analyses indicated a compatibility level of 80% with the genetic profile of the English girl - other results that were received were inconclusive.
But when confronted with this and other data during their interrogations as arguidos, Maddie's parents remained silent. It is still to be known whether they will maintain the same stance if the samples that were collected from a wall and a curtain in the apartment - the location where one of the English dogs marked the presence of cadaver odor - are compatible with their daughter's genetic profile.
News that were published in England yesterday reported that the McCann couple will ask for new forensic testing on the rental car in which the English dogs signalled cadaver odor in the boot and found biological residues of the girl.
Validated apprehension
While this waiting moment passes, as JN reported yesterday, a criminal instruction judge was asked to validate the apprehension of an agenda that belongs to Kate McCann, which can also be seen as a "diary". PJ wants to further investigate the habits of Madeleine's mother through that and other documents. The same magistrate will also pronounce himself about the request for assistant status, that was made by the couple, and should deny it.
On the other hand, the Ministerio Publico is analysing what diligences are justified at this point in the investigation. One of them, as has been reported previously, is related to the questioning of relatives and friends of the McCanns, through a request letter to England. The attorney who is in charge of the case will also decide whether it is justified to search further locations where the eventual body of the child could have passed through.
English couple defies Portuguese police
Kate and Gerry McCann sent a message to Policia Judiciaria yesterday, defying the inspectors to find Madeleine's body in order to prove the couple's involvement. According to English newspaper 'Daily Mail', the lawyers for Madeleine's parents said that without a body, it will be extremely difficult to prove the involvement in the alleged death of the 4-year-old child.
(...)
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/english-lab-delays-analyses-of-residues-13-9-07-t2016.html
So was that established in this caseThe Judge Who cut short the dog evidence was
So was that established in this caseThere has been no criminal court case as yet for a judge to make a ruling on that aspect in the McCann case.
Yep, and the Judge was ?Amelia? de Melo e Castro.
The same judge that cut short the dog evidence in the first case. She didn't allow the expert from the UK to finish
According To Anne Guedes (do Amaral) the British expert was taking too long, so (just as he was getting interesting IMO) the Judge Melo e Castro cut him short.
Do you remember, a few years ago, I also pointed out that Judge Melo de Castro was rather close to Amaral, as was Anne Guedes.
1) Their family homes were in the Jewish area of Portugal near Belmonte (anything starting with Bel (or Bal) is likely to be Jewish, because they worshipped the God *Baal *.
Melo and Goncalo are villages set 12 - 13 miles apart in a remote sparsly populated area of Portugal. Just 1.8 miles from Goncalo and less than 12 miles friom Melo lies the tiny place Seixo Amarelo
Now I posted the connections between Melo de Castro and Goncalo de Sousa Amaral before and they have been whooshed, but there were at least three, if you remember .... and i commented that there could be a * Conflict of Interests * here. There were two other reasons why they were close IMO ... and that is just based upon the Melo part of the name.
The Castro part of the Judges name also has connections to Goncalo de Sousa Amaral, but please do not force me to go into all that again, because some of them involve Isabel Duchess of Braganza who is Portugals 'Queen in waiting'. She seems to be descended from all these people $65*
..................
Also with the Court records, posted by Anne Guedes (do Amaral) to Goncalo de Sousa de Amaral... another potential *Conflict of Interests *.
There has been no criminal court case as yet for a judge to make a ruling on that aspect in the McCann case.
Im talking about whether the dog expert presented any details of the training of the dogs.I seem to recall they weren't fully trained.
2nd August
Diaries seized
13th Sept 2007
The judge gets copies of Kate's diaries in English and orders that they be translated so he can decide whether they can be included as evidence.
4th October 2007
The translator, AR, returns the copies along with her translation of them.
25th June 2008
The Prosecutor (I think) asks the judge what the decision is.
26th June 2008
The judge decides the diaries are personal and orders the copies be destroyed.
So did the PJ keep hold of a copy themselves? Did they have it translated? Why did they leak bits of it before asking for it to be entered in evidence?
It wasn't just the blitz re the diary. It was also the "100% DNA", allusions to gory substances and "tufts" of her hair in the boot, and whatever else.
Re the diary, from some articles it seems the files were handed over on 12 Sept.
Perhaps they actually realised that the so-called "evidence" amounted to a hill of beans; but tried their best to get a confession. It didn't turn out that way, the McCanns were free to go home, albeit still with their arguido status.
Perhaps a question of pride? By encouraging a media blitz on "evidence", it helped to gloss over the fact that there were no charges, despite the build-up in the pro-PJ media since 5 May and may have helped to fuel the well-seeded notion that the PJ were all highly competent shining knights in armour and that it was just corruption in high places that was preventing them from securing a charge.
Have you read this by David Rose? (He writes for the Mail on Sunday, although it appears online as the Daily).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz52ykvcRce
There certainly was a media blitz but it seems to have been triggered by one vague(ish) piece of information having an equally vague source and provenance. That is not to say the source was not PJ just that I would not bet too much on it.
I do find the concept of a diary being apprehended rather droll. That's Google translate for you I suppose.
It may help to take one step back and ask the purposes of a newspaper.
Providing a factually accurate account of "How they brought good news from Aix to Ghent" to present to the populace at large is along way down the list. IMO of course.
1 A newspaper will print as many of it's owner's biases, prejudices and political inclinations as the advertisers will hold still for.
2 It will present news items and /or human interest stories in a manner attractive to it's target audience to increase circulation showing the advertiser's that it reaches the advertiser's target audiences making it worth while to invest in advertising space and so on. To make it look as though it has legs makes even more attractive from the advertisers point of view => extra revenue.
3 A good human interest story will be milked until dry by the appropriate media.
4 By Sept 2007 the McCann case was soap opera. It having "everything" it is difficult to conceive of a time when it will cease to be a human interest story for some members of the public, except of course when all is revealed.
all my opinion of course.
So was that established in this case
You have the document. Work it out for yourself.
1) So they say. I did not have you down as the sort who would sing a Brill Building song.
True. I'd add another one: manipulation of public opinion. I find further layers in the PT situation, however. A young democracy, but still with some of the old guard and their supporters in place.
Judicial secrecy. I can't find some early articles at the moment, and it wasn't David Rose, but someone of the same ilk who'd interviewed one of the well-known PT senior tabloid journalists. It might have been Damasão, but I'm not certain.
I'm having to paraphrase from memory, but it was along the lines that judicial secrecy is like traffic regulations: everyone knows they exist, but everyone ignores them. Without PJ leaks, there wouldn't be any crime reporting in PT.
To an extent, I can understand that - there was no media strategy in criminal investigations. The result was that the public is interested, but there's no info to give them without unofficial cosy arrangements of juicy leaks that can be presented to suit different agendas.
The downside of that if you rely on the PJ for secret scraps, but then you criticiise them in one way or another, your lifeline gets cut off. The alternative is to present the info so that it lavishly praises them, whether the investigation is a fiasco or not.
Where that can backfire for the PJ is that the public has high expectations of their competence, but which doesn't necessarily quite materialise in the way that the build-up suggested.
I'm not sure if there's a media strategy even now, but things to seem more "modern" than they were 10 years ago.
I already have doneThen you will realise that dog alerts as described in this case are admissible within limits.
Then you will realise that dog alerts as described in this case are admissible within limits.
Neither a blanket yes nor a blanket no....in English law.
US law is a trifle more complex. Portuguese law ?
1) So they say. I did not have you down as the sort who would sing a Brill Building song.
2) The examining magistrate calls the tune on waht is and waht is not judicial secrecy between limits I believe.
I am using a new computer and atm cannot get into different websites nor my notes, but whether he was a Lawyer representing the Mccanns or/and the FSS is no matter. He put the expert viewpoint.
And remember, the facts are according to Anne Guedes, Amarals bloodline relative ... and as such should be read with caution becauswe of once again the piossibilty of a * Conflict of Interests *
Yes, she did find for The Mccanns in the previous case BUT at that time, I had ALREADY pointed out PUBLICLY that there was the possibility of a * Conflict of Interests * because of the Melo e Castro family and locational links with Goncalo de Sousa Amaral.
It surprises me that no-one seems to find this pertinent and interesting. Makes me wonder, is everyone dead on their feet?
What or who is Brill Building? lol
We don't know if they are admissable and we don't know how reliable they are...
What or who is Brill Building? lol
How does that materially effect the principle of the judgement by the appeal court?
He was the McCann's lawyer, Duarte's deputy. He concentrated on trying to suggest that the PJ got it wrong. How that was supposed to descredit Amaral's book, which described the PJ investigation goodness knows. What he should have been concentrating on was demonstrating a causal link from the book to the McCann's feelings. As Amaral's lawyer said;What a shame ! Others with a more important role have shown interest.
vague allegations from the couple and no evidence of any effect being caused by the book.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5786.0
That's why the judge was able to rule in the McCanns favour only by deciding that Amaral broke the rules governing his position as a retired policeman.
I don't know what you mean about the judge finding 'for The Mccanns in the previous case'. What previous case? This is the McCann's lawyer's closing speech in the only case on which this judge ruled, as far as I know.
Your interest in bloodlines isn't shared by others, Sadie, and the influence you think they exert is just speculation in my opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brill_Building
I'm still none the wiser. I guess it wasn't a compliment, but that's ok. ;)
I added a reference for you to my previous post.
He was the McCann's lawyer, Duarte's deputy. He concentrated on trying to suggest that the PJ got it wrong. How that was supposed to descredit Amaral's book, which described the PJ investigation goodness knows. What he should have been concentrating on was demonstrating a causal link from the book to the McCann's feelings. As Amaral's lawyer said;
vague allegations from the couple and no evidence of any effect being caused by the book.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5786.0
That's why the judge was able to rule in the McCanns favour only by deciding that Amaral broke the rules governing his position as a retired policeman.
I don't know what you mean about the judge finding 'for The Mccanns in the previous case'. What previous case? This is the McCann's lawyer's closing speech in the only case on which this judge ruled, as far as I know.
Your interest in bloodlines isn't shared by others, Sadie, and the influence you think they exert is just speculation in my opinion.
The Brill Building was a place where lyricists sat like battery hens churning out pop lyrics. People such as Carole King, Gerry Goffin, Neil Sedaka. Every time I see particular expressions repeated by all and sundry I think of the Brill Building :)
Or if you prefer a religious kick try Amos 3.3 it expresses a similar sentiment.
I'll look at the ref later.
Ok, I think I got the gist.
No, I'm quite capable of thinking for myself.
I don't have a problem agreeing - or disagreeing - with anyone on a particular point, whatever their general stance appears to be, if I find the point valid and if I choose to respond.
I am surprised that you didn't know about the previuos case cos you mentioned it in your earlier post today saying that she had ruled in the Mccanns favour.
The Judge, Maria Emilia de Melo e Castro also was the judge for the Libel Trial starting 12 September 2013 and she cut short the expert Lawyer on the on Eddie and Keelas findings and what they meant. In her summing up she ignored what he said and stated that Cadavar Odour was found in the appartment and in the car .... so backed Amaral in his misconceptions.
She had stopped the Mccann lawyer from putting the case about the none findings of Eddie and keela.... and wrongly backed Amaral
This Judge, Maria Emilia de Melo e Castro, was also the Judge in the Supreme Court, and she got it wrong in this first Court ... JEEZ !
How comw you had forgotten about the first case with this Judge, Gunit, when you mentioned it at least once this evening ?
I still cannot get into webpages atm, but had the above recorded in my emails.
Well that was my first take ?{)(**
I have been discussing the Libel Trial and nothing but the Libel Trial throughout.
I don't think this Judge was a Supreme Court Judge. Please provide a cite for that claim.
As an aside, a lawyer is a lawyer, why do you refer to the McCann's lawyer as an 'expert'?
Cite herewith. I am surprised with your finger so on the button, that you didn't know this. Are you sure that you weren't simply wasting my time?
A wind up?
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AnneGuedes.htm
Scroll down the page
The Supreme Court Judge :
Maria Emelie de Melo e Castro
Her complete name is Maria Emília Guerreiro de Avillez Melo e Castro.
You will see a smaller version of her image, clearly labelled Judge, amongst the photos of the people involved in the Supreme Court trial (lawyers, interpreters, translators etc)
No photograph, but image drawn after the first libel trial
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/A/Judge.jpg
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/A/Judge.jpg)
I think that all these images are connected to the Libel Trial, not to the Supreme Court hearing.There is a block of 13 photogrphs and one drawing (of Judge Maria Emilia de Melo e Castro) on the page I cited.
Photos: from McCann Libel trial by Anne Guedes
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AnneGuedes.htm
Your cite doesn't say that the judge was a Supreme Court judge.
It is a shame that no-one takes notice of the bloodlines, historical connections and bretheren cos IMO they are part of the key to this whole case.
-snip-
Your interest in bloodlines isn't shared by others, Sadie, and the influence you think they exert is just speculation in my opinion.
There is a block of 13 photogrphs and one drawing (of Judge Maria Emilia de Melo e Castro) on the page I cited.This may or may not help Sadie but on page 75 of the judgement there are 3 signatures which are not translated These could be the names of the three SC judges.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AnneGuedes.htm
The block of photographs is underneath the section headed Supreme Court 31 Jan 2017 and as it is close to that section, it appears to be of the Lawyers, translators, Judge etc of the Supreme Court. I believe it to be images of the main legal players in that Supreme Court and not of the lesser Court proceedings some three years previously..
To prove this, I would have to go thru all the court papers .... and as I have no intention of wasting my time doing that ... and neither have I the intention of spreading possibly incorrect info, I am going to modify my posts on this topic.
I will say that Anne Guedes and Pamalam present those photos as being of the legal participants in the Supreme Court trial, and if they are not, they should please take care to alter the presentation. Because if they are not the legal participants in the Supreme court, they are misleading as they stand
Go to the top of the class Robitty. Judges signing their decision document is normal procedure.In my days of being a civil servant we had to use our name written in full (rubber block stamp) as well as our signature. People in the know may be able to work out who these 3 judges were but most would find it impossible to read their signatures.
There is a block of 13 photogrphs and one drawing (of Judge Maria Emilia de Melo e Castro) on the page I cited.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AnneGuedes.htm
The block of photographs is underneath the section headed Supreme Court 31 Jan 2017 and as it is close to that section, it appears to be of the Lawyers, translators, Judge etc of the Supreme Court. I believe it to be images of the main legal players in that Supreme Court and not of the lesser Court proceedings some three years previously..
To prove this, I would have to go thru all the court papers .... and as I have no intention of wasting my time doing that ... and neither have I the intention of spreading possibly incorrect info, I am going to modify my posts on this topic.
I will say that Anne Guedes and Pamalam present those photos as being of the legal participants in the Supreme Court trial, and if they are not, they should please take care to alter the presentation. Because if they are not the legal participants in the Supreme court, they are misleading as they stand
This may or may not help Sadie but on page 75 of the judgement there are 3 signatures which are not translated These could be the names of the three SC judges.Thank you Rob 8((()*/
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/A/Acordao_Page_75.jpg
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/A/Acordao_Page_75.jpg)
As I understand it there were three judges involved in the Supreme Court decision, so why would only one be mentioned? Because she was the (single) judge in the Libel Trial.
I think the only people present at the Supreme Court were the judges, no lawyers or translators attended.
It would be very unusual for a judge in the lower court to be a Supreme Court judge too. It would be even more unusual for any judge to be involved in criticising their own judgement.
That little bit of knowledge helped me to work out what I was seeing.
Artist impression of the Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro
Judge McCann V Amaral Libel trial 2014.Recently named trainer magistrate
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AnneGuedes.htm
This may or may not help Sadie but on page 75 of the judgement there are 3 signatures which are not translated These could be the names of the three SC judges.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/A/Acordao_Page_75.jpg
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/A/Acordao_Page_75.jpg)
Well that was my first take ?{)(**
David James Smith seems to have been confided in by the McCanns. He got lots of details from them despite their claims that they observed the secrecy laws. He seems to know who it was who told them to show no emotion in public;
Jim Gamble, chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, told them that if the abductor was watching he or she might take pleasure in the McCanns’ distress.
A bit of misinformation here?
there were, apparently, obvious signs that an intruder had been there. What they were, however, is not clear. Apart from the open window and shutter, neither the McCanns nor the police have confirmed any other evidence of a break-in.
From the beginning the McCanns had been warned by the PJ that they could not speak about the details of the investigation or the circumstances of Madeleine’s disappearance. The "secrecy of justice" laws prevented anybody involved, including all police officers and witnesses, from talking about it to the press or anyone else. Both Gerry and Kate were meticulous in observing this rule.
Apart from telling this reporter all about it?
09 September 2007
Victims of the rumour mill? Timesonline
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id96.htm
As the reporter tells us;
That week in Praia da Luz, the week the McCanns were made suspects in their own daughter's "death", I was out there talking to them and to family and friends.
He's another one who believes the McCanns are innocent and, like everyone else, he is relying purely on his instincts, not on any evidence;
To me, the McCanns are genuine people in the grip of despair – the accusations against them are ludicrous and a cruel distraction from the search for their daughter.
Some of the things he says are almost beyond belief;
They were first to the table at the restaurant at 8.35 and spent some minutes talking to a couple from Hertfordshire – two more tennis players – at the next table, who were eating with their young children. As they chatted, Gerry thought how lucky he was, his children asleep nearby, he and Kate free to come and enjoy some adult time at the restaurant and not have to sit with their children, as this couple were.
[/b]
Lucky or neglectful?
Ah! The source of that little gem;
Earlier that week the McCanns had used a key to go in through the front door next to the children’s bedroom but, worrying the noise might wake the children, they began using the patio doors, leaving them unlocked.
It perhaps needs to be stated openly that all these timings and details, the way in which they weave and dovetail together, are based on witness accounts – corroborated not just by the McCann group but by others, such as Jes Wilkins
Really? Which 'others'? Wilkins was very precise; between 8.45 and 9.15 lol. Interesting;
Four times that night they put in calls via the British consul; four times the message came back from the PJ, a message that the McCanns would never forget: “Everything that can be done is being done.”
The twins slept on like logs, just as they always did at home, though even their parents were fleetingly worried – had they been sedated by an abductor' – that they should be quite so comatose.
Is that the logs who are likely to be awakened by someone unlocking a door? A passing shot at Amaral;
Sol’s journalist Felicia Cabrita had their names and phone numbers and details from their witness statements. She had called them all, and at least one other witness, Jes Wilkins.
The information had been handed to Cabrita by the police – she says she acquired the material through good journalism, which in a sense it was – and her source is widely believed by her colleagues to have been the former head of the inquiry, Goncalo Amaral.
Here's a snippet that the PJ can't be blamed for leaking. Where did that come from;
Leicestershire police have apparently paid for all the forensic tests being carried out in the case by the FSS – they are the client in the case, not the Portuguese.
Was there diplomatic pressure from the UK? He seems happy to accept that there was;
the Portuguese government and in turn the PJ had felt the heavy weight of diplomatic pressure from the UK – a pressure that the police and the journalists very much resented, with its implication that the police were not doing their job properly.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/9dec7/TIMES_16_12_07.htm
Im happy to accept what he says...but are you...you believe the above, but he also said this...and he spent a lot of time with them..
To me, the McCanns are genuine people in the grip of despair – the accusations against them are ludicrous and a cruel distraction from the search for their daughter
Fortunately the outcome of this case is not dependent upon people's opinion.
It may have ... it is impossible to quantify what the effect Goncalo Amaral's opinion might have had in the golden hours and early days of Madeleine's disappearance.
David James Smith seems to have been confided in by the McCanns. He got lots of details from them despite their claims that they observed the secrecy laws. He seems to know who it was who told them to show no emotion in public;
Jim Gamble, chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, told them that if the abductor was watching he or she might take pleasure in the McCanns’ distress.
A bit of misinformation here?
there were, apparently, obvious signs that an intruder had been there. What they were, however, is not clear. Apart from the open window and shutter, neither the McCanns nor the police have confirmed any other evidence of a break-in.
From the beginning the McCanns had been warned by the PJ that they could not speak about the details of the investigation or the circumstances of Madeleine’s disappearance. The "secrecy of justice" laws prevented anybody involved, including all police officers and witnesses, from talking about it to the press or anyone else. Both Gerry and Kate were meticulous in observing this rule.
Apart from telling this reporter all about it?
09 September 2007
Victims of the rumour mill? Timesonline
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id96.htm
As the reporter tells us;
That week in Praia da Luz, the week the McCanns were made suspects in their own daughter's "death", I was out there talking to them and to family and friends.
He's another one who believes the McCanns are innocent and, like everyone else, he is relying purely on his instincts, not on any evidence;
To me, the McCanns are genuine people in the grip of despair – the accusations against them are ludicrous and a cruel distraction from the search for their daughter.
Some of the things he says are almost beyond belief;
They were first to the table at the restaurant at 8.35 and spent some minutes talking to a couple from Hertfordshire – two more tennis players – at the next table, who were eating with their young children. As they chatted, Gerry thought how lucky he was, his children asleep nearby, he and Kate free to come and enjoy some adult time at the restaurant and not have to sit with their children, as this couple were.
[/b]
Lucky or neglectful?
Ah! The source of that little gem;
Earlier that week the McCanns had used a key to go in through the front door next to the children’s bedroom but, worrying the noise might wake the children, they began using the patio doors, leaving them unlocked.
It perhaps needs to be stated openly that all these timings and details, the way in which they weave and dovetail together, are based on witness accounts – corroborated not just by the McCann group but by others, such as Jes Wilkins
Really? Which 'others'? Wilkins was very precise; between 8.45 and 9.15 lol. Interesting;
Four times that night they put in calls via the British consul; four times the message came back from the PJ, a message that the McCanns would never forget: “Everything that can be done is being done.”
The twins slept on like logs, just as they always did at home, though even their parents were fleetingly worried – had they been sedated by an abductor' – that they should be quite so comatose.
Is that the logs who are likely to be awakened by someone unlocking a door? A passing shot at Amaral;
Sol’s journalist Felicia Cabrita had their names and phone numbers and details from their witness statements. She had called them all, and at least one other witness, Jes Wilkins.
The information had been handed to Cabrita by the police – she says she acquired the material through good journalism, which in a sense it was – and her source is widely believed by her colleagues to have been the former head of the inquiry, Goncalo Amaral.
Here's a snippet that the PJ can't be blamed for leaking. Where did that come from;
Leicestershire police have apparently paid for all the forensic tests being carried out in the case by the FSS – they are the client in the case, not the Portuguese.
Was there diplomatic pressure from the UK? He seems happy to accept that there was;
the Portuguese government and in turn the PJ had felt the heavy weight of diplomatic pressure from the UK – a pressure that the police and the journalists very much resented, with its implication that the police were not doing their job properly.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/9dec7/TIMES_16_12_07.htm
Ah, badly expressed. I was referring to the run of the mill social media and forum-haunting member of the public
Ah, badly expressed. I was referring to the run of the mill social media and forum-haunting member of the public
Would that be the armchair detectives who having read the files believe the evidence points to an abduction?
Yes, it's a more "pro" article than I'd remembered. And yes, there are a few inaccuracies, but on the whole most of it is, IMO. It was really only the judicial secrecy comment that stuck in my mind.
Several reporters stated during the Leveson inquiry that leaks were coming from the PJ (some of course, may have come from a naughty fan in the magistrate's office as well, I suppose). One or two came from the GNR: that they were roaring drunk - I presume that that's when Gerry fell to his knees and Kate was screaming her head off; and that the McCanns rang Sky before the police, which then got morphed into Kate had sone so. Neither of those appear to be accurate, but people tend to believe that what they first read is true if it fits their confirmation bias, and rarely bother to check for corrections.
I watched a number of the reporters testify, and I found Jay highly entertaining lol . Not sure where they're lurking on the Internet now and it would takes days to pinpoint them all in the videos.
Several reporters claimed at Leveson that the PJ were leaking. Tell me Carana what do you think it would have done for the said journalists credibility if they had admitted they had simply made the stories up ? If the articles were not true surely it is just as likely they were made up rather than leaked ?
I think it is just something in human nature that some folk prefer to believe the worst of individuals they have decided for some reason or other not to like.
All without any knowledge of the situation or without true understanding of events.
It is real people's lives we are playing with here ... not an episode of a soap opera set in sunny Portugal.
Whatever ... in my opinion the fact that such minutiae is still being pored over with prejudice eleven years into that family's continued search for their missing daughter ... must be horribly unique and as far as I am concerned very disturbing.
Everyone commenting on the case has an opinion about her parents, but none of them are able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that their opinion is the correct one.Gunit
Despite that, some people seem to think their opinion that the parents are innocent of any wrong-doing is morally superior to the opinion of those who have doubts about them.
Those same people often have no hesitation in denigrating Portugal, it's Judiciary and it's Police; especially Goncalo Amaral. I think that puts them on exactly the same level as those who attack the McCanns; their behaviour is equally reprehensible.
Everyone has the right to have an opinion and to present evidence to support it. No-one has the right to suggest that their opinion is superior to anyone else's, because that is also just their opinion.
It may have ... it is impossible to quantify what the effect Goncalo Amaral's opinion might have had in the golden hours and early days of Madeleine's disappearance.
Several reporters claimed at Leveson that the PJ were leaking. Tell me Carana what do you think it would have done for the said journalists credibility if they had admitted they had simply made the stories up ? If the articles were not true surely it is just as likely they were made up rather than leaked ?
Gunit
The Mccanns have no known history of dishonesty.
It is IMO natural that with little evidence against them, most people will support The Mccanns rather than Amaral.
The above is a simplification of part of the reasons why people stand by the Mccanns. Personally it is beyond my comprehension why people should so enjoy denigrating The Mccanns. It is like a bullying game
Please excuse me, i have to get on
One did, actually. Quite funny, really. Can't remember his name for the moment, nor which tabloid, which makes it a bit harder to hunt back for. He described how he and a colleague would be left with precious little time to fill all the space and made up nearly everything just to fill space in time for the deadline.
Several others explained how the pressure of coming up with a new angle or scoop by the tight deadline meant they had no time to fact check. Far easier to just crib, twist it a bit and get the piece out.
Have you read "Flat Earth News" by Nick Davies? Unless memory is failing, that exposé of media culture is what triggered the Leveson inquiry in the first place.
One did, actually. Quite funny, really. Can't remember his name for the moment, nor which tabloid, which makes it a bit harder to hunt back for. He described how he and a colleague would be left with precious little time to fill all the space and made up nearly everything just to fill space in time for the deadline.
Several others explained how the pressure of coming up with a new angle or scoop by the tight deadline meant they had no time to fact check. Far easier to just crib, twist it a bit and get the piece out.
Have you read "Flat Earth News" by Nick Davies? Unless memory is failing, that exposé of media culture is what triggered the Leveson inquiry in the first place.
David James Smith seems to have been confided in by the McCanns. He got lots of details from them despite their claims that they observed the secrecy laws. He seems to know who it was who told them to show no emotion in public;
Jim Gamble, chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, told them that if the abductor was watching he or she might take pleasure in the McCanns’ distress.
A bit of misinformation here?
there were, apparently, obvious signs that an intruder had been there. What they were, however, is not clear. Apart from the open window and shutter, neither the McCanns nor the police have confirmed any other evidence of a break-in.
From the beginning the McCanns had been warned by the PJ that they could not speak about the details of the investigation or the circumstances of Madeleine’s disappearance. The "secrecy of justice" laws prevented anybody involved, including all police officers and witnesses, from talking about it to the press or anyone else. Both Gerry and Kate were meticulous in observing this rule.
Apart from telling this reporter all about it?
09 September 2007
Victims of the rumour mill? Timesonline
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id96.htm
As the reporter tells us;
That week in Praia da Luz, the week the McCanns were made suspects in their own daughter's "death", I was out there talking to them and to family and friends.
He's another one who believes the McCanns are innocent and, like everyone else, he is relying purely on his instincts, not on any evidence;
To me, the McCanns are genuine people in the grip of despair – the accusations against them are ludicrous and a cruel distraction from the search for their daughter.
Some of the things he says are almost beyond belief;
They were first to the table at the restaurant at 8.35 and spent some minutes talking to a couple from Hertfordshire – two more tennis players – at the next table, who were eating with their young children. As they chatted, Gerry thought how lucky he was, his children asleep nearby, he and Kate free to come and enjoy some adult time at the restaurant and not have to sit with their children, as this couple were.
[/b]
Lucky or neglectful?
Ah! The source of that little gem;
Earlier that week the McCanns had used a key to go in through the front door next to the children’s bedroom but, worrying the noise might wake the children, they began using the patio doors, leaving them unlocked.
It perhaps needs to be stated openly that all these timings and details, the way in which they weave and dovetail together, are based on witness accounts – corroborated not just by the McCann group but by others, such as Jes Wilkins
Really? Which 'others'? Wilkins was very precise; between 8.45 and 9.15 lol. Interesting;
Four times that night they put in calls via the British consul; four times the message came back from the PJ, a message that the McCanns would never forget: “Everything that can be done is being done.”
The twins slept on like logs, just as they always did at home, though even their parents were fleetingly worried – had they been sedated by an abductor' – that they should be quite so comatose.
Is that the logs who are likely to be awakened by someone unlocking a door? A passing shot at Amaral;
Sol’s journalist Felicia Cabrita had their names and phone numbers and details from their witness statements. She had called them all, and at least one other witness, Jes Wilkins.
The information had been handed to Cabrita by the police – she says she acquired the material through good journalism, which in a sense it was – and her source is widely believed by her colleagues to have been the former head of the inquiry, Goncalo Amaral.
Here's a snippet that the PJ can't be blamed for leaking. Where did that come from;
Leicestershire police have apparently paid for all the forensic tests being carried out in the case by the FSS – they are the client in the case, not the Portuguese.
Was there diplomatic pressure from the UK? He seems happy to accept that there was;
the Portuguese government and in turn the PJ had felt the heavy weight of diplomatic pressure from the UK – a pressure that the police and the journalists very much resented, with its implication that the police were not doing their job properly.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/9dec7/TIMES_16_12_07.htm
I have read Flat Earth News Carana and an excellent book it is too however I think it was the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone that triggered Leveson.
G-Unit,
My impression is that Clarence did give a few reputable journalists basic info re the McCann's version and asked if they'd be interested in checking it out. At the time, there were no available files to verify some details, so inevitably there are a few inaccuracies that we now know about. Personally, I prefer the more neutral piece by David Rose.
However.... don't forget that this was after the PT onslaught that revved up around 12-13 September, just when they were given leave to return to the UK, repeated by the UK tabloids about "tufts" of hair, "100% DNA in the car" and allusions to gory substances that could only point to gruesome remains of a thawing corpse, "100% DNA in the car", Kate couldn't cope with her "hysterical" kids, and none of that turned out to be accurate.
Add to that, various people on social media who were threatening to take matters (physically) into their own hands. You do remember "the Molotov cocktail" and the threat to kidnap the twins, don't you?
Imagine for one moment, despite the fact you may never have left your kids unattended for a single minute and therefore disapprove of the fact that they did, but that you'd unwittingly made a bad judgment call about something (take it out of context and try to imagine something totally different) that led to a disastrous situation and ended
up with not only (something) cherished that had disappeared, or any other situation that you would never have wanted to happen, and that you knew that escalating allegations about you weren't true, but everyone was then out baying for your blood (including the police who were supposed to be considering all options, but who, in the absence of any other obvious slamdunker that quickly panned out, had decided that you were therefore the guilty party in a heinous crime and genuinely believed that you were about to be stitched up in a foreign country? And bear in mind that the original team's only other case involving a similar type of situation had got people banged up under the maximum penalty under less than limpid conditions, and on more than dubious evidence.
If you can step back and genuinely imagine yourself in such a situation, and please try to think of a different situation to this particular context, what would you have done? Honestly?
I've heard so many knee-jerk reactions... but I'm hoping that you'll take a moment to think about it.
You seem to be presenting as facts that the McCanns 'made a bad judgement call', that they 'knew that escalating allegations about them weren't true', and that they 'genuinely believed that they were about to be stitched up in a foreign country'.
Can you prove that any of the above are facts? I don't think you can, but you need to prove they are if you expect me to place myself in the situation you describe. The fact that you believe the McCann's narrative doesn't make it true.
Ok. Sigh.
I was commenting on your criticism of the "pro" article, which happened to mention the comment that had stuck i my mind about judicial secrecy. That comment coincides with numerous other statements made during the Leveson inquiry.
Whatever the source of the constant drip of half-baked leaks from the investigation, they came from somewhere. And were all insinuating that the McCanns were necessarily guilty of Amaral's theory and of the unsavoury mental image of transporting thawing, gooey remains in a car.
Which "facts" support the idea that a gooey, thawing mess of remains had been transported in the car? Or that 15 alleles in that contaminated soup were necessarily the result of that mess having been transported in it?
FYI: I was a long-time fencesitter (which, de facto, wasn't a popular stance with either camp). lol
Fencesitting isn’t a problem, I would be very wary of anyone who was completely one way or the other.
Fencesitting isn’t a problem, I would be very wary of anyone who was completely one way or the other.
What came first, Jassi, the chicken or the egg?
and Im wary of thse who think the dog alerts are circunstantial evidence
The search results obtained from the GNR tracker dogs, the CSI dog and the EVRD constitute evidence in the Madeleine McCann case. However, without further corroborative or informative evidence the significance of that evidence remains unknown.This is only suggestions:
It should also be pointed out that the tracker dogs finds and the CSI/EVRD alerts appear to be mutually exclusive in that they can't all relate to Madeleine. Or to put it another way, she couldn't have died in 5a and still walked out of it.
Depends on whether you believe in creation or evolution, I suppose."What came first, Jassi, the chicken or the egg?" I have been told by a veterinarian that the rooster came first. I'm still not sure what she meant.
Ok. Sigh.
I was commenting on your criticism of the "pro" article, which happened to mention the comment that had stuck i my mind about judicial secrecy. That comment coincides with numerous other statements made during the Leveson inquiry.
Whatever the source of the constant drip of half-baked leaks from the investigation, they came from somewhere. And were all insinuating that the McCanns were necessarily guilty of Amaral's theory and of the unsavoury mental image of transporting thawing, gooey remains in a car.
Which "facts" support the idea that a gooey, thawing mess of remains had been transported in the car? Or that 15 alleles in that contaminated soup were necessarily the result of that mess having been transported in it?
FYI: I was a long-time fencesitter (which, de facto, wasn't a popular stance with either camp). lol
You said they 'knew that escalating allegations about them weren't true' without saying which allegations you were referring to. Now you are referring to them being accused of 'transporting thawing, gooey remains in a car.'If the body had been left in the open for 5 weeks the maggots would have stripped the body and it would be most difficult to move. That is why the frozen body idea seems the only one that makes sense to me. So it isn't a matter of looking for somewhere to hide a body but actually looking for a freezer in which to hide a body, and generally they are found inside a building for they need energy to run them.
Firstly, no-one has ever said that was a fact as far as I know. The PJ quite rightly asked them on 7th September if they could explain why the two dogs alerted to their apartment and hire car. I say quite rightly because they could hardly ignore it, could they? It isn't unheard of, you see, as this Q & A with a DCI shows;
Madeleine was killed, her body hidden before being moved in the boot of the McCanns' silver Renault Scenic
DCI Kirkham: This is what police will have been quizzing Kate about. You don't have some one in for 11 hours to check a few points. Portuguese police apparently believe Madeleine was killed by accident. That fits with the suggestion that her body could have been hidden for a while. If murder is pre-meditated, the killer has worked out what to do with the body. If it happens without planning, most people panic and either run, cover up how the death happened or hide the body. Small bodies can easily disappear down holes and even if you do not know the area you will not have to go far to find somewhere to dump it. Later, if you think you are getting away with it, there may be a temptation to return and dispose of the body before the search widens or somebody stumbles across it.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/5sep7/MIRROR_08_09_2007.htm
In my opinion the emotive words you used are designed to suggest how unsavoury and outlandish the idea is, but it isn't. The police have to deal with unsavoury crime scenes and don't rule scenarios out because they seem outlandish to people unfamiliar with the actions of the desperate.
If the body had been left in the open for 5 weeks the maggots would have stripped the body and it would be most difficult to move. That is why the frozen body idea seems the only one that makes sense to me. So it isn't a matter of looking for somewhere to hide a body but actually looking for a freezer in which to hide a body, and generally they are found inside a building for they need energy to run them.
So whoever did that needs keys and access to other buildings around PdL. That doesn't sound like the Tapas 9 does it.
You and Amaral and your frozen bodies lol. A body can be kept for several weeks if just refrigerated.
You and Amaral and your frozen bodies lol. A body can be kept for several weeks if just refrigerated.What temperature is that? are you talking 4 degrees C or -1 degrees C? What temperature are morgues run at?
What temperature is that? are you talking 4 degrees C or -1 degrees C? What temperature are morgues run at?
Wikipedia "Types of cold chambers[edit]
There are two types of mortuary cold chambers:
Positive temperature
Bodies are kept between 2 °C (36 °F) and 4 °C (39 °F). While this is usually used for keeping bodies for up to several weeks, it does not prevent decomposition, which continues at a slower rate than at room temperature.[3]
Negative temperature
Bodies are kept at between −10 °C (14 °F) and −50 °C (−58 °F). Usually used at forensic institutes, particularly when a body has not been identified. At these temperatures the body is completely frozen and decomposition is very much reduced."
Amaral talked of the body being moved 5 weeks later. Sounds like that would be difficult in a fridge.
It was more than 20 days before they hired the Renault. When would the move be done? From where to where?
And then you've got all the eyes of the world on the McCanns in the early days so could they really do that and not be noticed?
Why should this be a problem? It's not as if there would be any reason to preserve a body intact, particularly if the last thing you actually wanted was a post mortem.What; you think there are no problems!
What; you think there are no problems!
The first problem is when was Madeleine dismembered? and who did that? , where was it done? Packaging another problem. cleaning up another problem. where is this fridge?
Where do you get dismembering from?I misunderstood your comment "It's not as if there would be any reason to preserve a body intact". If it wasn't "intact" I thought you were implying it was dismembered.
Small body can be fitted into a normal sized fridge if shelves removed.
I misunderstood your comment "It's not as if there would be any reason to preserve a body intact". If it wasn't "intact" I thought you were implying it was dismembered.
What temperature is that? are you talking 4 degrees C or -1 degrees C? What temperature are morgues run at?
Wikipedia "Types of cold chambers[edit]
There are two types of mortuary cold chambers:
Positive temperature
Bodies are kept between 2 °C (36 °F) and 4 °C (39 °F). While this is usually used for keeping bodies for up to several weeks, it does not prevent decomposition, which continues at a slower rate than at room temperature.[3]
Negative temperature
Bodies are kept at between −10 °C (14 °F) and −50 °C (−58 °F). Usually used at forensic institutes, particularly when a body has not been identified. At these temperatures the body is completely frozen and decomposition is very much reduced."
Amaral talked of the body being moved 5 weeks later. Sounds like that would be difficult in a fridge.
It was more than 20 days before they hired the Renault. When would the move be done? From where to where?
And then you've got all the eyes of the world on the McCanns in the early days so could they really do that and not be noticed?
Fencesitting isn’t a problem, I would be very wary of anyone who was completely one way or the other.
Interview with Goncalo Amaral
With the residues that were found inside the car, the little girl had to have been transported inside it.
How can you state that?
Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time [of the year], part of the ice melted. On a curb, for example, something fell from the trunk’s right side, above the wheel. It may be said that this is speculation, but it’s the only way to explain what happened there. GA
The really distressing thing about that statement in my opinion is that it was made by the senior officer in charge of Madeleine's investigation. Hardly a professional or even accurate opinion.
I remember a time when I assumed he knew what he was talking about and that therefore that must have been true. It wasn't until I could read the files for myself that I realised what a load of BS that was. I expect that the majority of ladies who knit in front of Dear Julia's pink couch matinée TV show still believe that.I took this to be based on some real observation. "How can you state that?
Is there evidence that Madeleine's body was ever in the car? According to the CSI dog there was blood in the boot and on the key fob. According to the FSS there wasn't sufficient evidence to say the blood was Madeleine's.
Sandy Cameron had a hire car from at least 12th May, but we have no details of that car or who drove it. Perhaps because details didn't come out until the rog interviews.
Sandy Cameron was also there and possessed a hire car, but it was not the Renault Scenic that Gerry and Kate rented during the third week that I stayed with them in Portugal
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/L-R-MCQUEEN.htm
There was NO EVIDENCE that the blood was Madeleines. Sufficient is the wrong word IMO. Did the FSS use the word Sufficient?It was not possible to say what the source of the DNA. They use the term body fluid. In conclusive but 15 out of the 19 alleles for Madeleine were mixed in the mixed DNA sample that had at least 3 contributors. That is a strange result.
Is there evidence that Madeleine's body was ever in the car? According to the CSI dog there was blood in the boot and on the key fob. According to the FSS there wasn't sufficient evidence to say the blood was Madeleine's.
Sandy Cameron had a hire car from at least 12th May, but we have no details of that car or who drove it. Perhaps because details didn't come out until the rog interviews.
Sandy Cameron was also there and possessed a hire car, but it was not the Renault Scenic that Gerry and Kate rented during the third week that I stayed with them in Portugal
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/L-R-MCQUEEN.htm
It was not possible to say what the source of the DNA. They use the term body fluid. In conclusive but 15 out of the 19 alleles for Madeleine were mixed in the mixed DNA sample that had at least 3 contributors. That is a strange result.not a strange result at all......what they said was if you took a soup of any three poeple you would probably find the 15 alleles...it is quite possible possible taht the sample had nothing to do with maddie whatsoever
Full disclosure: I came off my fence once I'd gone through a long list of questions that I had and waded through the files to find answers.
The result of that is, no, now I don't see any plausible scenario from A-Z involving the parents.
I listened to both sides, but I wanted to come to my own conclusions.
I remember a time when I assumed he knew what he was talking about and that therefore that must have been true. It wasn't until I could read the files for myself that I realised what a load of BS that was. I expect that the majority of ladies who knit in front of Dear Julia's pink couch matinée TV show still believe that.
I took this to be based on some real observation. "How can you state that?
Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time [of the year], part of the ice melted. On a curb, for example, something fell from the trunk’s right side, above the wheel. It may be said that this is speculation, but it’s the only way to explain what happened there. GA"
So what I think someone saw was a wet patch on the pavement where the McCann car had been parked previously. I would have like to see the actual report. Who saw it? And what day this happened? But I have not seen that detail as yet. Was this where the "5 weeks after" came from?
as far as i am aware this is total fantasy...nothing dripped on the kerb
It was not possible to say what the source of the DNA. They use the term body fluid. In conclusive but 15 out of the 19 alleles for Madeleine were mixed in the mixed DNA sample that had at least 3 contributors. That is a strange result.
I have used the word blood because that's what the CSI dog was trained to find.
I have often wondered why the sample contained DNA from more than one person. I can understand that happening in a case of gang-rape, for example, but not quite how it happened in this case. If the CSI dog was as good as Grime said, there was at least some blood in the boot. Then what? Two other people bled or dribbled on exactly the same spot?
The other problem is that DNA analysis is seen as an exact science but it isn't. Different analysts can reach different conclusions about the same sample, particularly when it is from more than one person.
A man was convicted in a gang-rape case in the US because the experts said his DNA couldn't be excluded from a mixed sample. The same sample was later given to 17 analysts for retesting. Only one agreed with the original finding; that he couldn't be excluded. 4 said the evidence was inconclusive and 12 said he could be excluded.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727733.500-fallible-dna-evidence-can-mean-prison-or-freedom/
The 'inconclusive' conclusion reached by the FSS may have been correct, but a different conclusion could have been reached by a different analyst in my opinion.
I remember a time when I assumed he knew what he was talking about and that therefore that must have been true. It wasn't until I could read the files for myself that I realised what a load of BS that was. I expect that the majority of ladies who knit in front of Dear Julia's pink couch matinée TV show still believe that.
First...only one contributor needed to be blood...not all 3
Second you may feel that a different result could have been achieved but that is pure speculation based on nothing from someone with little knowledge of what's involved
Interesting....so you have considered all the evidence....and you have an in depth knowledge of it....and now you se no way the parents are involved...That is precisely my stance...sceptics take note
I have used the word blood because that's what the CSI dog was trained to find.
I have often wondered why the sample contained DNA from more than one person. I can understand that happening in a case of gang-rape, for example, but not quite how it happened in this case. If the CSI dog was as good as Grime said, there was at least some blood in the boot. Then what? Two other people bled or dribbled on exactly the same spot?
The other problem is that DNA analysis is seen as an exact science but it isn't. Different analysts can reach different conclusions about the same sample, particularly when it is from more than one person.
A man was convicted in a gang-rape case in the US because the experts said his DNA couldn't be excluded from a mixed sample. The same sample was later given to 17 analysts for retesting. Only one agreed with the original finding; that he couldn't be excluded. 4 said the evidence was inconclusive and 12 said he could be excluded.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727733.500-fallible-dna-evidence-can-mean-prison-or-freedom/
The 'inconclusive' conclusion reached by the FSS may have been correct, but a different conclusion could have been reached by a different analyst in my opinion.
If you had taken the time to read my post I said 'bled or dribbled', allowing for other fluids to be there.
If you read the link you would know that there is evidence that different analysts can reach different conclusions about the same sample. The link contains opinions from people who know exactly what's involved.
I remember a time when I assumed he knew what he was talking about and that therefore that must have been true. It wasn't until I could read the files for myself that I realised what a load of BS that was. I expect that the majority of ladies who knit in front of Dear Julia's pink couch matinée TV show still believe that.
Interesting....so you have considered all the evidence....and you have an in depth knowledge of it....and now you se no way the parents are involved...That is precisely my stance...sceptics take note
I have considered all the evidence currently in the public domain and it is very clear that a certain firm of Spanish detectives, a Portuguese lawyer and others attempted to pervert the course of justice in the Maddie case and the sooner the police investigate these individuals the better.
Rather condescending of you Carana.
I prefer a more moderate stance,officer's from Scotland Yard can't or won't declare whether the girl remains alive or more sadly dead, or even if she left the apartment alive which maybe was not their line if thinking,from that its hard to see how any arm chair detective can decipher it to show they believe there was an abduction.The most of important evidence of all, how? is yet to be answered.
The sample did not have to be deposited there initially...a cloth could have been used to wile several surfaces and then used to wipe the boot....this is how sensitive LCDNA is
The DNAs could have collected and mixed on the cloth
The results are the results...the alleles found are the allies found... different interpretation s could in their be made re the results...as I understand no one has contradicted the FSS
A wet cloth was used at one point;Anyone can contradict them...if they have a reasoned argument. It isn't the result that can be disputed but the interpretation of the results. The fact is the interpretation by the FSS makes perfect sense
When we unloaded the shopping bags, we noticed that blood has run out of the bottom of the plastic bag. After this shopping trip and still in the month of July 2007, I began to notice a strange odour in the car. I did not give it much importance and assumed it was likely due to the leakage from the rubbish bags or from the blood which had escaped from the shopping bags. As a result, we removed the carpet from the boot (trunk) in order to clean it. I tossed (beat) the boot carpet to remove any particles and cleaned it with a wet cloth and left it to air out.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/A-J-CAMERON.htm
Of course the blood he refers to wouldn't have been alerted to by the CSI dog.
How could anyone contradict the FSS findings? Their findings were not, as far as I know, reviewed.
I remember a time when I assumed he knew what he was talking about and that therefore that must have been true. It wasn't until I could read the files for myself that I realised what a load of BS that was. I expect that the majority of ladies who knit in front of Dear Julia's pink couch matinée TV show still believe that.
So despite this, the conclusions reached are accepted in other cases. Why single this case out to treat differently, with unecessary suspicion?
The FSS had a chequered history, you may recall. It's conclusions were not without controversy. It missed important evidence in the case of Damilola Taylor in 2000;
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2007/may/18/youthjustice.politics1
It took another beating in 2007 in the case of Sean Hoey;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7154189.stm
I am discussing the McCann case for what I think are fairly obvious reasons.
The FSS developed LCDNA.....that is a technique that is now used all round the world . Sean Hoey......I doubt I could give my opinion on that case here....his DNA was found at the scene of the bombing but it was LCDNA....so although a match for him was found his lawyers argued that it could have arrived their by transference....hardly fair to criticise the FSS for that
It seems once again an attempt at a smear campaign against the FSS because they did not give the result you would have liked...imo
Both SY and the Portuguese have made it clear the parents are not involved ...imo...and that's the conclusion I had already reached
Forgive me for doubting your enthusiasm for all things McCann but I prefer to wait for the case to be solved before making such pronounciations.
A wet cloth was used at one point;
When we unloaded the shopping bags, we noticed that blood has run out of the bottom of the plastic bag. After this shopping trip and still in the month of July 2007, I began to notice a strange odour in the car. I did not give it much importance and assumed it was likely due to the leakage from the rubbish bags or from the blood which had escaped from the shopping bags. As a result, we removed the carpet from the boot (trunk) in order to clean it. I tossed (beat) the boot carpet to remove any particles and cleaned it with a wet cloth and left it to air out.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/A-J-CAMERON.htm
Of course the blood he refers to wouldn't have been alerted to by the CSI dog.
How could anyone contradict the FSS findings? Their findings were not, as far as I know, reviewed.
Do you have a cite for 'a technique that is now used all round the world'?
I have no need to attempt to smear the FSS. Others have provided evidence that LCN DNA testing has problems associated with it. Acceptance of anything without question isn't how I operate.
The FSS may have carried out their tests perfectly and their results may be beyond reproach, but then again they may not.
Forgive me for doubting your enthusiasm for all things McCann but I prefer to wait for the case to be solved before making such pronounciations.
LCN DNA has been used in the US , Australia and Sweden a quick check reveals
LCN DNA is currently accepted as evidence in the UK so I think your ideas of problems is not accurate...
Your last line is pure speculation....what evidence do you have that they did not carry out their tests correctly...pure mudslinging
Would the same criticism apply to Grime
I made my pronouncement some years ago and gradually more and more has come to light to support it....with both investigations now saying the McCanns are not suspects...looks like I am being proven right.
A poster who doubts the McCanns has made a post this morning describing why she questions the forensics...I've been able to explain why I accept them and dare I say it....show where I think she is wrong..
My enthusiasm is based on the evidence....and several knowledgeable posters....posters who imo understand the evidence agree.
I have used the word blood because that's what the CSI dog was trained to find.
I have often wondered why the sample contained DNA from more than one person. I can understand that happening in a case of gang-rape, for example, but not quite how it happened in this case. If the CSI dog was as good as Grime said, there was at least some blood in the boot. Then what? Two other people bled or dribbled on exactly the same spot?
The other problem is that DNA analysis is seen as an exact science but it isn't. Different analysts can reach different conclusions about the same sample, particularly when it is from more than one person.
A man was convicted in a gang-rape case in the US because the experts said his DNA couldn't be excluded from a mixed sample. The same sample was later given to 17 analysts for retesting. Only one agreed with the original finding; that he couldn't be excluded. 4 said the evidence was inconclusive and 12 said he could be excluded.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727733.500-fallible-dna-evidence-can-mean-prison-or-freedom/
The 'inconclusive' conclusion reached by the FSS may have been correct, but a different conclusion could have been reached by a different analyst in my opinion.
Forgive me for doubting your enthusiasm for the alleged attempt to pervert the course of justice....there isn't even an investigation into that because...imo...it never happened
Unfortunately for some like yourself, much of it is now public knowledge thanks to several Portuguese lawyers, one of whom couldn't help himself, and of-course the men from Delmonte whom the McCanns and their fellow funders tried to gag. @)(++(*
Now why would the parents of a missinig child want to gag anyone? *%87
US; the medical examiner’s office in New York City......is the only public lab in the United States that uses low copy number DNA to develop profiles for use in criminal cases.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/27/science/dna-under-the-scope-and-a-forensic-tool-under-a-cloud.html
The gist of The FSS stuff by Mr Lowe was "It doesn't rule anything in nor does it rule anything out"
Anything beyond that is speculation.
The gist of The FSS stuff by Mr Lowe was "It doesn't rule anything in nor does it rule anything out"But there was DNA found. Albeit a mixture of 3 persons.
Anything beyond that is speculation.
But there was DNA found. Albeit a mixture of 3 persons.
None of whom were Madeleine.
That isn't a factual statement, it's an opinion which is probably wrong.
Inconclusive results indicate that DNA testing did not produce information that would allow an individual to be either included or excluded as the source of the biological evidence....... The suspect cannot be excluded as a possible donor of the DNA found in the evidence sample, but a more conclusive result may not be possible. These cases must be reported as inconclusive.
https://ojp.gov/ovc/publications/bulletins/dna_4_2001/dna8_4_01.html
That isn't a factual statement, it's an opinion which is probably wrong.
Inconclusive results indicate that DNA testing did not produce information that would allow an individual to be either included or excluded as the source of the biological evidence....... The suspect cannot be excluded as a possible donor of the DNA found in the evidence sample, but a more conclusive result may not be possible. These cases must be reported as inconclusive.
https://ojp.gov/ovc/publications/bulletins/dna_4_2001/dna8_4_01.html
Please stop over egging the pudding and when discussing Madeleine's DNA refer only to the testing carried out on the actual forensic samples recovered in Praia da Luz and the results of the testing carried out.
In my opinion the above 'cite' is yet another obfuscation ... as if there wasn't sufficient myth and myopia already introduced to Madeleine's case.
That isn't a factual statement, it's an opinion which is probably wrong.It may be quite possible that Elvis cannot be excluded...which puts your claim into perspective
Inconclusive results indicate that DNA testing did not produce information that would allow an individual to be either included or excluded as the source of the biological evidence....... The suspect cannot be excluded as a possible donor of the DNA found in the evidence sample, but a more conclusive result may not be possible. These cases must be reported as inconclusive.
https://ojp.gov/ovc/publications/bulletins/dna_4_2001/dna8_4_01.html
It may be quite possible that Elvis cannot be excluded...which puts your claim into perspective
Perhaps you would like to provide a cite which states that testing on the mixture of DNA collected excluded Madeleine as a possible donor ?
So was there any of Elvis's DNA in the samples collected in Luz because it is certainly possible that there was from Madeleine.
Can one cite a negative? You might find it easier to cite the positive.
Madeleine was there it would hardly be surprising were her DNA to be found somewhere. They did look ... where was it they found it?
Myth #1 - Madeleine's DNA was found in the hire car
This is false on every level. Madeleine's DNA was never identified as having been in the McCann hire car which was rented several weeks after the disappearance.
The Forensic Science Service in England (now defunct) offered their services to the Portuguese authorities in order that samples recovered from the McCann apartment and the hire car could be analysed. A short time before the results were officially announced the Portuguese Press ran with a story that the DNA recovered from these samples matched with that associated with Madeleine McCann. They were in error.
The official results disclosed no link between the samples and Madeleine McCann.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1209.msg33642#msg33642
None of whom were Madeleine.The word they used was "inconclusive" which means to me at least they can't even rule her out as you have suggested.
It wouldn't be surprising that her DNA was found however what is surprising is the venom with which supporters attack anyone who posts that fact.
It is important to understand that finding Madeleine's DNA in the hire car might not have been significant as innocent transfer was highly likely.
So why is it attacked?Because the swabs were taken from a location that innocent transfer would never have occurred.
Because the swabs were taken from a location that innocent transfer would never have occurred.
So was there any of Elvis's DNA in the samples collected in Luz because it is certainly possible that there was from Madeleine.
which of course is incorrect......its been pointed out that Gerry wiped the cars interior with a wet cloth...and I have attacked nothing...just pointed out true facts. yet we have a leading sceptic...believed by many who claims as fact that madeleines blood was found in the boot...why cant all posters stick to the factsCarana and I worked out where the samples were taken from (on the DNA thread) and it was from the underside of the plastic coated fabric (boot lining) So wiping the boot with a damp cloth would not cause the DNA sample to get under the water proof covering. There maybe no connection between Keela's alert and the position the swab was taken.
Carana and I worked out where the samples were taken from (on the DNA thread) and it was from the underside of the plastic coated fabric (boot lining) So wiping the boot with a damp cloth would not cause the DNA sample to get under the water proof covering. There maybe no connection between Keela's alert and the position the swab was taken.
What I'm saying is fact.
It is also possible there was a complete match to elvis...has that been ruled out...no it hasnt. Im just showing the ridiculous nature of your argumant...imoPlease bring the argument back to sensible arguments please.
Please bring the argument back to sensible arguments please.
Carana and I worked out where the samples were taken from (on the DNA thread) and it was from the underside of the plastic coated fabric (boot lining) So wiping the boot with a damp cloth would not cause the DNA sample to get under the water proof covering. There maybe no connection between Keela's alert and the position the swab was taken.
What I'm saying is fact.
if you claim it is fact could you provide link to the posts..a cite is required .....im quite scepticalIt is a whole section of the thread centred on around this post. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7862.msg375570#msg375570
It is a whole section of the thread centred on around this post. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7862.msg375570#msg375570
That is about as good as you get in this case. Nothing is defined precisely.
There is nothing there that shows exactly where the sample was taken from......it simply states...it is understood that....there is no confirmation
That is about as good as you get in this case. Nothing is defined precisely.
So we don't know that the sample was taken from the underside...just someone has claimed....No claims to the contrary so what does that tell you?
No claims to the contrary so what does that tell you?You claimed in post 280 you knew where it came from
You claimed in post 280 you knew where it came fromDo you know it any different? I'm here learning about this case and if you know where it came from tell me please.
Do you know it any different? I'm here learning about this case and if you know where it came from tell me please.
You are the one claiming you know where it came from....the files day keela alerted in the boot....that's it.....
The search results obtained from the GNR tracker dogs, the CSI dog and the EVRD constitute evidence in the Madeleine McCann case. However, without further corroborative or informative evidence the significance of that evidence remains unknown.
It should also be pointed out that the tracker dogs finds and the CSI/EVRD alerts appear to be mutually exclusive in that they can't all relate to Madeleine. Or to put it another way, she couldn't have died in 5a and still walked out of it.
martin grime confirms that the alerts cannot be classed as evidence unless corroborated....so the cadaver alerts cannot be classsed as evidence according to grime
The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog
alert indications MUST be corroborated if to establish their findings as
evidence.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Desperation personified? Round and round the mulberry bush we go.
Martin Grime did not state that the dog alerts couldn't be classified as evidence because to do so would have been a nonsense. You obviously don't understand what police consider to be evidence.
All he in fact did state was that in the absence of FURTHER corroborative evidence, the alerts had no evidential reliability. The dog findings all constitute evidence but cannot yet be relied upon to prove anything. Ergo, if further evidence is found which corroborates the dog evidence then that would be significant.
You are the one claiming you know where it came from....the files say keela alerted in the boot....that's it.....Carana and I (and others) had worked out in the DNA thread that at the time the CSI dog Keela had been put into the boot of the car the mats had already been removed so if they sent the whole mat to the lab (which they did) we don't see Keela point to a specific part of the mat for it had already been removed. She points to a position in the boot which the PJ then corresponds to a position on the mat.
Carana and I (and others) had worked out in the DNA thread that at the time the CSI dog Keela had been put into the boot of the car the mats had already been removed so if they sent the whole mat to the lab (which they did) we don't see Keela point to a specific part of the mat for it had already been removed. She points to a position in the boot which the PJ then corresponds to a position on the mat.
I've looked back at the posts you have quoted and just don't see that...simply people saying it is understood....and a source says....that is not confirmation of anythingNothing about the mat having been removed? I was certain that was the thread.
Nothing about the mat having been removed? I was certain that was the thread.
There was not blood from 3 different people. One person's blood made Keela alert.
"Thus, the Renault Scenic vehicle was moved to parking level -3 and subjected to an expert examination by officers from the Police Science Laboratory and another canine inspection that began at 03h49 on 7 August 2007 by the dog Keela, that detects traces of human blood, it having been verified the following result:
03h53 - the dog 'marked' an area of the lower right-hand side of the interior part of the baggage compartment of the car;"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm
Number 10
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P12/12_VOLUME_XIIa_Page_3238.jpg)
There was not blood from 3 different people. One person's blood made Keela alert.
"Thus, the Renault Scenic vehicle was moved to parking level -3 and subjected to an expert examination by officers from the Police Science Laboratory and another canine inspection that began at 03h49 on 7 August 2007 by the dog Keela, that detects traces of human blood, it having been verified the following result:
03h53 - the dog 'marked' an area of the lower right-hand side of the interior part of the baggage compartment of the car;"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm
Number 10
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P12/12_VOLUME_XIIa_Page_3238.jpg)
it hasnt been confirmed as blood
There was not blood from 3 different people. One person's blood made Keela alert.
"Thus, the Renault Scenic vehicle was moved to parking level -3 and subjected to an expert examination by officers from the Police Science Laboratory and another canine inspection that began at 03h49 on 7 August 2007 by the dog Keela, that detects traces of human blood, it having been verified the following result:
03h53 - the dog 'marked' an area of the lower right-hand side of the interior part of the baggage compartment of the car;"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm
Number 10
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P12/12_VOLUME_XIIa_Page_3238.jpg)
Keela only alerts to blood.
Q: I know you don’t want to go into detail but are there more forensic tests, is that what is going on?
MR: I’m not going to talk about detail of the type of work going on but there are critical lines of enquiry
of great interest to ourselves and our Portuguese counterparts and there are some significant
investigative avenues we are pursuing that we see as very worthwhile.
http://news.met.police.uk/documents/transcript-of-interview-with-ac-mark-rowley-66743
The forensic evidence gathered at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance has been stored at the National Institute for Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences in Coimbra in central Portugal.
Detectives and forensic technicians from the Metropolitan police are scheduled to visit the laboratory on Wednesday.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/13/madeleine-mccann-forensic-scientists-portugal
I wonder what caused Gerry to bleed onto the car key? No word in their book of truth to explain his blood being found.
I wonder what caused Gerry to bleed onto the car key? No word in their book of truth to explain his blood being found.
He probably didnt bleed onto the car key...
Ok, I think I've got it.
10 (1) and 10 (2) = the vertical vent panel + the horizontal side bar (north-south, right-hand side) as viewed from the boot.
11 was the horizontal covering (it doesn't actually say whether it was fibre-coated or just plastic), but it's where the forensic guys found hairs / fibres.
12 is the key card.
Unless anyone can substantiate anything different, there never was a fibre-coated mat that was sent for DNA analysis as such.
I wonder what caused Gerry to bleed onto the car key? No word in their book of truth to explain his blood being found.
That seems reasonable. Well done. What is the source for the fibre-coated mat ?
No blood was ever forensically corroborated - we're just going off Keela's alerts. Oh and Eddie's, but Gerry is very much alive, and Eddie never alerted to the boot.
A knicked finger at some point in time by anyone could explain that. Dump shopping in the boot, take car card and drive off.
Could even be a speck of blood from some unknown person on whatever the shopping was contained in, and brushed against the side panel.
I'm not the only person to occasionally knick a finger, am I?
If I've got this straight (happy to be corrected), there never was a gooey soaked mat, let alone the underside of one. And, no, there never were tufts of hair that could only have come from a cadaver, either.
Believe it or not, at one point, when I was back to thinking that the McCanns weren't involved, I tried to imagine a different scenario re the car issue, just to see if I was being biased or not.
My imagined scenario was that some sadistic creep nicked their car in the middle of the night and dumped her body in it to dispose of it. It was just a personal experiment: if I took the McCanns out of the equation, would my conclusions have been any different?
No. I'd have been highly sceptical about that theory as well. Objectively, I really can't see how a decomposing body could have been in that car - whoever was involved.
That's something we are both agreed on Carana.
Eddie's alert and Keela's lack of alert in the McCann's bedroom is harder to explain though
men fairly reglarly cut themselves shaving...a speck on the finger could quite easily transfer to the key fob...the real question for me is how little blood keeela found
I doubt we'll ever know, Davel. According to Grime, Keela was 100% accurate on the physical presence of blood... even in traces too minute to be forensically corroborated.
as john has pointed out whats harder to expalin is the cadaver dog alert and the tracker dog tracking.. seeing as dogs are not supposed to lie......the alerts themselves are easily explained
Not hard at all. The tracker dogs followed Madeleine's scent left earlier in the day/days.
not according to John and angelo
That's something we are both agreed on Carana.
Eddie's alert and Keela's lack of alert in the McCann's bedroom is harder to explain though
so totally useless as evidence...next
how could he possibly know that...has keela ever falsely alerted
I agreed with you on something the other day. I know this doesn't happen often... ;)
Yes, I agree that it's harder to explain, but IMO the simplistic matrix of one or both dogs alerting is simply that... simplistic.
If you read Grime's documents, which I'm sure we all have, he states that Keela only alerts to the PHYSICAL presence of blood. He says no such thing about Eddie. And, AFAIK, what exactly he wouldn't react to, aside from pork-based foodstuffs in a restaurant and whatever roadkill he'd ever come across, isn't clear at all.
Without going into bizarre theories of dead pigs in cupboards, I find it quite plausible that something (socks with a plaster covering a small foot cut?) removed prior to the dogs (the flat had been re-occupied up to a week previously) could be a feasible explanation. No one seems to have asked the prior occupants... as far as we know from the available files.
It might not be the right explanation, but I find it quite plausible.
I'm afraid that doesn't explain why Keela didn't alert to the plaster ( presumably containing a small amount of blood ) but Eddie did. Can you explain that ?You have raised a very important observation. Where do I find about Eddie alerting to the plaster?
I'm afraid that doesn't explain why Keela didn't alert to the plaster ( presumably containing a small amount of blood ) but Eddie did. Can you explain that ?
I'm afraid that doesn't explain why Keela didn't alert to the plaster ( presumably containing a small amount of blood ) but Eddie did. Can you explain that ?
No! it is evidence that nothing specific can ruled in or ruled out.
This discussion has been going on for at least 4 years to my knowledge with each side drawing erroneous conclusions.
how could he possibly know that...has keela ever falsely alertedThey go through training exercises everyday and the results of the training exercises would give a good indication of how accurate the dog is. If it only found 50% of the training samples 50% accurate. If Keela found 100% of the training samples 100% accurate.
They go through training exercises everyday and the results of the training exercises would give a good indication of how accurate the dog is. If it only found 50% of the training samples 50% accurate. If Keela found 100% of the training samples 100% accurate.
I am wondering if the dog would not be also picking up the presence of the trainer. I think to be very accurate in running the training random people would have to be involved in placing the hidden samples.
They go through training exercises everyday and the results of the training exercises would give a good indication of how accurate the dog is. If it only found 50% of the training samples 50% accurate. If Keela found 100% of the training samples 100% accurate.
I am wondering if the dog would not be also picking up the presence of the trainer. I think to be very accurate in running the training random people would have to be involved in placing the hidden samples.
Not hard at all. The tracker dogs followed Madeleine's scent left earlier in the day/days
They go through training exercises everyday and the results of the training exercises would give a good indication of how accurate the dog is. If it only found 50% of the training samples 50% accurate. If Keela found 100% of the training samples 100% accurate.
I am wondering if the dog would not be also picking up the presence of the trainer. I think to be very accurate in running the training random people would have to be involved in placing the hidden samples.
Has Keela ever given a false alert...that is the questionEven if she had never given a false alert there is always the chance that the next alert will be false. Each test has to be assessed on its own merits IMO. It is like going to the casino and playing roulette, you might look at the previous results and think this will be the next outcome, but I have come to believe the past results have no influence on the future. So even if Keela had been 100% accurate in all past cases that does not determine the accuracy of the next test.
Even if she had never given a false alert there is always the chance that the next alert will be false. Each test has to be assessed on its own merits IMO. It is like going to the casino and playing roulette, you might look at the previous results and think this will be the next outcome, but I have come to believe the past results have no influence on the future. So even if Keela had been 100% accurate in all past cases that does not determine the accuracy of the next test.
Grime has stated clearly that any alert needs to be corroborated for it to be accepted as evidence and therefore the alert by keela in the boot cannot confirm the presence of bloodI think we are saying the same thing in different ways.
I think it might be more like if it is blood she will sense it 100% of the time, if it isn't blood but some other body fluid we can't be sure what she would do.
it does actually....keela is not alerting by chance but by skill....thus the roulette wheel is not random
I think we are saying the same thing in different ways.
I agree
you are RIGHT in as much that even if keela had a 100% record it does not follow that her next alert will be correct..Didn't he get beaten in his last race. https://youtu.be/pV6pExNL7IM
Usain Bolt had a 100% record...The only way we know its correct is with forensic corroboration...and it didn't happen so no confirmation
It may have been pus ... any blood cells would have been been disposed of with the plaster and pus ... but the scent of decay would waft around in an enclosed room???
Didn't he get beaten in his last race. https://youtu.be/pV6pExNL7IM
The forensic testing on the boot cover was a LCN DNA test and that test never confirms whether it was blood or not. So even if it was a 100% matched to Madeleine's DNA it was never going to be confirmed whether it was blood or not.
Not hard at all. The tracker dogs followed Madeleine's scent left earlier in the day/daysBut hopefully the dog was able to determine the most recent trail. Did she go right up to the front door when she returned from the creche that afternoon? What is known is the Madeleine left without her shoes so if she woke and wandered the scent trail will be far more intense than just following a trail where she was walking with shoes on. Unfortunately there are similar paths passed during the day it is hard to be certain that the tracking dogs identified a woke and wandered situation. But it can't be ruled out that is for certain.
yes he did...and no confirmation to blood...and no confirmation to maddieSo we now agree. Usain was beaten and there was no confirmation it was blood or that the DNA was Madeleine's.
But hopefully the dog was able to determine the most recent trail. Did she go right up to the front door when she returned from the creche that afternoon? What is known is the Madeleine left without her shoes so if she woke and wandered the scent trail will be far more intense than just following a trail where she was walking with shoes on. Unfortunately there are similar paths passed during the day it is hard to be certain that the tracking dogs identified a woke and wandered situation. But it can't be ruled out that is for certain.
So we now agree. Usain was beaten and there was no confirmation it was blood or that the DNA was Madeleine's.
Does pus contain cadaverine ?I don't see why not but in general pus has a distinctive odour of its own. A Bit like different varieties of cheeses. Different proteins being degraded by certain bacteria producing a distinctive colour and odour.
whats important in an investigation is what can be ruled in........this obsession with it has not been ruled out is absurd.....as the dna of elvis in the trunk has not been ruled outIf it can't be ruled out, it is in the list of possible scenarios, but the archiving report was ruling out a woke and wandered situation by saying it was "highly unlikely", and that IMO was very wrong.
If it can't be ruled out, it is in the list of possible scenarios, but the archiving report was ruling out a woke and wandered situation by saying it was "highly unlikely", and that IMO was very wrong.
Does pus contain cadaverine ?
you would need to understand WHY they ruled it out to have a valid opinion...you dontNo they had the opportunity to enlighten us and they didn't so it up to them not me. Why are you so against a woke and wandered situation? I can see why the PJ were for they were backing "the parents did it" theory, but what do you gain from it?
Why cadaverine in particular? There are hundreds of substances that give off a whiff of decomposition.When I think it through a deceased person would never develop an abscess or pus after death, so it would be wise for cadaver dogs to be trained not to pick up an abscess discharge or pus IMO.
No they had the opportunity to enlighten us and they didn't so it up to them not me. Why are you so against a woke and wandered situation? I can see why the PJ were for they were backing "the parents did it" theory, but what do you gain from it?
No they had the opportunity to enlighten us and they didn't so it up to them not me. Why are you so against a woke and wandered situation? I can see why the PJ were for they were backing "the parents did it" theory, but what do you gain from it?
The police thought woke and wandered was unlikely because they would have expected to find her if that's what had happened imo.
The police thought woke and wandered was unlikely because they would have expected to find her if that's what had happened imo.
Why cadaverine in particular? There are hundreds of substances that give off a whiff of decomposition.
Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver scent. Keela didn't alert which means Eddie's alert couldn't have been to blood. Cadaver scent is made up of many volatile compounds including cadaverine. Pus contains no cadaverine.
you need to remember...none of the alerts can be regarded as evidence unless corroborated.....without corroboration all you have is barking dogs.....that is an undeniable fact. My opinion is that there was never a cadaver in 5A...and no one can disprove that
Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver scent. Keela didn't alert which means Eddie's alert couldn't have been to blood. Cadaver scent is made up of many volatile compounds including cadaverine. Pus contains no cadaverine.
Im not against it at all....Im looking at the evidence...and the final report...with more information than we have said it was highly unlikely...that is evidence...yours is just opinionWell is it true that it is just your opinion that they have "more information than we have"?
Eddie also alerts to blood, according to Grime.
I don't find it clear what exactly Grime means by "cadaver scent". Some dogs have been known to falsely alert when searchng for bodies in peat bogs - because they give off methane, and that's one of the VOCs. A whole body won't smell the same from one period to another, nor will one type of body part necessarily smell the same as a different one.
And I still don't know what Grime meant by scents he was trained to detect (as opposed to what he would specifically not react to that is also subject to decomposition recognisable by a dog).
What was he reacting to on the sex tissues in Jersey? A speck of blood or semen/vaginal secretions? Or both? Presumably the tissues didn't indicate anything of relevance to the investigation.
The police thought woke and wandered was unlikely because they would have expected to find her if that's what had happened imo.But any other ending is just as likely after a woke and wandered.
thats your opinion but you have no idea on what basis the PJ made their decision...and your reason does not tie in with what the final report saidWhy are you so fixated by that final report? Do you agree with everything in the final report?
Why are you so fixated by that final report? Do you agree with everything in the final report?
What a strange replyNo you are not for you were adding in your opinion about more information. Do you agree with everything in that report?
I am not fixated with the final report
Once again do not post your opinion as fact...it isn't
I'm quoting the final report
I have this bad feeling that we could be descending into yet another dog thread... not sure I could cope with that. lol
have a look at the final report to see just how wrong you are...they gave a very specific reason
Does pus contain cadaverine ?
Does pus stink of putrefaction? A quick Google will give you the very obvious answer to your question ... not forgetting another chemical ... putrescine.I think his task was a way more difficult than that for any animal decaying will produce cadaverine and putrescine.
In other words ... in my opinion the presence of cadaverine and putrecine on a plaster contaminated with pus from an infected wound would immediately have given Eddie the mental image of a bouncing tennis ball resulting in a joyful "woof" as he recognised the scent of chemicals he was trained to find.
I couldn't either lol
Reading over the last 12 months no one knows hows a lock works nor a roller shutter* and seemingly few have bothered to look at a plot plan.... hey ho says Rowley ?{)(**
*A roller shutter has 5 basic components ho hum.
I think his task was a way more difficult than that for any animal decaying will produce cadaverine and putrescine.
So that means it is not just a matter of detecting these two chemicals as he has to only alert to "human" odours.
If you have a hunt for one of the zillion dog threads, Rob, there are quite a few research papers posted. Good luck, though, there are dozens of them and they take quite a bit of wading time.I use Google scholar to get scientific articles.
you need to remember...none of the alerts can be regarded as evidence unless corroborated.....without corroboration all you have is barking dogs.....that is an undeniable fact. My opinion is that there was never a cadaver in 5A...and no one can disprove that
These dogs, which had already been used on multiple occasions by the Scotland Yard and by the FBI with positive results, are evidence collection means and do not serve as evidence; any residue, even if invisible to the naked eye, which is collected using this type of dogs, has to be subject to forensics testing in a credentialed laboratory.
Martin Grime, the dogs' instructor himself [20], mentions in his report: "Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime investigations"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
you need to remember...none of the alerts can be regarded as evidence unless corroborated.....without corroboration all you have is barking dogs.....that is an undeniable fact. My opinion is that there was never a cadaver in 5A...and no one can disprove thatCan one have an opinion the there was no cadaver in 5A? Isn't that more correctly described as a theory?
Does pus stink of putrefaction? A quick Google will give you the very obvious answer to your question ... not forgetting another chemical ... putrescine.
In other words ... in my opinion the presence of cadaverine and putrecine on a plaster contaminated with pus from an infected wound would immediately have given Eddie the mental image of a bouncing tennis ball resulting in a joyful "woof" as he recognised the scent of chemicals he was trained to find.
I have no problem with that, but at some point intelligence (if accurate) should lead to more concrete evidence. In this case, it apparently didn't.
Or hasn't yet ?
There is no cadaverine in pus.
True there are several of the volatile compounds found in cadaver odour which are also found in pus but no cadaverine and without it Eddie would not have alerted.
There is no cadaverine in pus.
True there are several of the volatile compounds found in cadaver odour which are also found in pus but no cadaverine and without it Eddie would not have alerted.
Why not?
Eddie/Keela have been used by SY with positive results according to that report. Quite an eye-opener!
Quite simply ... you are wrong.
Ever almost gagged when someone with severe halitosis has breathed on you? The cause of the smell is very simple ...
All About Bad Breath (Porphyromonas Gingivalis)
FACTS: Many people believe that bad breath, or halitosis, is caused by gas rising up from the stomach – particularly after eating onions or spicy foods. In fact, most cases are caused by microbes such as Porphyromonas gingivalis!
Between three and four hundred types of microbes typically call the human mouth home. Most are harmless. But a few produce “volatile sulfur compounds.” These compounds, such as hydrogen sulfide – which smells like rotting eggs – give bad breath its characteristic odor. (Other oral bacterial by-products include cadaverine and putrescine, which are typical of rotting corpses and rotting meat!)
VSC-producing bacteria are generally present in inoffensive quantities. However, as oxygen levels in areas of the mouth are reduced – behind layers of plaque or food, for instance – these anaerobic bacteria thrive. Furthermore, as VSC-levels increase, the pH of the mouth is reduced, which creates the sour, metallic taste experienced by halitosis sufferers!
So what can you do about Porphyromonas gingivalis? Brush and floss, of course. Oh, and avoid onions and spicy foods: they’re very high in sulfur content.
https://www.giantmicrobes.com/uk/products/badbreath.html
Infection can occur anywhere in the human body and if the result produces pus the stink of putrefaction can in many cases be overpowering.
Nothing more so than if you are unfortunate enough to have tooth abscess which requires draining whether human or animal ... of course Eddie would react to one though not t'other. But the same chemical compounds make up both.
Why do abscesses smell so bad?
**** **** **** **** **** ****
This multiplication of organisms and the cellular destruction also forms a cocktail of some unpleasant chemicals. The exact mix depends on the organisms. Gasses such as ammonia, methane and sulphur dioxide (think rotten eggs) may be produced. Two other compounds are largely responsible for the foul odour of putrefying flesh. The delightfully named putrescine and cadaverine, are produced by the breakdown of amino acids in the tissue.
But what is the point of all this stink? To us the smell is disgusting and we are repelled by it. We instinctively avoid anything that creates such odours helping to protect us from exposure to infectious agents.
http://howanimalswork.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/what-makes-eye-colour.html
Not sure what you are trying to prove with that screed Brietta. Trying to compare apple with oranges it seems to me.
I have proved that your post denying the presence of cadaverine in pus is wrong. Therefore had there been a plaster with pus on it in the apartment at any time after the McCann occupancy even when removed there was a fair chance it would have caused Eddie to alert.
That is if you place any credence at all on Eddie's ability to react to substances which are not there.
The alerts are police intelligence to investigate further e.g. new forensics, new leads searching wasteland for body etc. Eddie alerted in the Prout case which confirmed to the police that Kate was deceased. Eddie wasn't used in court. He has been used in court Bob Rose case, Harron, Parker etc.
This intelligence leads to Smithman. You will never see Smithman coming forward. He will have to be arrested.
I have proved that your post denying the presence of cadaverine in pus is wrong. Therefore had there been a plaster with pus on it in the apartment at any time after the McCann occupancy even when removed there was a fair chance it would have caused Eddie to alert.
That is if you place any credence at all on Eddie's ability to react to substances which are not there.
Quite simply ... you are wrong.
Ever almost gagged when someone with severe halitosis has breathed on you? The cause of the smell is very simple ...
All About Bad Breath (Porphyromonas Gingivalis)
FACTS: Many people believe that bad breath, or halitosis, is caused by gas rising up from the stomach – particularly after eating onions or spicy foods. In fact, most cases are caused by microbes such as Porphyromonas gingivalis!
Between three and four hundred types of microbes typically call the human mouth home. Most are harmless. But a few produce “volatile sulfur compounds.” These compounds, such as hydrogen sulfide – which smells like rotting eggs – give bad breath its characteristic odor. (Other oral bacterial by-products include cadaverine and putrescine, which are typical of rotting corpses and rotting meat!)
VSC-producing bacteria are generally present in inoffensive quantities. However, as oxygen levels in areas of the mouth are reduced – behind layers of plaque or food, for instance – these anaerobic bacteria thrive. Furthermore, as VSC-levels increase, the pH of the mouth is reduced, which creates the sour, metallic taste experienced by halitosis sufferers!
So what can you do about Porphyromonas gingivalis? Brush and floss, of course. Oh, and avoid onions and spicy foods: they’re very high in sulfur content.
https://www.giantmicrobes.com/uk/products/badbreath.html
Infection can occur anywhere in the human body and if the result produces pus the stink of putrefaction can in many cases be overpowering.
Nothing more so than if you are unfortunate enough to have tooth abscess which requires draining whether human or animal ... of course Eddie would react to one though not t'other. But the same chemical compounds make up both.
Why do abscesses smell so bad?
**** **** **** **** **** ****
This multiplication of organisms and the cellular destruction also forms a cocktail of some unpleasant chemicals. The exact mix depends on the organisms. Gasses such as ammonia, methane and sulphur dioxide (think rotten eggs) may be produced. Two other compounds are largely responsible for the foul odour of putrefying flesh. The delightfully named putrescine and cadaverine, are produced by the breakdown of amino acids in the tissue.
But what is the point of all this stink? To us the smell is disgusting and we are repelled by it. We instinctively avoid anything that creates such odours helping to protect us from exposure to infectious agents.
http://howanimalswork.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/what-makes-eye-colour.html
Have you ever considered you might be on the wrong track
No but I've tested other theories. There's only one.
I still want to know if Mary Smith said "Oh is she asleep?"
If so, most revealing.
another one
Cadaverine as a putative component of oral malodor.
Goldberg S1, Kozlovsky A, Gordon D, Gelernter I, Sintov A, Rosenberg M.
Author information
Abstract
Whereas previous studies have shown correlations between volatile sulphur compounds (VSC) and bad breath levels, it is probable that other compounds found in the oral cavity may contribute to oral malodor. In the present investigation, the possibility that diamines (cadaverine and putrescine) are associated with oral malodor parameters was assessed. Saliva samples from 52 subjects were analyzed for cadaverine and putrescine by HPLC
so cadaverine and putrescine are found in some saliva
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8046106
Saliva may be but not pus.How do you know that?