Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 300322 times)

0 Members and 16 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #825 on: October 01, 2020, 08:52:05 AM »
Not forgetting the tattoo that CB doesn't have,it'll be the same in the Madeleine case imo,no DNA match.

Perhaps it means that there were two or more camera and long sharp blade carrying predators preying on innocent women in the Algarve in the years prior to Madeleine being abducted using exactly the same modus operandi.

Quite a chilling thought.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #826 on: October 01, 2020, 09:00:58 AM »
Perhaps it means that there were two or more camera and long sharp blade carrying predators preying on innocent women in the Algarve in the years prior to Madeleine *being abducted* using exactly the same modus operandi.

Quite a chilling thought.

You spelt died in the holiday apartment wrong.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #827 on: October 01, 2020, 09:45:48 AM »
You spelt died in the holiday apartment wrong.

Probably because there was absolutely no substantiation of any of the 'evidence' Amaral used to illustrate his nonsensical theories regarding what he decided was 'proof'.

On the other hand, the same weaver of tall tales tells us that the child predator Brueckner was visited by the police in 2007 and ruled out.

I know that won't impinge on your prejudice, but it is certainly food for thought for me and no doubt a few others too.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Lace

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #828 on: October 01, 2020, 09:52:16 AM »
To shift the blame onto some unknown person.  IMO

So,  Madeleine falls off the sofa and dies,  Kate arrives for her check finds Madeleine dead and decides to fake an abduction without even telling Gerry.   She fakes an abduction and hides Madeleine's body,  where?   It's ridiculous and you know it.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #829 on: October 01, 2020, 09:54:08 AM »
You seem very eager to believe this latest tabloid report unquestioningly.  What about the fact that there is no DNA in the rape case because it was all allegedly destroyed by the PJ?

This is what the media said;

But today it emerged the DNA evidence collected from the crime scene was destroyed around two months before Madeleine's disappearance, meaning the chance of making any solid link between the two cases if the same offender was responsible could now prove impossible.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8442487/Portuguese-prosecutors-DESTROYED-vital-DNA-evidence.html

This is what was actually destroyed;

'On March 15 2007 when the judge decides to archive the investigation, the Public Ministry decide any biological material should be destroyed.

They add: 'As they are in a bad condition it is improbable that if this re-investigation was reopened the material could be subjected to counterproof analysis.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8442487/Portuguese-prosecutors-DESTROYED-vital-DNA-evidence.html

They did find DNA;

The documents make it clear DNA was obtained but no match.

So did they destroy this DNA? No, they destroyed the source of the DNA. The DNA profile(s) they obtained would have been recorded in reports and those reports were not destroyed.

It's normal to destroy the samples; the FSS were suggesting they were going to destroy the biological samples in the McCann case very early on, but they kept the results.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Lace

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #830 on: October 01, 2020, 10:01:24 AM »
But supporters were so sure it was Brueckner !!!

What supporters,  no one could be sure it was Brueckner as they said there was no DNA.

Offline Lace

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #831 on: October 01, 2020, 10:03:22 AM »
couldnt he sue them for  defamation??

If he could,  then the McCann's could sue too,  there have been a lot of defamation going on against them on this forum.

Offline jassi

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #832 on: October 01, 2020, 10:19:38 AM »
So,  Madeleine falls off the sofa and dies,  Kate arrives for her check finds Madeleine dead and decides to fake an abduction without even telling Gerry.   She fakes an abduction and hides Madeleine's body,  where?   It's ridiculous and you know it.

I've never suggested that is what happened.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #833 on: October 01, 2020, 10:23:57 AM »
So,  Madeleine falls off the sofa and dies,  Kate arrives for her check finds Madeleine dead and decides to fake an abduction without even telling Gerry.   She fakes an abduction and hides Madeleine's body,  where?   It's ridiculous and you know it.

Who suggested that scenario?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #834 on: October 01, 2020, 10:53:06 AM »
Who suggested that scenario?

Goncalo Amaral.

I really don't know why you insist on revisiting flawed calumnies of the past in apparent defence of supposed infringement of the rights of a convicted rapist and paedophile.
But there can be no doubt that what Amaral has had to say over thirteen years based on what amounts to no evidence at all is ably reflected in what Lace has said in her posts.
I think your response is disingenuous.


We talked about death by others, not murder. In the room blood and cadaver odour was found just below a window where a sofa was. The father was talking to a friend just outside that window for a while. The girl did not have a a heavy sleep, that's what the parents said. Perhaps she heard her father and climbed to the sofa bellow the window. But the parents, for the girl not to go out,moved it away from the wall. Madeleine could have fallen.

Q - The girl falls from the sofa, dies with the blow and the parents find her.

A - The mother. It is the mother who finds the girl dead.

Q - But I am trying to think out an idea. How can a mother who has just found her daughter dead on the floor decides to hide the corpse? And how do you hide the corpse of a girl of nearly four years old so that no one can't find it?

A – This is what we were investigating when I was dismissed from the ca
se                  Translated by Mercedes

____________________________________________________________________________

Gonçalo Amaral, the visible head of an investigation that had thousands of people in suspense, tells why he remains insistent that it was Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry, who were responsible for her disappearance.

Question – You defend the theory that the parents are guilty of what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Answer – No. That is not in the book.

Q - However that is the theory that one can understand from reading it.

A - From the synopsis you also obtain the same conclusions of the book.

Q - What are the reasons that make you believe that imply the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter?

Translated by Joana Morais

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/goncalo-amaral-in-el-mundo-gerry-mccann-hid-m-08-0-t4122.html
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #835 on: October 01, 2020, 11:45:28 AM »
Goncalo Amaral.

I really don't know why you insist on revisiting flawed calumnies of the past in apparent defence of supposed infringement of the rights of a convicted rapist and paedophile.
But there can be no doubt that what Amaral has had to say over thirteen years based on what amounts to no evidence at all is ably reflected in what Lace has said in her posts.
I think your response is disingenuous.


We talked about death by others, not murder. In the room blood and cadaver odour was found just below a window where a sofa was. The father was talking to a friend just outside that window for a while. The girl did not have a a heavy sleep, that's what the parents said. Perhaps she heard her father and climbed to the sofa bellow the window. But the parents, for the girl not to go out,moved it away from the wall. Madeleine could have fallen.

Q - The girl falls from the sofa, dies with the blow and the parents find her.

A - The mother. It is the mother who finds the girl dead.

Q - But I am trying to think out an idea. How can a mother who has just found her daughter dead on the floor decides to hide the corpse? And how do you hide the corpse of a girl of nearly four years old so that no one can't find it?

A – This is what we were investigating when I was dismissed from the ca
se                  Translated by Mercedes

____________________________________________________________________________

Gonçalo Amaral, the visible head of an investigation that had thousands of people in suspense, tells why he remains insistent that it was Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry, who were responsible for her disappearance.

Question – You defend the theory that the parents are guilty of what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Answer – No. That is not in the book.

Q - However that is the theory that one can understand from reading it.

A - From the synopsis you also obtain the same conclusions of the book.

Q - What are the reasons that make you believe that imply the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter?

Translated by Joana Morais

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/goncalo-amaral-in-el-mundo-gerry-mccann-hid-m-08-0-t4122.html

I really don't know why you insist on revisiting flawed calumnies of the past in apparent defence of supposed infringement of the rights of a convicted rapist and paedophile.

Goodness! I ask a question and get an accusation. I think it was the one who posted the theory who was revisiting it, not me. That the theory was a flawed calumny is your opinion, although I see no acknowledgement of that. How you see asking a question as defending anyone escapes me I'm afraid.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #836 on: October 01, 2020, 12:01:20 PM »
So,  Madeleine falls off the sofa and dies,  Kate arrives for her check finds Madeleine dead and decides to fake an abduction without even telling Gerry.   She fakes an abduction and hides Madeleine's body,  where?   It's ridiculous and you know it.

No wonder you believe in abduction ....if that's how YOU think it happened.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #837 on: October 01, 2020, 12:14:58 PM »
Goncalo Amaral.

I really don't know why you insist on revisiting flawed calumnies of the past in apparent defence of supposed infringement of the rights of a convicted rapist and paedophile.
But there can be no doubt that what Amaral has had to say over thirteen years based on what amounts to no evidence at all is ably reflected in what Lace has said in her posts.
I think your response is disingenuous.


We talked about death by others, not murder. In the room blood and cadaver odour was found just below a window where a sofa was. The father was talking to a friend just outside that window for a while. The girl did not have a a heavy sleep, that's what the parents said. Perhaps she heard her father and climbed to the sofa bellow the window. But the parents, for the girl not to go out,moved it away from the wall. Madeleine could have fallen.

Q - The girl falls from the sofa, dies with the blow and the parents find her.

A - The mother. It is the mother who finds the girl dead.

Q - But I am trying to think out an idea. How can a mother who has just found her daughter dead on the floor decides to hide the corpse? And how do you hide the corpse of a girl of nearly four years old so that no one can't find it?

A – This is what we were investigating when I was dismissed from the ca
se                  Translated by Mercedes

____________________________________________________________________________

Gonçalo Amaral, the visible head of an investigation that had thousands of people in suspense, tells why he remains insistent that it was Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry, who were responsible for her disappearance.

Question – You defend the theory that the parents are guilty of what happened to Madeleine McCann.

Answer – No. That is not in the book.

Q - However that is the theory that one can understand from reading it.

A - From the synopsis you also obtain the same conclusions of the book.

Q - What are the reasons that make you believe that imply the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter?

Translated by Joana Morais

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/goncalo-amaral-in-el-mundo-gerry-mccann-hid-m-08-0-t4122.html

Q - But I am trying to think out an idea. How can a mother who has just found her daughter dead on the floor decides to hide the corpse? And how do you hide the corpse of a girl of nearly four years old so that no one can't find it?

A – This is what we were investigating when I was dismissed from the case
 


I doubt very much he meant the 10 o'clock check.   interesting though he never got the chance to work it out.

Because they wanted him gone ...I believe because he was on the right track.

Imo the DNA on this case was not exactly conclusive enough to rule out completely. as no DNA match.



British DNA analysis
Hair and other fibres were collected from areas in the car and apartment 5A where Keela and Eddie had given alerts, and were sent to the Forensic Science Service (FSS) in Birmingham for DNA profiling, arriving around 8 August 2007.[154] At this point, according to the Sunday Times, the PJ "abandoned the abduction theory".[53] On 8 August, without waiting for the results from Birmingham, the Portuguese police called the McCanns to a meeting in Portimão, where Guilhermino Encarnação, PJ regional director, and Luis Neves, coordinator of the Direcção Central de Combate ao Banditismo in Lisbon, told them the case was now a murder inquiry.[155] When Encarnação died of stomach cancer in 2010, The Daily Telegraph identified him as a major source of the leaks against the McCanns.[156] Both the McCanns were interrogated that day; the officers suggested that Kate's memory was faulty.[155]

The FSS used a technique known as low copy number (LCN) testing. Used when only a few cells are available, the test is controversial because it is vulnerable to contamination and misinterpretation.[157] On 3 September John Lowe of the FSS emailed Detective Superintendent Stuart Prior of the Leicestershire police, the liaison officer between the British and Portuguese police. Lowe told Prior that a sample from the car boot contained 15 out of 19 of Madeleine's DNA components, and that the result was "too complex for meaningful interpretation":

A complex LCN [low copy number] DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section ... Within the DNA profile of Madeleine McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. ... Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion. ... [W]e cannot answer the question: Is the match genuine, or is it a chance match.[c]

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #838 on: October 01, 2020, 12:30:00 PM »
This is what the media said;

But today it emerged the DNA evidence collected from the crime scene was destroyed around two months before Madeleine's disappearance, meaning the chance of making any solid link between the two cases if the same offender was responsible could now prove impossible.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8442487/Portuguese-prosecutors-DESTROYED-vital-DNA-evidence.html

This is what was actually destroyed;

'On March 15 2007 when the judge decides to archive the investigation, the Public Ministry decide any biological material should be destroyed.

They add: 'As they are in a bad condition it is improbable that if this re-investigation was reopened the material could be subjected to counterproof analysis.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8442487/Portuguese-prosecutors-DESTROYED-vital-DNA-evidence.html

They did find DNA;

The documents make it clear DNA was obtained but no match.

So did they destroy this DNA? No, they destroyed the source of the DNA. The DNA profile(s) they obtained would have been recorded in reports and those reports were not destroyed.

It's normal to destroy the samples; the FSS were suggesting they were going to destroy the biological samples in the McCann case very early on, but they kept the results.
“But today it emerged the DNA evidence collected from the crime scene was destroyed around two months before Madeleine's disappearance, meaning the chance of making any solid link between the two cases if the same offender was responsible could now prove impossible”. Suddenly now it’s possible to rule him out?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline jassi

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #839 on: October 01, 2020, 12:50:57 PM »
It appears that the DNA results were kept, not the material from which the results were obtained..
Presumably DNA results from a crime scene could be kept in perpetuity - subject to the law  of the land.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future