Is there any hard evidence whatsoever in the Madeleine McCann case?

[mercury]

I was pointing out that hard evidence seized from one of the arguidos was not subjected to the same "forensic" examination as that belonging to the McCanns - which, given the number of witnesses who put him at the scene that night, seems rather an oversight.

none of those "witnesses" are credible and some have had words put into their mouths, really have to go now, catch up tomorrow maybe

[Carana]

I was pointing out that hard evidence seized from one of the arguidos was not subjected to the same "forensic" examination as that belonging to the McCanns - which, given the number of witnesses who put him at the scene that night, seems rather an oversight.

I agree with you on that. They took a dark blue jacket from the VW and 4 pairs of trousers from CL.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1461.jpg

But then what? The PJ doesn't appear to have done anything with them. They did check the VW and CL's bed for hairs, but I can't see anything about the clothes, which seems a bit odd. As it happens, none of the hairs found in either could have been Madeleine's and none of RM's haplotype was found in 5A.

They also checked out a potential entrance to the crawl space in CL, but then there's no record of having done the same under Block 5 (or any of the others).

[slartibartfast]

I think that a far larger space than that at Casa Liliana must exist under apartment 5A.  The front entrance is at street level and the back entrance is at the top of a steep flight of stairs.  The layout of my house is similar and although my staircase is about half as high as the one at 5A, it is possible to stand upright in the cellar.

I think there must be an entrance somewhere and I find it extraordinary if the elevator shaft and the area under the apartment wasn't checked.

So who do you think hide Madeleine under there?

[Anna]

Topic Please

[Anna]

Topic heading...Is there any hard evidence.

Please redirect your posts regarding witnesses to the appropriate Thread. Thank you.

Murat link : http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1392.msg216848#msg216848

[misty]

Topic heading...Is there any hard evidence.

Please redirect your posts regarding witnesses to the appropriate Thread. Thank you.

Murat link : http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1392.msg216848#msg216848

Are several witness testimonies not hard evidence - or does this topic refer to physical evidence only? Testimonies are not soft evidence.

[Anna]

Are several witness testimonies not hard evidence - or does this topic refer to physical evidence only? Testimonies are not soft evidence.

Sorry Misty, but I believe it has to be evidence of a material sort to be classed as hard evidence in this instance.
There are many threads on witnesses etc.  This thread has been a discussion concerning ...Hair, DNA, fingerprints, clothing etc. Hard evidence should have material proof.

[misty]

Sorry Misty, but I believe it has to be evidence of a material sort to be classed as hard evidence in this instance.
There are many threads on witnesses etc.  This thread has been a discussion concerning ...Hair, DNA, fingerprints, clothing etc. Hard evidence should have material proof.

Ok, that's fine. I'd just googled "hard evidence" & the definition is a bit vague.
The issue of RM's seized clothing cannot therefore be classed as hard evidence as it doesn't appear to have been subjected to any forensic testing.

[pegasus]

Example of hard evidence = the PJ photos taken on 4th May.
If something is in one of those photos, then it was definitely there, and in the exact location shown in the photo,  when the photo was taken - no-one can dispute it.

[misty]

Example of hard evidence = the PJ photos taken on 4th May.
If something is in one of those photos, then it was definitely there, and in the exact location shown in the photo,  when the photo was taken - no-one can dispute it.

What about the ability to photo-shop? None of the photos in the files have a time & date stamp on them.

[pegasus]

What about the ability to photo-shop? None of the photos in the files have a time & date stamp on them.

Are you seriously suggesting that the PJ photoshopped their 4th May crime-scene photos?
Ironically, I was going to use them to show a huge mistake in a certain portugese film.

[misty]

Are you seriously suggesting that the PJ photoshopped their 4th May crime-scene photos?
Ironically, I was going to use them to show a huge mistake in a certain portugese film.

All I can say is that I don't think those particular photos, if they are copies of genuine photos, would be admissible as evidence in a UK court. I don't know what the Portugues procedures stipulated in 2007 regarding date stamps, but there is the same problem with the Levy VRD videos, isn't there? How authentic is anything in this case?

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/forensic-photography.html
*snipped*
All photographs or video taken at a crime scene are indelibly time and date stamped.

[pegasus]

All I can say is that I don't think those particular photos, if they are copies of genuine photos, would be admissible as evidence in a UK court. I don't know what the Portugues procedures stipulated in 2007 regarding date stamps, but there is the same problem with the Levy VRD videos, isn't there? How authentic is anything in this case?

http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/forensic-photography.html
*snipped*
All photographs or video taken at a crime scene are indelibly time and date stamped.

If you claim the 4th May official PJ photos are photoshopped, its pointless to describe the mistake in the film.

[misty]

If you claim the 4th May official PJ photos are photoshopped, its pointless to describe the mistake in the film.

I'm not claiming that they actually are photoshopped, but if they were to be used in evidence & someone said, e.g, there was no clothes airer on the patio that night - how could the PJ prove otherwise?
By all means describe the mistake you see in the film for discussion purposes - we're not the ones responsible for what makes it to any courtroom.
Night, Pegasus.

[pegasus]

IMO the photo of the airer is hard evidence. If it was relevant, a court could examine that photo, the time it was taken, and the statement of the officer who took the photo, and conclude that the airer was on the balcony, with those clothes on it.
The only significance of the airer in that photo IMO is to prove that the alerted clothes were not on the airer that night (therefore they were inside the apartment).