Would that be the same forensic report that stated the CSI's didn't find a single footprint in the apartment gardens, despite all those people trampling all over the place?
09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2319
Photos 41 to 43: Details of the window of the bedroom from which the child disappeared where the non-existence of traces/clues of break-in/forced entry was verified.
After the examination of the inside of the apartment and despite the immediate surroundings of the referred apartment not having been preserved [protected] there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects/traces of forensic value and [nor] of any traces of shoe-prints in the garden area of the apartment.
The recovery of cigarette stubs was not viable due to the existence of a reasonable quantity thereof within the referred perimeter -----------------------------------------------------------------
Would that be the same forensic team who acquired 12 non-human hairs from the apartment?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PORTUGUESE-FORENSIC.htm
*snip*
CONCLUSIONS
1st- The macro- and microscopic analysis of 257 hairs revealed 245 human and 12 non-human.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would that be the same CSI team who "missed" the blood that the dogs indicated to?
The Red Tops are OK, though, when it comes to reports of Gerry & Kate playing tennis the day after Madeleine went missing. Etc etc.
Why are you talking about footprints? My question was about cigarette ash and you haven't linked to any official source about it, and how it COMPROMISED the evidence as you claimed, making the news of the world article stay in the place it is, ie. unfounded. As an aside do you really think any police would be going around dropping fag ash at a crime scene? Get real.
As for the blood detected in the living room by the CSI dog, Was it not found under the tiles? If it was, why would any forensic team find it through normal" methods ie, sight or luminol spray.
its Ok to write reams about stuff, that bother you, but its best to answer questions directly and not deflect dont you think?