Let's leave "no stone unturned"... Let's at least take Dr Purlin up on his offer of making a conclusive analysis of the DNA data. Yes of course some traceable DNA belonging to MM should have been present in 5A... sweat, urine, saliva on bed clothes and pillow cases, for example. The point is though that Keela was trained to alert to human blood and not to sweat, urine and saliva. If the dogs alerted at such things = they wouldn't have been so selective in their alerts. It defies all objectivity to think otherwise.
And skin cells which humans shed at the rate of 30,000 - 40,000 per minute every day. LCN DNA works off samples as small as 1,000,000 the size of a grain of salt so of course MM's DNA would be all over 5A through direct and indirect contamination and in the hire car via indirect contamination.
Surely the point is that the locations Keela alerted to no blood was visible to the naked eye. The location was swabbed and sent to FSS in UK. Result = inconclusive. What inference(s) do you wish to draw from this if not as FSS reported?
Look at GM's reported answer when asked if MM lost any blood in the apartment. Sure it doesn't prove anything, but there is circumstantial evidence and warranted inquisitive suspicion that make the parents worthy of further investigation. This is the route the PJ undoubtedly wanting to take initially (well after discounting the abduction story). They felt pressure was applied by figures in the UK establishment not to follow this line of inquiry and essential work was therefore hampered. MM has been cheated of a proper investigation. Instead we suffered the appalling media stories (often controlled by CM, IMO) of lurking predators, paedophiles and child traffickers (but of course there was "no evidence that MM had come to harm"... we had faux police press conferences led by a political spin doctor, IMO. Nothing of the like has ever been seen before.
Of course the McCanns should have been considered suspects from the off as all the research shows if small children are involved in foul play it often involves the parents or others known to the children. But robust scientific evidence can't be conjured up based on hunches and there's not a shred of evidence to suggest the McCanns were involved.
On what basis did the PJ rule out abduction?
I agree the idea a lone predatory paedophile or criminal gangs were hanging around defies all logic. The McCanns had only been in Portugal for a little over 5 days when MM was reported missing. No British child in the history of tourism to Europe has disappeared in similar circumstances before or since.
I take little notice of what the McCanns said or didn't say along with T7 and CM. Especially CM as he comes over as pompous and bumbling imo.
