Author Topic: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?  (Read 12834 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pathfinder73

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #60 on: June 24, 2015, 06:40:08 PM »
I read somewhere that it was.....might be in one of these somewhere

John Geraghty interview

JG Profile
http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2009/06/11/profile-john-geraghty/

Is this the email to prince charles, that enraged GA?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-484797/Sacked-maid-kidnapped-Madeleine-bosses.html

That looks nothing like him - his picture is in the Boavista golf club book posted above.

More than 150 police officers have been drafted into the area-and yesterday British detectives from the McCann's home county of Leicestershire flew in to join the hunt which also took in the Boavista golf course, again a mile from where she was abducted.

Hunt at Black Rock News of the World (article no longer online)

Ross Hall & Carole Aye Maung in Praia da Luz, Portugal
6 May 2007

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id399.html
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Online G-Unit

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #61 on: June 24, 2015, 07:45:11 PM »
So many coincidences in this case. According to Kate's book Gerry joined Rothley Park Golf Club before she had Madeleine, and he had been to Portugal a couple of times to play golf. At home he played every Monday. Gerry said in his statements that he had been to Portugal once, in 1994.

On 25th March 2007 the Renault Scenic was hired by a Kenneth Walkden and some friends who were on their annual golfing holiday. Mr Walkden and his friends were members of the Rothley Park Golf Club. He says he didn't know the McCanns. I wonder if he knew John Geraghty?
http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/chasing-cars-doctors.html
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Online G-Unit

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #62 on: June 24, 2015, 08:08:33 PM »
He is probably Gerry's golf buddy. He's a wealthy man so did he own an apartment in PDL e.g. St James Apartments?

http://www.boavistagolf.com/media/pdfs/boavista-10th-anniversary-2002-2012.pdf



5. With regard to the possible sighting of arguido Gerry McCann next to a pink coloured block of apartments at a site opposite the Luz cemetery, we can inform you that this an establishment called 'St James Portuguesa Lda', lots 1 and 2 being situated in the positions mentioned, from the outside the spaces corresponding to Lot 1 can be seen of a total of apartment designated as follows: 101-104, 111-114, 121-124, 105-109, 115-119, 125-129.

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

Amaral was removed before investigating that lead.

This is supposed to be Geraghty too. Is it the same man as number 5?

Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline mercury

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #63 on: June 24, 2015, 09:02:42 PM »
This is becoming like the CMOMM site. John Gerarghty. the police were not interested in him in the slightest. but we have a dozen pictures of innocent people to trawl through for some reason.

I've not even understood the thinking behind any suspicion of him and what's supposed to have happened or what dumping their car at his after the police went over it and removed large chunks really means

Online G-Unit

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #64 on: June 24, 2015, 09:44:00 PM »
This is becoming like the CMOMM site. John Gerarghty. the police were not interested in him in the slightest. but we have a dozen pictures of innocent people to trawl through for some reason.

I've not even understood the thinking behind any suspicion of him and what's supposed to have happened or what dumping their car at his after the police went over it and removed large chunks really means

It was said he stored it in his garage so the McCanns could have it inspected themselves, but no reports that they did that. He returned it to the Hire Company too. There's also a pre-hire inspection sheet with his and Michael Wright's signatures on it. He was a member of the Boavista Golf club which was searched at one point I believe, so it was close.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline mercury

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #65 on: June 25, 2015, 12:21:19 AM »
It was said he stored it in his garage so the McCanns could have it inspected themselves, but no reports that they did that. He returned it to the Hire Company too. There's also a pre-hire inspection sheet with his and Michael Wright's signatures on it. He was a member of the Boavista Golf club which was searched at one point I believe, so it was close.

inspect it themselves?


 @)(++(*

Ok

Offline pathfinder73

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #66 on: June 25, 2015, 12:35:28 AM »
inspect it themselves?


 @)(++(*

Ok

It gets better  @)(++(*

But the BBC last night quoted a source close to Mr and Mrs McCann who said they were considering carrying out their own tests on the vehicle, which was being kept in a "safe place to avoid any possibility of evidence being planted".

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/13/ukcrime.estheraddley
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline mercury

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #67 on: June 25, 2015, 12:40:48 AM »
It gets better  @)(++(*

But the BBC last night quoted a source close to Mr and Mrs McCann who said they were considering carrying out their own tests on the vehicle, which was being kept in a "safe place to avoid any possibility of evidence being planted".

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/13/ukcrime.estheraddley

Couldn't make it up, what a stupid stupid farce, shame on them

Online stephen25000

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #68 on: June 25, 2015, 08:17:17 AM »
Couldn't make it up, what a stupid stupid farce, shame on them


The ludicrous nature of this is beyond a joke.

How many times have the mccanns, suspects in their daughters disappearance demanded access to the police files , or here the case ?

The sheer arrogance of it defies belief.

They clearly believe they are untouchable.
The McCanns were solely responsible for their childcare arrangements and there is no one else to blame.

S and S, two more amateurs making money from a disappeared child, and clearly without a clue.

Online stephen25000

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #69 on: June 25, 2015, 09:03:26 AM »
I have been passed this from another poster on Amazon.


To put that into some kind of context, many clinical tests are nowhere near that reliable.
If the mods want to move it to another thread, that is fine.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


You might find this useful when discussing the dogs and the ''Incredibly unreliable'' claim, which was demonstrably false
http://www.caninesearchsolutions.org/wisconsin_v._zapata.pdf

In particular, this paragraph

''* The negative response to the question of the canines' detection reliability was based
upon the dogs' actual searches in the field. The judge concluded that any/each time a
cadaver dog searched and cleared an area without providing an indication and no person
or other tool returned to the search location to verify that there WASN'T something
there, the dog's conclusion that the area did not contain the odor of human remains had
not been confirmed and was therefore was not reliable. ''

This was the basic problem with quoting the Zapata case. The measure the judge used to determine reliability was neither scientifically nor statistically valid.

If the dog came back after a search having not registed a hit, there are only two possibilities

1) The dog is correct, there is no evidence of cadaver, ie a ''true negative'' or
2) The dog is incorrect, it has missed the evidence, and this was therefore a ''false negative''

However, in the Zapata case the judge decided that unless someone had actually checked the area again, each 'negative' was a 'false negative'

Now clearly, this is absolutely not a valid conclusion, but using this strange formula has the effect of reducing the apparent reliability of the dogs considerably. In effect it is saying ''the dog is only right if it finds something'', and takes no account of the searches when the dog doesn't find anything because there is nothing to find. It also raises the issue that the subsequent searches are equally only as good as the dog searching - unless he thought he could send out a handler with particuarly keen senses.

It also has little validity with respect to Zapata because it concerns purely 'false' negatives, and not false positives.Likewise, in the McCann case the issue concerns positive indications, which studies have shown as being of the order of 90% accurate.

In the Zapata case the dogs alerted to locations the accused subsequently confirmed he had moved the body to.

The data from the Oesterhelweg et al study is far more reliable as the study was in controlled conditions and compared to a non-cadaver. In summary, that showed the following:

Sensitivity (75-100), specificity (91-100), positive predictive value (90-100), negative predictive value (90-100), accuracy (92-100).

To put that into some kind of context, many clinical tests are nowhere near that reliable.
The McCanns were solely responsible for their childcare arrangements and there is no one else to blame.

S and S, two more amateurs making money from a disappeared child, and clearly without a clue.

Offline Benice

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #70 on: June 25, 2015, 09:14:04 AM »
inspect it themselves?


 @)(++(*

Ok


Pure speculation on my part but  -   the McCanns had been told there was evidence in the car of Madeleine's dead body having been there.   They knew this could not be true and so to have another inspection would seem appropriate at that time.      However IMO once it emerged that there was no evidence and the PJ had lied to them - that was no longer necessary.

If the McCanns were Amarals prime suspects  - why didn't he have them followed from the moment they acquired a car?    He would have either caught them in the act -  or known that no body had ever been carried in it.  End of.

He saw fit to have the UK police put under surveillance - but not the suspects? !! 

You really can't get more farcical than that IMO.
The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline Brietta

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #71 on: June 25, 2015, 09:14:46 AM »

The ludicrous nature of this is beyond a joke.

How many times have the mccanns, suspects in their daughters disappearance demanded access to the police files , or here the case ?

The sheer arrogance of it defies belief.

They clearly believe they are untouchable.

          Police chief says 'we were too hasty' in naming McCanns as suspects

Portugal's most senior police officer has suggested that detectives may have been too hasty in making the McCanns official suspects in the investigation into the disappearance of their daughter, Madeleine.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/feb/03/ukcrime.world

The only people who appear to be untouchable in the original police investigation into Madeleine's disappearance are those who witnesses reported to have seen in the vicinity of the apartment.

Those persons (or person) have not been traced and since this forum has confirmed that suspicions against the parents were formed on the 4th of May ... how assiduously were they looked for?

If they were not traced to be either ruled in or ruled out of the inquiry it leaves a gaping hole in the conduct of the case.

I realise your prejudice does not allow you to contemplate the reality of the professional omissions in the original case ... but that is one of them.

Considering that all the witnesses were unconnected and independent ... the failure to keep their statements in mind is one of the things I think indicates that just like you, the investigation was less interested in finding the real perpetrator than in the prosecution of Kate McCann.
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Online stephen25000

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #72 on: June 25, 2015, 09:20:10 AM »
          Police chief says 'we were too hasty' in naming McCanns as suspects

Portugal's most senior police officer has suggested that detectives may have been too hasty in making the McCanns official suspects in the investigation into the disappearance of their daughter, Madeleine.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/feb/03/ukcrime.world

The only people who appear to be untouchable in the original police investigation into Madeleine's disappearance are those who witnesses reported to have seen in the vicinity of the apartment.

Those persons (or person) have not been traced and since this forum has confirmed that suspicions against the parents were formed on the 4th of May ... how assiduously were they looked for?

If they were not traced to be either ruled in or ruled out of the inquiry it leaves a gaping hole in the conduct of the case.

I realise your prejudice does not allow you to contemplate the reality of the professional omissions in the original case ... but that is one of them.

Considering that all the witnesses were unconnected and independent ... the failure to keep their statements in mind is one of the things I think indicates that just like you, the investigation was less interested in finding the real perpetrator than in the prosecution of Kate McCann.
   

The prejudice and bias are yours.

You are on here to defend the mccanns.

There is no way potential suspects in a case would be allowed to view all case files as the mccanns repeatedly requested.

However, even more importantly, THE CRIME IS STILL UNKNOWN.

Try to comprehend that means beyond your blind devotion to the mccanns.
The McCanns were solely responsible for their childcare arrangements and there is no one else to blame.

S and S, two more amateurs making money from a disappeared child, and clearly without a clue.

Offline Brietta

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #73 on: June 25, 2015, 09:25:58 AM »

Pure speculation on my part but  -   the McCanns had been told there was evidence in the car of Madeleine's dead body having been there.   They knew this could not be true and so to have another inspection would seem appropriate at that time.      However IMO once it emerged that there was no evidence and the PJ had lied to them - that was no longer necessary.

If the McCanns were Amarals prime suspects  - why didn't he have them followed from the moment they acquired a car?    He would have either caught them in the act -  or known that no body had ever been carried in it.  End of.

He saw fit to have the UK police put under surveillance - but not the suspects? !! 

You really can't get more farcical than that IMO.

In the knowledge that Madeleine's remains had never been in the vehicle they knew that the 'evidence' presented to them that she had been there was false.

It was prudent for them to keep and perhaps even purchase the vehicle ... I find nothing extraordinary in that.

What I do find remarkable is that if the vehicle was as pivotal to the prosecution case as the investigators apparently believed ... why had it been released back into the McCann custody?
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Online stephen25000

Re: What/where should have been investigated,but was not?
« Reply #74 on: June 25, 2015, 09:33:32 AM »
In the knowledge that Madeleine's remains had never been in the vehicle they knew that the 'evidence' presented to them that she had been there was false.

It was prudent for them to keep and perhaps even purchase the vehicle ... I find nothing extraordinary in that.

What I do find remarkable is that if the vehicle was as pivotal to the prosecution case as the investigators apparently believed ... why had it been released back into the McCann custody?

It is not know where Madeleine or her remains have been.

Merely unconfirmed forensics.

and it should never have been given back to the mccanns.

The McCanns were solely responsible for their childcare arrangements and there is no one else to blame.

S and S, two more amateurs making money from a disappeared child, and clearly without a clue.