Why didn't the dogs alert to any of Gerry's clothing?

[mercury]

Also wearing them on flight back to UK on Sept 9th 2007.
This witness is innocent and has no knowledge of what happened.

Iyo is gerry the same?

[pegasus]

Iyo is gerry the same?

I've already told you Merc that IMO the child was alive and well during the 21:05 check. Also JW emphasises that the behaviour a few minutes later was entirely relaxed and normal.
Changing subject to the PJ Final Report (and truly going back to square one) there is a rather illogical assumption in the Preamble, second paragraph.

[mercury]

I've already told you Merc that IMO the child was alive and well during the 21:05 check. Also JW emphasises that the behaviour a few minutes later was entirely relaxed and normal.
Changing subject to the PJ Final Report (and truly going back to square one) there is a rather illogical assumption in the Preamble, second paragraph.

- I was asking if in your opnion GM was, like you say, Kate, honest and has no idea what happened
- No one knows if the chld was alive and well at 2105
- you mean David Payne?

According to the Time and Place, the facts occurred on the day 3 of May of 2007, in a temporal hiatus, understood to be between 21H05 and 22H00 (being certain that after 17H30, only GERALD and KATE had contact with MADELEINE) at the resort named 'Ocean Club', located in Vila da Luz, Lagos, place, where the minor’s family, along with seven other persons, with whom they had a friendship relationship, where enjoying some holidays, with the duration of one week.

Eta

Appearing relaxed and normal is proof of not very much

[pegasus]

- I was asking if in your opnion GM was, like you say, Kate, honest and has no idea what happened
- No one knows if the chld was alive and well at 2105
- you mean David Payne?

According to the Time and Place, the facts occurred on the day 3 of May of 2007, in a temporal hiatus, understood to be between 21H05 and 22H00 (being certain that after 17H30, only GERALD and KATE had contact with MADELEINE) at the resort named 'Ocean Club', located in Vila da Luz, Lagos, place, where the minor’s family, along with seven other persons, with whom they had a friendship relationship, where enjoying some holidays, with the duration of one week.

Eta

Appearing relaxed and normal is proof of not very much

Truly going back to square one Merc, IMO the big error made by every investigation for 8.75 years is the ninth bold word of second paragraph of Preámbulo
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4526.jpg

[mercury]

9th plus bold= 2200

Otherwise just SAY please


Forums deserted, bye for now

Ps you didnt answer all my post, why not?

[pegasus]

9th plus bold= 2200

Otherwise just SAY please


Forums deserted, bye for now

Ps you didnt answer all my post, why not?

IMO none of the T7 were anything to do with this Merc.
And yes you found what IMO is the huge unsafe assumption in the Preámbulo.

[misty]

Truly going back to square one Merc, IMO the big error made by every investigation for 8.75 years is the ninth bold word of second paragraph of Preámbulo
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4526.jpg

Why? How do you think Madeleine escaped the attention of everyone, both inside that sparsely-furnished apartment and outside, where various people were milling around?
IMO - if you believe the GM sighting at around 2105 - the crucial facts are that the door had been moved & Madeleine was lying on top of the covers, seemingly asleep, rather than under the covers in the manner she had been left by KM.

[pegasus]

For starters, time last seen plus minimum time Misty. And there are plenty of cases where "complete" searches weren't.

[misty]

For starters, time last seen plus minimum time Misty.

You are using the dog alerts as the basis for your timing. That is a crucial mistake.

[pegasus]

You are using the dog alerts as the basis for your timing. That is a crucial mistake.

Even if one completely ignores the dogs and the alerts, it's unsafe to base over 8 years of investigation on such an arbitrary assumption.

[misty]

Even if one completely ignores the dogs and the alerts, it's unsafe to base over 8 years of investigation on such an arbitrary assumption.

The arbitrary assumption was based on the collective evidence of those present at the scene after KM returned to the apartment with the rest of the group plus those who entered afterwards. A living Madeleine would have been quickly located; a hidden corpse perhaps not so readily so but very difficult to remove from the premises after the police became involved.
IMO you have to work from 7.30, when the children were put to bed, until 10pm or shortly after.

[pegasus]

The arbitrary assumption was based on the collective evidence of those present at the scene after KM returned to the apartment with the rest of the group plus those who entered afterwards. A living Madeleine would have been quickly located; a hidden corpse perhaps not so readily so but very difficult to remove from the premises after the police became involved.
IMO you have to work from 7.30, when the children were put to bed, until 10pm or shortly after.

I read about another case where a whole investigation was based on a residence departure window of noon to 6pm absolute latest. And there was a ten times more thorough indoor search too.

[misty]

I read about another case where a whole investigation was based on a residence departure window of noon to 6pm absolute latest. And there was a ten times more thorough indoor search too.

That particular assumption was based on the word of the eventual perpetrator, was it not, but also substantiated by the report from a neighbour that the (already deceased) victim had walked past his window that same day.
So I think Mercury is right - it is a question of whether you believe the GM sighting at 9.05 to be true or not.

[pegasus]

That particular assumption was based on the word of the eventual perpetrator, was it not, but also substantiated by the report from a neighbour that the (already deceased) victim had walked past his window that same day.
So I think Mercury is right - it is a question of whether you believe the GM sighting at 9.05 to be true or not.

That whole London investigation was based on a rigidly assumed absolute latest possible departure by any means from residence time of about 6pm, because that is when police presumably searched the residence thoroughly and determined the missing person was not there, nothing to do with any witness statements.

[misty]

That whole London investigation was based on a rigidly assumed absolute latest possible departure by any means from residence time of about 6pm, because that is when police presumably searched the residence thoroughly and determined the missing person was not there, nothing to do with any witness statements.

"The early searches were just a look around,  they were not deep searches" said DCI Nick Scola at the Old Bailey - and they were in possession of the neighbour's report (who was subsequently jailed for 5 months).