Madeleine McCann new DNA hope: Curtains may hold key to who took her.

[pathfinder73]

Ok thanks didn't know that.

[Alice Purjorick]

That's not what he originally said in a TV show. ;)

You have no idea how funny that is!
The McCanns on "Oprah"
DCI Redwood on "Crimewatch"
Dr Amaral on TV Whatever

And our arguments/debates are based on who said what on the telly.....oh stop it CD.

It is Roger Mellie's fault 

[sadie]

It's no joke Sadie.

19.19 The dog "marked" an area of tiles in the living room, next to the window and behind the sofa.

19.20 The dog "marked" the lower part of the left white coloured curtain of the window behind the sofa.

It is a joke because keela marked not Eddie.  Therefore there is no cadavar odour, just blood which presumably can be seen with the naked eye.

[Carana]

You have no idea how funny that is!
The McCanns on "Oprah"
DCI Redwood on "Crimewatch"
Dr Amaral on TV Whatever

And our arguments/debates are based on who said what on the telly.....oh stop it CD.

It is Roger Mellie's fault 

Pathfinder was quoting a relatively recent interview with Amaral.

However, during the phase of his book promo tour, Amaral had earlier said something quite different.


DL: In the Madeleine McCann case, who made the decision to send the analyses to Birmingham, to the FSS? In Portugal there is the National Institute [Forensic Medicine].

GA: This is the question. At that point in time, we were already feeling the pressure of the British media, we felt incompetent, that was what they said, and anything that we might do, would be questioned. It was a political decision by the PJ, but which was understandable at that point in time and it is still understandable now because it was a way of compromising, an attempt to compromise a British institution with the results that were to be found. If you ask me now if I would do the same today, I don’t think I would. Maybe there would be another laboratory, or at least, I wouldn’t have sent all the samples to that laboratory. But I can also tell you that at the IML, the Institute for Forensics Medicine, there was not the full capacity to carry out all of these tests, namely the low copy number analyses. Only in England, at this laboratory or at other laboratories outside of the country. We could have chosen another laboratory, but we opted for this one. It was a disaster. The decision was not disastrous; it was the tests that were disastrous to say the least.

DL: But do those samples still exist?

GA: No. They have all been destroyed. From the hair samples, it’s all been destroyed. There is a situation that is reported that is the following: there are several hairs, lots of hair is found in the car boot, in the car that was rented 23 days later, a comparison is made in terms of colour and colouration where they say yes indeed, these could be from the little girl, but then the laboratory says that they don’t manage, it doesn’t have any roots, they cannot define the DNA, they cannot define whether it’s from a living or a dead person, and when a team of Portuguese investigators go to the lab, accompanied by a Portuguese scientist, Dr. Francisco Corte Real, they ask for that hair, they went as far as holding that hair in their hands. And they had that hair, duly stored, that package with the hair, but then a report from the FSS appears in which they realize that they’d better keep them, and that later on they destroyed them in an attempt to define the DNA, or to discover whether it was from a living person or not, and they destroyed all of that hair. In Portugal they were also destroyed. It’s a bit hard to understand how in order to define the DNA, or to carry out another test, such a quantity of hair has to be used, like there existed in Portugal as well, and then it wasn’t possible to perform analyses of other types, namely the possibility of sedatives that the little girl might have ingested or was forced to ingest.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/02/exclusive-interview-to-former-pj.html


The hairs from the Scenic were returned with a receipt slip signed by Inspector Viegas. I've no idea what happened to the curtain material sent to FSS - I haven't seen a receipt slip for that.

I've no idea where the hairs from 5A are - I presume that they have been kept somewhere in PT.

IMO, those are the important items to analyse. They are from just after the disappearance and haven't been able to be identified.

[Brietta]

Esoteric possibly but inscrutable definitely not. Perfectly "scrutable" in my 'umble opinion Master Copperfield.
When NSY have eliminated all that which is impossible a la SH and gone through Rumsfeld's principle and have come to terms with anything they don't like as Zizek quotes it will be interesting to see who is last man* standing as it were. It is to be hoped The Met will be that diligent.

* man in the global sense rather than any specific man.
I do so find these little footnotes help to stop debate about what hasn't been said don't you?

Perhaps I did not make myself clear; when I chose to say 'inscrutable' it was to illustrate your post was totally unfathomable to me ... not having been blessed with a superior intellect such as yours.

[pathfinder73]

It is a joke because keela marked not Eddie.  Therefore there is no cadavar odour, just blood which presumably can be seen with the naked eye.

Yeah it was Keela but who's blood?

[sadie]

Yeah it was Keela but who's blood?

Obviously whose blood, but probably the bloodstains showed with out keela.  Certainly no cadavar odour there

[pathfinder73]

28/10/2014 15:24
Maddie: 444 by DNA was subjected to analysis
In 2007, the partial 25 samples of blood and saliva tests were performed.

By Rui Gomes Pando
Experts from the National Institute of Legal Medicine (INML) analyzed the 444 that were collected by the Judicial Police in following the disappearance of Madeleine McCann months in 2007, in Praia da Luz, Lagos. When the CM was found, were still subject to forensic testing 25 samples of blood and saliva and three other traces found in the room from where the child disappeared and the boot of a car. These are some traces that Scotland Yard now wants to bring England to analyze again, a British private laboratory.

English as the CM reported yesterday, still want to re-do tests to a curtained room where Maddie slept, which was targeted by the skill INML in 2007, and where nothing relevant was found. The collection of the remains was made in homes, cars and sofas by experts of the Laboratory of Forensic Science of PJ. Among the remnants are still samples of hair and saliva of several people who were deemed relevant to the investigation. In the list of the 444 subject to testing, are 432 human and 12 nonhuman, 98 had no correspondence with any DNA profile and 19 partial results were obtained. The request for a review will be part of the remains of a 6th letter rogatory. This despite the new prosecutor for the Public Ministry of Portimão, Agnes Sequeira, the decision does not already exist for the 5th letter, sent by the British to Portugal.

http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/nacional/portugal/detalhe/adn_de_444_pelos_foi_alvo_de_analise.html

[Carana]

Yeah it was Keela but who's blood?

Ask Keela. No blood was found. Assuming she's accurate, it could have been a pricked finger hanging up a curtain years previously.

Her speciality is no doubt invaluable if it leads to forensic evidence that can be related to a case. In this instance, it didn't.

[Montclair]

So the police want to look at the blood and saliva samples from the apartment 5A and the boot of a car according  to Correio da Manhã. AFAIK, the police only took samples from the McCanns' hire car. Very interesting!

[Montclair]

Voluntary swabs have been taken in this case in Portugal, but I'm not sure how it works if someone chooses not to. I haven't delved into that yet.

Until less than a decade ago, fingerprints seemed to be the main ID trace for suspects in some countries. DNA is a sensitive topic and hasn't been easy to legislate. Until there was legislation, there was no point in having a database.

I can remember one case in the UK in which people were invited to give mouth swabs (although the details of the case escape me for the moment) and at least one recent one in France. I think that there was also an older case, although I'm no longer sure of the details of that one.

The recent one in France was a rape case, so they had the DNA of the creep to compare it to.

I don't know where you obtained your information but as, AFAIK, voluntary swabs are not accepted in Portugal. DNA testing can only be done through a court order.

[Mr Gray]

I don't know where you obtained your information but as, AFAIK, voluntary swabs are not accepted in Portugal. DNA testing can only be done through a court order.

Ii think you will find that many voluntary swabs have already been taken ....

[Montclair]

Ii think you will find that many voluntary swabs have already been taken ....

Whether they did or not, the DNA swabs wouldn't be valid because the obtaining of DNA must be approved by a judge. Even for paternity cases, the DNA must be requested by a judge, it cannot be done voluntarily between two parties and then given to some laboratory.

[Carana]

I don't know where you obtained your information but as, AFAIK, voluntary swabs are not accepted in Portugal. DNA testing can only be done through a court order.

I haven't checked the correspondence between the PJ and the magistrate on this, but my point was that the PJ made everyone they wanted a swab from sign a consent form - and so in that sense, it was voluntary.

Here's one at random:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P7/07_VOLUME_VI1a_Page_1714.jpg

[Montclair]

IIRC, from Portuguese media reports, SY requested DNA samples from "suspects" and this was denied by the judge. With this refusal by the judge, SY allegedly wanted to obtain DNA by underhanded methods without the knowledge or consent of the persons involved which is manifestly illegal here in Portugal.

I did read about an investigation of a gang member in Porto. The judge of the criminal court authorised taking the sample from the suspect who then refused to give it. After his refusal, another court authorised the obtaining of the DNA sample by "force", that is from a cigarette or a piece of chewing gum, etc. The point I'm making is that the obtaining of the DNA must first be authorised by a judge and then the person signs a consent form.

BTW, regarding this case of the gang member, Marinho Pinto, in the newspaper article, argued that making someone give their DNA against their will could be considered self incriminating, thus against the constitution.

If, as davel, has stated, people having given their DNA samples voluntarily, I suppose that these persons have nothing to hide or fear.