The Cracked Mirror.

[Rachel Granada]

Do you have the date of that email?

I don't have the date of the document, but I would hazard a guess that the dates mentioned by Alves would be, inter alia, to tie in with the requests made to the holiday party to do a recon in May 2008.

[ferryman]

I absolutely agree that is where SY say they are at the moment but of course i am sure you accept that the course and focus of investigations change over time. They should move with the evidence.

After all it was only a month or so before the McCann's were made arguidos that the PJ said they weren't suspects.

Equally i recall one of Redwood's statements which said they analysed i think it was two thirds of the documentation, so clearly the review of already gathered evidence is not complete let alone the gathering of new evidence.

I can see why the Yard appear to be pursuing the abduction scenario and my logic for that is probably best saved for another post.

However it must be said that if they pursue abduction and bring in a suspect or indeed take one to trial they will need more evidence than is in the files, and short of a confession, a defence lawyer worth his salt will have a field day.

Imagine the questioning in Court:

Prosecution: Can you tell us how you entered the apartment
Defendant: I did not enter the apartment and there is no evidence i did

Prosecution: Can you tell us how you sedated the child
Defendant: I did not sedate the child and there is no evidence i did

Prosecution: Can you tell us how you removed the child from PDL
Defendant: I did not remove the child from PDL and there is no evidence i did

And so on and so forth.

After all it was only a month or so before the McCann's were made arguidos that the PJ said they weren't suspects.

That was before the dogs.

The dogs are discredited.

What, now, is there left that says themccannsdunit?

[faithlilly]

After all it was only a month or so before the McCann's were made arguidos that the PJ said they weren't suspects.

That was before the dogs.

The dogs are discredited.

What, now, is there left that says themccannsdunit?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-478885/Madeleine-Top-policeman-inisists-McCanns-victims-suspects.html


The story above appeared on 2nd September, less than a week before the McCanns were made arguidos or suspects.

[stephen25000]

After all it was only a month or so before the McCann's were made arguidos that the PJ said they weren't suspects.

That was before the dogs.

The dogs are discredited.

What, now, is there left that says themccannsdunit?

No the dogs aren't discredited, only in your and your fellow acolytes minds is that view perceived.

As to arguido status the mccanns  chose that by their actions.

[Rachel Granada]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-478885/Madeleine-Top-policeman-inisists-McCanns-victims-suspects.html


The story above appeared on 2nd September, less than a week before the McCanns were made arguidos or suspects.

... and before the proper forensic results were in.  Results which proved worthless in backing up Almeida's now-superseded interim report.  The interim report which is still being promoted by the doubters.

[AnneGuedes]

The dogs weren't discredited. Prof Harrison knew, before calling the dogs, it was impossible to find human remains in the flat from where Madeleine vanished. He thought some blood residue could be found. It wasn't. You can fall and die without bleeding, at least not internally. Eddie alerted to death but that death couldn't be forensically determined. No evidence in court but an orientation for the investigation that made the AG link it to the arguido status.

[Benice]

The dogs weren't discredited. Prof Harrison knew, before calling the dogs, it was impossible to find human remains in the flat from where Madeleine vanished. He thought some blood residue could be found. It wasn't. You can fall and die without bleeding, at least not internally. Eddie alerted to death but that death couldn't be forensically determined. No evidence in court but an orientation for the investigation that made the AG link it to the arguido status.

No Anne, there is no proof that Eddie alerted to 'death 'because Eddie could alert to body parts/blood/fluids  from living people.   Why do you keep ignoring that fact?

[AnneGuedes]

Benice, you keep insisting Eddie could alert to "living" blood, nails, hairs, cadaverine even, skin cells, etc. This is not what Mr Grime says. But never mind.
In the corner of the bedroom, on top of the balcony, in the flower bed, there was no nail, no hair, no blood, no fluid, no nothing in spite of forensic examination.
What did the dog alert to ?

[Benice]

Benice, you keep insisting Eddie could alert to "living" blood, nails, hairs, cadaverine even, skin cells, etc. This is not what Mr Grime says. But never mind.
In the corner of the bedroom, on top of the balcony, in the flower bed, there was no nail, no hair, no blood, no fluid, no nothing in spite of forensic examination.
What did the dog alert to ?

On the contrary Anne I am repeating Martin Grime's claims - (although I personally have never mentioned skin cells) .     They are not my assertions they are his - corroborated and confirmed by other experts in his field.

How do we know no nails, hair or blood had been in those places you mention?   According to Martin Grime his dogs could detect the tiniest  traces which may have been deposited many decades before the 3rd May -  in fact from so long ago that the actual material itself had decayed away leaving only a residual scent.  Therefore what Eddie alerted to may have been long gone.

So without a body we don't know if Eddie alerted to the scent from a dead body or to body bits from a live one -which is why Martin Grime repeatedly reminds us in his statements  that without corroborating evidence the alerts have no value.



 

[AnneGuedes]

So without a body we don't know if Eddie alerted to the scent from a dead body or to body bits from a live one

Those are your words, Benice, not Mr Grime's, this is your belief, not his knowledge.
This is not fair.
And the only explanation you have for Eddie alerting to volatile molecules of decay in the 5A is to suggest some kind of Clever Hans !

[Albertini]

I think you are wrong.    If a court has decreed that the content of Amaral's book is not libellous, why are the MCanns taking him to court on the grounds that the content of his book is libellous?  That would be a pointless exercise.     And why if a court has already  proved that Amaral's book is not libellous, has he kept delaying the case?     One would think he wouldn't be able to get to court quick enough if he knew it was in the bag - so that he could unfreeze his assets.

Well read the words form the Judges summation. Their ruling and judgement is clear as day that Amaral's thesis, in law, was a valid interpretation of the facts gathered.

I have no idea why they are taking him to court again, you need to ask them. All i know is what was said the last time the issue of his claims, via his book, were brought to a Court.

In relation to delaying it, there is no point in arguing who has delayed it, McCann supporters say he did, those not of the abduction belief say the Mccann's delayed it.

[Albertini]

No Anne, there is no proof that Eddie alerted to 'death 'because Eddie could alert to body parts/blood/fluids  from living people.   Why do you keep ignoring that fact?

But i thought Eddie, was trained to give a specific alert to cadavert scent, which determined what he was alerting to:

Pavlov's theory is used in the
case of the E.V.R.D. system of alert. He has been 'conditioned' to give a
verbal alert when coming into contact with 'dead body scent'

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

[Albertini]

I don't have the date of the document, but I would hazard a guess that the dates mentioned by Alves would be, inter alia, to tie in with the requests made to the holiday party to do a recon in May 2008.

So on or after the time all the other members of the group had refused to take part?

[Benice]

But i thought Eddie, was trained to give a specific alert to cadavert scent, which determined what he was alerting to:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

Eddie was trained to alert to cadaverscent and blood - including dried blood from living people.   

[Albertini]

Eddie was trained to alert to cadaverscent and blood - including dried blood from living people.

Correct, but if you read that training report you can see a gives a specific alert to cadaver scent.