UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Admin on April 03, 2013, 01:22:11 PM
-
There has been some debate about the window sill at Apt 5a, Block 5, Ocean Club Resort, PORTIMAO.
For the sake of clarification here is an official police photograph showing the window and sill.
(http://i.imgur.com/7M5Cm6e.jpg?1)
-
So where is all this lichen and organic material we have been hearing about??? 8-)(--)
-
These photographs were taken after the Forensic Expert had been looking for fingerprints. There are photos of her actually doing it on the morning after Madeleine disappeared.
The pink stuff is fingerprint powder.
-
This is typical of what happens when myths are challenged and there are no biased mods with a ban button. If this contention had been made on MM or CMOMM, just before the confirming evidence was posted, the poster wouldbebanned (or the postwould bewipedand the poster banned.) Thus ways aremyths maintained.
-
In the days when people like me still had a voice on Anti McCann Forums, and there was a time, this was pointed out on several occasions, but completely ignored. And Yes, I was banned, several times, simply because I had the audacity to question obvious "Mistakes".
Thank you, Admin, for posting up the picture. Perhaps we can put that Myth to bed now.
-
This is typical of what happens when myths are challenged and there are no biased mods with a ban button. If this contention had been made on MM or CMOMM, just before the confirming evidence was posted, the poster wouldbebanned (or the postwould bewipedand the poster banned.) Thus ways aremyths maintained.
The lichen quote was from a channel 4 documentary I believe. I don't remember lichen on the window ledge being mentioned in the files.
-
This is typical of what happens when myths are challenged and there are no biased mods with a ban button. If this contention had been made on MM or CMOMM, just before the confirming evidence was posted, the poster wouldbebanned (or the postwould bewipedand the poster banned.) Thus ways aremyths maintained.
The lichen quote was from a channel 4 documentary I believe. I don't remember lichen on the window ledge being mentioned in the files.
ANd the myth in the [ censored word ] camp just grew like topsy because no-one was allowed to contradict it.
-
On matters fenestral:
No glove/no hairnet = contamination of the scene
(http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/04_03/mccann1EPA0405_468x540.jpg)
-
The bottom line with all these discussions on the window is simple.
The only identifiable prints were Kate McCanns.
There is no evidence of abduction,any statement to the otherwise is a fallacy.
It has been nearly 6 years now since she disappeared and not one trace of her.
The number of ludicrous sightings occur at regular rates, normally prior to another appearance of the Mccanns in the Press or media, in general.
Probably the crime will never be solved, and as listed by the CFO, it is referred to 'as type of crime unknown'.
The indications of the dogs so far, have been the only possible indication of what could have happened to Madeleine, and having seen the use of dogs in a variety of situations, with a very high success rate, Their use is well founded.
All of this as a result of two parents who left 3 children under the age of 4 to go drinking and eating, for several nights in a row, in what they claim was an unlocked/locked apartment.
That was and is totally unacceptable behaviour by any parent, from what ever background
-
I keep promising myself to make this or that my last post.
There is a longer drop outside the window, than inside. The window frame (not sure about the shutter so much) stands proud of the sill. Now I'm not a man and I certainly don't have long legs.
Is it physically possible without damaging your manly-hood to straddle that frame with or without a child, in or out?
Do you stand on the bed, or at the bottom of the bed in the space between bed & chair?
You'd certainly need a long inside leg & beware of the dangly bits !
-
On matters fenestral:
No glove/no hairnet = contamination of the scene
(http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/04_03/mccann1EPA0405_468x540.jpg)
She is in an outdoor environment so there will be contamination, it's unavoidable. She is not touching the shutter with the ungloved hand and what good would a hairnets do ?
-
Good that you refer to the 'indications' of the dogs.
For that is all they are - indications
What the dogs reacted to - was never explained by SCIENCE
Had I led my cat into that garage - and she had miaowed - we'd be in the same predicament
Mere indications NOT backed up by scientific evaluation, thus worthless
Nothing to see here
-
yep, hairnet/hair cover, both hands gloved, and face masked (whether outside or inside)
you do of course realise that you leave your DNA by just walking into a room and breathing?
that's how it's done properly:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8227706/Justice-system-threatened-by-closure-of-Forensic-Science-Service.html
-
Good that you refer to the 'indications' of the dogs.
For that is all they are - indications
What the dogs reacted to - was never explained by SCIENCE
Had I led my cat into that garage - and she had miaowed - we'd be in the same predicament
Mere indications NOT backed up by scientific evaluation, thus worthless
Nothing to see here
Not quite, the indications did not provide a sufficient genetic match to madeleine.
Meanwhile, I respectfully suggest you contact your local Police Force to see how they view the use of dogs in a variety of situations.
-
Good that you refer to the 'indications' of the dogs.
For that is all they are - indications
What the dogs reacted to - was never explained by SCIENCE
Had I led my cat into that garage - and she had miaowed - we'd be in the same predicament
Mere indications NOT backed up by scientific evaluation, thus worthless
Nothing to see here
Not quite, the indications did not provide a sufficient genetic match to madeleine.
Meanwhile, I respectfully suggest you contact your local Police Force to see how they view the use of dogs in a variety of situations.
I have followed the argument about the lichen on the windowsills quite carefully. I believe that the reference came from an "expert", David Barclay who was part of a TV review team for Channel 4 and who gave the comment about lichen not being disturbed. This man was never involved in the actual case and though he had been in PDL as part of this TV review his comment was not specific to the Apt 5 windowsill but was more general "Apart from anything else, the window sills in that area are covered in green lichen. The minute you try and scrape over the window sills you would have left marks and we know that the scenes of crime lady, the next morning, was looking for exactly that." The PJ pictures of the windowsill show that his comment cannot be related directly to that window.
Having recently read the Lowe report it is clear that there was no exact DNA match to Madeleine in the car as many people still claim and that the scientist is very definite that what traces of DNA did exist could not be used as evidence because they came from at least three people and were not specific to one person.
-
I keep promising myself to make this or that my last post.
There is a longer drop outside the window, than inside. The window frame (not sure about the shutter so much) stands proud of the sill. Now I'm not a man and I certainly don't have long legs.
Is it physically possible without damaging your manly-hood to straddle that frame with or without a child, in or out?
Do you stand on the bed, or at the bottom of the bed in the space between bed & chair?
You'd certainly need a long inside leg & beware of the dangly bits !
I think a man would be hard pushed to exit that window carrying a youngster Meadow although they might have got in by that means and exited by one of the doors.
-
If you consider the position of the bed from which Madeleine was picked up, her head would have been on the abductors right arm. But in the Jane Tanner sighting which would have been seconds later the child's head was on the man's left arm. This could suggest that she was passed to a second abductor, possibly through the window.
A lone abductor would have had difficulty changing her head from one arm to the other.
-
There are many interesting questions posed about the actual handling of the dogs in PDL by Martin Grime.
Examples include the fact that he only wore protective clothing when examining the car and why that might be?
Also if you watch the video of the cars being examined, it is clear that there was no alert to the McCann car (which Grime said he could not identify as theirs even though it was plastered in posters and had been on TV for weeks before with them in it) within the first few tens of seconds of sniffing. Why did he call the dog back to this car far more forcefully than he called it back to the other cars which were not sniffed for the same length of time?
You provided a more than plausible reason for this, a few posts ago!
-
I have followed the argument about the lichen on the windowsills quite carefully. I believe that the reference came from an "expert", David Barclay who was part of a TV review team for Channel 4 and who gave the comment about lichen not being disturbed. This man was never involved in the actual case and though he had been in PDL as part of this TV review his comment was not specific to the Apt 5 windowsill but was more general "Apart from anything else, the window sills in that area are covered in green lichen. The minute you try and scrape over the window sills you would have left marks and we know that the scenes of crime lady, the next morning, was looking for exactly that." The PJ pictures of the windowsill show that his comment cannot be related directly to that window.
Having recently read the Lowe report it is clear that there was no exact DNA match to Madeleine in the car as many people still claim and that the scientist is very definite that what traces of DNA did exist could not be used as evidence because they came from at least three people and were not specific to one person.
You have summed up two issues quite nicely there gilet. Basically there is no DNA evidence which connects to Maddie and the window sills at apartment 5a was free of lichen as can be seen from the earlier photograph so graciously provided by the Portuguese Police.
-
I have followed the argument about the lichen on the windowsills quite carefully. I believe that the reference came from an "expert", David Barclay who was part of a TV review team for Channel 4 and who gave the comment about lichen not being disturbed. This man was never involved in the actual case and though he had been in PDL as part of this TV review his comment was not specific to the Apt 5 windowsill but was more general "Apart from anything else, the window sills in that area are covered in green lichen. The minute you try and scrape over the window sills you would have left marks and we know that the scenes of crime lady, the next morning, was looking for exactly that." The PJ pictures of the windowsill show that his comment cannot be related directly to that window.
Having recently read the Lowe report it is clear that there was no exact DNA match to Madeleine in the car as many people still claim and that the scientist is very definite that what traces of DNA did exist could not be used as evidence because they came from at least three people and were not specific to one person.
You have summed up two issues quite nicely there gilet. Basically there is no DNA evidence which connects to Maddie and the window sills at apartment 5a was free of lichen as can be seen from the earlier photograph so graciously provided by the Portuguese Police.
which places lichen neatly in the same round filing cabinet as blue bags, volcanoes and errant fridges
I do like this place
-
I would take heart if I thought we were getting somewhere with The Myths. But I've seen it all before, and I expect to see it all again. Same old same old week in week out.
-
I would take heart if I thought we were getting somewhere with The Myths. But I've seen it all before, and I expect to see it all again. Same old same old week in week out.
yep, the [ censored word ]s remind me of accidentally stumbling upon an episode of 'Last of the summer wine'
There's bound to be a bathtub hurtling down the hills - wellies are ever present - and push bikes are always ridden in a wobbly fashion
That predictability of 'Last of..' though was somewhat comforting - for it had moments of insight and humour
qualities the [ censored word ]s lack entirely - not one original or uncruel thought between 'em
More like Dalek's 'EXTERMINATE' whilst not being able to manage to go up stairs
-
I would take heart if I thought we were getting somewhere with The Myths. But I've seen it all before, and I expect to see it all again. Same old same old week in week out.
Just like the Bamber case. Endless magic roundabout. Two factions shouting at each other, trying to score points. But at least with the Bamber case, we have evidence. Holy load of old bollocks, Batman!!!
-
I would take heart if I thought we were getting somewhere with The Myths. But I've seen it all before, and I expect to see it all again. Same old same old week in week out.
yep, the [ censored word ]s remind me of accidentally stumbling upon an episode of 'Last of the summer wine'
There's bound to be a bathtub hurtling down the hills - wellies are ever present - and push bikes are always ridden in a wobbly fashion
That predictability of 'Last of..' though was somewhat comforting - for it had moments of insight and humour
qualities the [ censored word ]s lack entirely - not one original or uncruel thought between 'em
More like Dalek's 'EXTERMINATE' whilst not being able to manage to go up stairs
While I admire your use of Compo and Clegg, it's a bad idea to use the term "[ censored word ]s." That suggests loonies and trolls. We don't do that on here. We also don't "do" naughty fat thieves, closet gays and tiny little burglars who tried to join the police force, but were just too short.
-
I would take heart if I thought we were getting somewhere with The Myths. But I've seen it all before, and I expect to see it all again. Same old same old week in week out.
yep, the [ censored word ]s remind me of accidentally stumbling upon an episode of 'Last of the summer wine'
There's bound to be a bathtub hurtling down the hills - wellies are ever present - and push bikes are always ridden in a wobbly fashion
That predictability of 'Last of..' though was somewhat comforting - for it had moments of insight and humour
qualities the [ censored word ]s lack entirely - not one original or uncruel thought between 'em
More like Dalek's 'EXTERMINATE' whilst not being able to manage to go up stairs
While I admire your use of Compo and Clegg, it's a bad idea to use the term "[ censored word ]s." That suggests loonies and trolls. We don't do that on here. We also don't "do" naughty fat thieves, closet gays and tiny little burglars who tried to join the police force, but were just too short.
fair enough
detractors - acceptable to you?
-
I prefer to call them people who seek to denigrate the McCanns without providing any evidence to support what they are saying about the couple beyond rehashed news reports from mid 2007 which have long since been proven to be wrong.
-
I prefer to call them people who seek to denigrate the McCanns without providing any evidence to support what they are saying about the couple beyond rehashed news reports from mid 2007 which have long since been proven to be wrong.
or deliberatly mistranslated/edited
perfect example - 'Gerry did you know Robert Murat?'
the Lisbon
maffia had their paws all over that one
-
I prefer to call them people who seek to denigrate the McCanns without providing any evidence to support what they are saying about the couple beyond rehashed news reports from mid 2007 which have long since been proven to be wrong.
EXcellent. Can we find an acronym in that.
MCCann amateur detectives, obtuse loaded descriptions, with out morals endless nonsense
-
I prefer to call them people who seek to denigrate the McCanns without providing any evidence to support what they are saying about the couple beyond rehashed news reports from mid 2007 which have long since been proven to be wrong.
EXcellent. Can we find an acronym in that.
MCCann amateur detectives, obtuse loaded descriptions, with out morals endless nonsense
Mad Old Women? That's a bit misogynistic - a fair few of them are the male of the species.
MAny men, even young men, may be old women!
-
Denigrators
Determined, evidence notwithstanding, individuals getting really angry that others remain steadfast.
-
I prefer to call them people who seek to denigrate the McCanns without providing any evidence to support what they are saying about the couple beyond rehashed news reports from mid 2007 which have long since been proven to be wrong.
EXcellent. Can we find an acronym in that.
MCCann amateur detectives, obtuse loaded descriptions, with out morals endless nonsense
Mad Old Women? That's a bit misogynistic - a fair few of them are the male of the species.
MAny men, even young men, may be old women!
My point is that using the term "old women" in a derogatory way is misogynistic. As one who will be an old woman before too many more years have elapsed I have to say I object to the term (albeit with my tongue somewhat in cheek).
By the way, I notice that my assessment of Spudgun's (lack of) debating skills and propensity to resort to insults and threats of violence has been removed from the forum. Mods, could you explain why when Spudgun's original post in which he denigrates Debunker as a WUM and a troll with an IQ below 75 has been allowed to remain?
SOrry, the basic form just jumped out at me
Old git apologises