McCann's Apartment.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.
Murat's House and Garden.
The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.
A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.
Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.
This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.
An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
This open area between the village urban limits and the Boavista golf club to the east and includes a plateau on which sits a trig point and mobile phone mast.
This area has been previously searched by officers and dogs walking through the area to check for Madeleine McCann's visible remains. However considering the new scenario of Homicide and concealed deposition this area affords many opportunities to dispose of a body. Within this area there are old empty properties, wells, thick vegetation, pockets of soft sand and natural fissures in the cliffs. Whilst there is no intelligence she is buried or concealed in this land it would be a natural place an offender may choose dose to the Village using the least effort principle. A proportionate response may therefore be considered to conduct a search of this area using a team of Victim Recovery Dogs (VRD) that are specifically trained to located concealed human remains.
Prior to undertaking this task it would be beneficial to consult with a Forensic Anthropologist with knowledge of this region of Portugal to give opinion as to the likely state of any remains to be found. Further research could also be conducted with regards to the natural scavenging predators in the area.
An inhibiting factor is that since the disappearance of the child an old empty house adjacent to the Trig Point on the Rocha Negra has been demolished and all rubble removed, If she was concealed within this property the search would be unlikely to detect her now.
The timeline of these searches was as follows:
On 31-07-07 the PJ conducted canine searches with a search warrant at apartments in Praia da Luz that had been previously occupied by the McCanns and their friends.
On 01-08-07 the PJ and GNR assisted by a canine, conducted searches on the eastern beach and wasteland in Praia da Luz. (My addition: Harrison's recommendation)
On 02-08-07 the PJ conducted a search warrant at a villa in Praia da Luz currently occupied by the McCann family. (My addition; no reference to Grime, or his dogs.)
Later the same day PJ officers conducted a screening procedure involving items removed from the McCann’s villa.
(The inspection in the gym; no reference to Grime, or his dogs.)
On 03-08-07 PJ and GNR officers were given instruction based on translated extracts from NPIA doctrine on search management and procedures. This focused on search procedures relating to buildings and vehicles. (Retrospectively, after both inspections at villa and gym; but before the inspection of vehicles.)
On 04-08-07 and 05-08-07 a search warrant was executed at the villa and gardens belonging to the PJ suspect Robert Murat. This search involved both PJ and GNR personnel supported by civil defence, geophysical equipment operators and a canine handler. (Harrison recommended inspection of the Murat property)
On 06-08-07 ten vehicles were searched associated to the enquiry. (No reference to the involvement of Grime and his dogs).
On 07-08-07 the western beach and remaining wasteland areas were searched using canine and GNR personnel. (Harrison's recommendation)
On 08-08-07 the drains around the apartment block where Madeleine McCann disappeared from were subject to a visual inspection by PJ officers.
1. Between 23h20 and 23h30 the two dogs were allowed to reconoitre the entire area to guarantee that there were no existing odours - and none were detected by them.
2. Between 23h30 and 23h40 items from the box labelled 'common room' were inspected by the blood dog without result.
- At 23h41 the cadaver dog began its inspection and 'marked' some clothing on the edge of the area. The inspection ended at 23h52 with the clothing having been collected for later direct examination and photographic report.
On Friday 20.07.2007 a request was made by the Portuguese Judicial Police to the NPIA for search advisory assistance. As a result of this the following terms of reference were produced.
It should be noted that the English police were party to and fully supportive of this request. This was not merely a PJ strategy/ploy to implicate the parents.
Of course.
Why should the British have objected in principle to the involvement of dogs in the searches?
No reason at all.
The question is over why a free-lance handler should have been recruited.
From Harrison's report, his recommendation for searches:
Harrison's time-line of searches:
Note that Harrison acknowledges the input of Grime and his dogs only in those searches Harrison recommended.
Official record of searches at the gym
Either the clothes were laid out in lightning-fast time between completion of the reconnoitre and commencement of the search, or the PJ cribbed off instructions Harrison gave them on how to conduct searches in buildings and vehicles (see quote above)
All the searches undertaken were recommended by Harrison with the exception of the clothing screening and at least one car he wouldn't have known about. Please list searches which are not covered below.
All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
In complying with these terms I undertook a series of briefings and site visits. These were with GNR and PJ personnel who had been involved in the previous searches conducted the week following Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in Praia da Luz.
The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation.
Harrison recommended that all cars owned or driven by Murat should be inspected.
There were 3. One (hired by Murat) was crashed by the PJ driving it to the inspection-site.
8 (that Harrison never said anything about) made the line-up.
Why?
And Harrison did make a (prior) reference to inspections at the villa and of vehicles (other than owned or driven by Murat).
This is it:
Harrison makes plain, I think, that these recommendations were nothing, directly, to do with him (although he is less explicit about how they came about) .....
The recommendations were made by Harrison in his “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document”. It is included with his other reports.
After assessing what had gone before and examining the area this document was produced;
“Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” and it was submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:
All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
NATIONAL SEARCH INVESTIGATOR
2224 to 2234 Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document (in English) by Mark Harrison 2007.07.23
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm#mh2224
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Following the search effected at Rua das Flores, 27, during which certain items were seized, this present inspection was performed, in a place appropriated for its purpose, [the gym!] attempting to identify particular pieces of clothing possibly indicated by the dogs, namely Eddy [that] indicates cadaver odours and Kila [that] indicates blood odours.
And the inspection at the gym gets no prior mention whatever.
First reference to it is just as it is about to happen:
To be clear, there was no justification for inspecting clothing at all, let alone (the same clothing!) twice (in two different spots).
This was not clothing kept in some special storage pending inspection; this was clothing in common circulation as clothing is: worn, washed, packed in suitcases, folded away in wardrobe shelves (etc,)
What possibile information (of worth to the enquiry) might have arisen from inspecting, then re-inspecting, the same clothing (twice) in two different spots?
Even if minute traces of (Madeleine's blood) had been found (it would have to be minute, because blood visible to the naked human eye wouldn't require a dog to find) so what?
Madeleine sat on Mummy's knee, or Daddy's knee, has a nose bleed or other minor abrasion, blood transfers to clothing.
So what?
Scarcely incriminating, is it?
Since when have you become an expert in forensic examinations or analysis, let alone police procedure ?
What inspection of clothing was there in the Adrian Prout investigation?
Mark Harrison was employed to search for the scenario of Madeleine's deceased body being somewhere in PDL. Enter the specialist dog team of Eddie and Keela to find evidence.
"These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
p.s. If there was blood on the clothes Keela would have alerted.
Would you care to remind me of the different circumstances of the two cases ?
To be clear, there was no justification for inspecting clothing at all, let alone (the same clothing!) twice (in two different spots).
So what was Harrison attempting to prove with the dog deployments?
Mark Harrison was handed a brief (by the PJ!) to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and worked to it.
He offered to consider other possibilities or scenarios (sic) on request but there is no evidence he was requested to do so.
Mark Harrison concluded his investigations by admitting frankly that he had no clue what happened to Madeleine.
But there was. A child disappears in suspicious circumstances with no evidence of a break in or of stranger intrusion, nothing disturbed and no valuables stolen. Her parents were the last people to see her alive apparently. Who would you check out??
eta in such circumstances it is normal practise to look closely at the parents.
Yes a body being concealed so it couldn't be found would lead any police force to believe it's a likely murder. There is nothing strange in that conclusion.
It recommended.
Not Harrison recommended.
It recommended.
I've already cited what Harrison recommended; all cars owned or driven by Murat (which had been subjected to some sort of prior inspection).
(Mark Harrison)
The searches described in this document were limited to certain locations. Therefore, it can not be said that the concealed remains of Madeleine McCann are not within the village of Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Enter SY 7 years later searching a different location in PDL.
Mark Harrison was handed a brief (by the PJ!) to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and worked to it.
He offered to consider other possibilities or scenarios (sic) on request but there is no evidence he was requested to do so.
Mark Harrison concluded his investigations by admitting frankly that he had no clue what happened to Madeleine.
Having looked at what he actually wrote Harrison makes it clear that considering death and body disposal was the correct response. He concludes that the sea would have been the most likely place to dispose of a body in the circumstances.
This report has highlighted the extensive and professional efforts made by the Portuguese authorities regarding the search to locate Madeleine McCann alive. It has now begun to consider further opportunities to re search locations in order to address the possibility that she has been murdered and concealed nearby. This would be a proportionate and appropriate response given the elapsed time since her disappearance and previous experience in such similar cases. Should the investigators wish to discuss and develop the issues raised in this initial assessment I would be happy to do so. Should further advisory ?in country? support be required of the National Search Advisor following this initial assessment phase formal approval must be sought from the NPIA.
I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz. (See my second report entitled “NPIA OP TASK Search Doc Beach and Marine”).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Amaral was right to state nobody talked of murder. If Maddie died in 5a it was accidental. If she was run over in the street outside 5a it was accidental.
Harrison formed no pre-conceived ideas (of his own). Good detectives don't. They analyse the facts and draw their own conclusions.
Harrison's hands were tied by a brief (handed to him by the PJ) to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and did so.
Amaral either lied or was incompetent when he said no one talked about murder.
And certainly (by English libel law) he libelled the McCanns with that reference.
No clue about Portuguese libel law.
Can you cite the word murder in Harrison's or Amral's statements?
This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz. Other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report.
This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz. Other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report.
(Mark Harrison).
That would tend to confirm the 'M' word was in Harrison's brief.
Harrison formed no pre-conceived ideas (of his own). Good detectives don't. They analyse the facts and draw their own conclusions.
Harrison's hands were tied by a brief (handed to him by the PJ) to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and did so.
Amaral either lied or was incompetent when he said no one talked about murder.
And certainly (by English libel law) he libelled the McCanns with that reference.
No clue about Portuguese libel law.
Murder could only have been considered in the context of an intruder abduction. Had that occurred she would not have died in 5a so putting the CSI and Cadaver dogs into block 5 had no relevance to intruder abduction/murder. That leaves only one conclusion and that relates squarely with the parents.
Maddie last seen in public around 5pm, disappearance announced after 10pm.
That would tend to confirm the 'M' word was in Harrison's brief.
In considering the two scenarios that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body disposed of by a person on foot or in a vehicle, I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to forensic examination.
However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.
He obviously did agree with the extra searches or he wouldn't have claimed to have recommended them.
You have stated an assumption as if fact (with zero corroborating evidence).
Harrison wanted searches confined to the places Madeleine either had been or (conceivably) might have been: the holiday apartments, the Murats' place, areas in and around PdL, (sic) all vehicles owned or driven by Murat.
That was it!
Nothing else.
The extras got introduced (somehow) and Harrison just went with the flow; went as far as (presumably) he dared in registering his protest in the way he worded his record of inspections ....
That would tend to confirm the 'M' word was in Harrison's brief.
I'm not the one making assumptions. Harrison said in his final report that in his first report he had recommended searching; All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles. He said that, it isn't an assumption by me. All I did was suggest why he may have made that mistake.
On the other hand you are assuming he had some hidden reason for describing the searches in the way he did. You have nothing whatsoever to support that assumption except your imagination.
Re Visiting Previously Searched Areas.
In considering the two scenarios that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body disposed of by a person on foot or in a vehicle, I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to forensic examination.
Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.
This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann. Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.
McCann's Apartment.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.
Murat's House and Garden.
The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.
A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.
Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.
This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.
An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.
Page 2228 :
Deploy geophysical instruments in the house and garden to detect any burial of a body or concealment in voids.
These specialists should be supported by physical search teams exploring and accessing all areas where concealment of a child's body could be made typically 0.5m.
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
This open area between the village urban limits and the Boavista golf club to the east and includes a plateau on which sits a trig point and mobile phone mast.
This area has been previously searched by officers and dogs walking through the area to check for Madeleine McCann's visible remains. However considering the new scenario of Homicide and concealed deposition this area affords many opportunities to dispose of a body. Within this area there are old empty properties, wells, thick vegetation, pockets of soft sand and natural fissures in the cliffs. Whilst there is no intelligence she is buried or concealed in this land it would be a natural place an offender may choose dose to the Village using the least effort principle. A proportionate response may therefore be considered to conduct a search of this area using a team of Victim Recovery Dogs (VRD) that are specifically trained to located concealed human remains.
Prior to undertaking this task it would be beneficial to consult with a Forensic Anthropologist with knowledge of this region of Portugal to give opinion as to the likely state of any remains to be found. Further research could also be conducted with regards to the natural scavenging predators in the area.
Praia Da Luz Beach.
In simple terms the beach is in a natural inlet and bounded by cliffs.
The winds are generally from the west and create low energy waves of less
than 2m. This is significant regarding any body disposal scenario from the
shore as the wave energy is not sufficient to "take a body" out to sea. Instead
a body would most likely trave1 eastwards in a re circulating motion along the
shoreline until it was trapped by the rock outcrop to the east of the beach or
consumed by marine life. ti the entry point was the rock outcrop itself to the
east of the beach then the body would most likely continue in a re circulating
motion along the shoreline until it again encountered a bamer to its passage,
the most eastward of this would be 5km away at Ponta Da Piedade near
Lagos.
Sub Surface Burial on P D Luz Beach
For Body Disposal Purposes The Beach Can Be Separated And
Discussed Into 6 Areas.
Figure 2.The boulders in the rock falls are too large
to man handle. Vegetative growth suggests rock
falls have been in situ for some time. The low energy
wave action would not move any of the boulders. It
is possible a small child could be secreted amongst
the rocks in natural voids.
Figure 3.The cliff edge at the base of the beach is at
an angle that inhibits soil removal. The shale re fills
any hole dug and is unsuitable to achieve a burial.
Figure4.At the base of the cliff are wave cuts where
the bedrock has been eroded by wave action. Here
sand can be easily dug but after a few centimetres
the digger reaches the bed rock, preventing a
successful burial.
Figure 5.The beach cusps or berms are mounds of
sand made by wind action. These cusps form at the
limit of the tides reach and would only be recovered
in storm conditions. Digging on the cusps is easy but to achieve as
more than a few centimetres depth is very difficult to
the fine sand granules refill the hole
Figure 6.The dark sand in this image shows the
intertidal area. Here digging and burial could
possibly be achieved although it would be through a
mixture of grave1 and water. However any burial
would be quickly exposed by wave action and
ultimately taken into the sea.
Amaral gets accused often of not understanding the dog alert's and the DNA evidence. Could it be that Harrison wasn't all that informed either given the brief provide to Martin Grime.
The brief provided to Mark Harrison was before Grime had set foot (or either of his dogs had set paw) on Portuguese soil.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present.
Did Harrison not understand that cadaverine takes time to develop? An intruder, assuming there ever was one, only had minutes in 5a.
Sigh ....
Here, again, is what Harrison recommended:
Harrison also considered 'burial of a body', himself explored that option and, himself, ruled it out.
And yet (Amaral's version!) Harrison said that Madeleine is definitely dead; that her 'concealed remains' were somewhere in close proximity to the apartment; that Madeleine's parents were 'probably responisble' (for Madeleine's 'death')
You know ....
I would like to know if you have a cite for the bolded bit? I can't find it in his book.
The request for Harrison's help was made to the NPIA on 20th July by Encarnacao. Harrison says the request mentioned murder. There is no copy of that request in the files, so it can't be checked.
Harrison would have talked about murder because that was his brief; to look for a murder victim. If Amaral hadn't seen Encarnacao's request he may well have concluded that murder was being suggested by Harrison.
It seems that Encarnacao was operating outside the files, as he did with the unrecorded interview with the McCanns on 8th August.
Amaral has been subjected to unrelenting criticism but Encarnacao and Neves seem to have been following an unrecorded agenda of their own which didn't help the investigation at all. Neves played down his contact with the McCanns, but he and Encarnacao met with them on a regular basis at the British Consulate. Had this arrangement not been in place then Amaral may have met and spoken to them at some point, but he was excluded by his superiors.
The final meeting took place at the Police Station, was unrecorded and should not have happened without arguido status for the McCanns. Not only that, if the parents were involved they were given advance warning about the direction of the investigation and another month to prepare themselves before the officially recorded investigation, following procedure, did make them arguidos.
From Goncalo Amaral's interview to El Mundo
Q - What do you think that could have happened that night?
A - Both the British and Portuguese police, and even the prosecutor, who has already changed his mind, thought the same. We talked about death by others, not murder. In the room blood and cadaver odour was found just below a window where a sofa was. The father was talking to a friend just outside that window for a while. The girl did not have a a heavy sleep, that's what the parents said. Perhaps she heard her father and climbed to the sofa bellow the window. But the parents, for the girl not to go out,moved it away from the wall. Madeleine could have fallen.
Cadaver, not cadaverine. Cadaverine is a (comparatively small) component of the whole 'bouquet' (of cadaver scent). It is present in urine and semen and therefore can be found in living humans as well as dead.
But that aside, I'm sure Harrison understood that perfectly well.
It's in his El Mundo interview.
It's usual practice to provide a copy of the cite and a link allowing people to read it themselves, as, I'm sure, you would be the first to point out if others gave you a similar response to the one you have given above.
However, as it seems I'm asking too much expecting you to follow forum norms I went and found it for myself.
Q - What do you think could have happened that night?
A - Both the British and Portuguese police, and even the prosecutor, who has already changed his mind, thought the same. We talked about death by others, not murder.
SILVIA TAULÉS
06 September 2008
El Mundo
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html
The only person who, it is said, talked about murder was Encarnacao in his request for search assistance to the NPIA.
To prove that Amaral lied as you have repeatedly said you need to prove that he knew what Encarnacao said in that request. The fact that there's no copy of that request in the files means it was not included in the official records of the investigation. Therefore it's not possible to prove that Amaral had knowledge of it's contents.
Do you have any proof that murder was discussed?
Carlos what the police had proposed. If we, or rather I, admitted that Madeleine had died in an accident in the apartment, and confessed to having hidden and disposed of her body, the sentence I'd receive would be much more lenient: only two years ... as opposed to what I'd be looking at if I ended up being charged with homicide.
It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:
"1 - Whoever places another person's life in danger,
a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or
b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;"
This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim's life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim's behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that neither of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child's death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the 'Ocean Club' resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.
The culmination of a murder investigation is that the McCanns were made arguidos in the (suspected) murder of their daughter, and offered a choice between either confessing (to hiding and concealing 'a body', that of her loved and cherished daughter Madeleine), for a which a comparatively lenient sentence would be imposed against one arguido (Kate); or that Kate and Gerry would face murder charges.
I repeat that the culmination of a murder investigation was that Kate and Gerry were made arguidos in the (alleged!) murder of their daughter.
Page 243 (hardback copy) Madeleine:
In the spirit of providing full context, so as not to be personally guilty of libel, this
Yet again ferryman for the umpteenth time , it has not been determined who is resppnsible , if anyone is , for Madeleine's disappearance, let alone an unproven and hypothetical abductor.
It is time you learned not to twist facts to suit your mantra.
I am clinically providing all the facts.
You respond with (well-worn!) mantras.
How could the original investigation determine who was responsible if the crime hasn't been determined ?
Let alone clear someone or persons if they haven't been charged.
Mark Harrison was employed to search for the scenario of Madeleine's deceased body being somewhere in PDL. Enter the specialist dog team of Eddie and Keela to find evidence.But from the full video, it appears that Keela was only used piecemeal. She didn't examine all the clothes that Eddie did .... she didn't examine the clothes that Eddie alerted to.
"These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
p.s. If blood were on the clothes Keela would have alerted.
But from the full video, it appears that Keela was only used piecemeal. She didn't examine all the clothes that Eddie did .... she didn't examine the clothes that Eddie alerted to.
To remind you.
For there to be any indicators at all both dogs had to be shown everything ... and then only could anything be taken from Eddies alerts
For it to be an indicator to cadavar odour, it was necessary that both dogs sniffed and that Keela did not alert ,... but Eddie did Both dogs sniffing was a must.
If Eddie sniffed without Keela, then it was most likely dried blood from a living person
If both dogs alerted then it was blood from a living person that they were both alerting to
Keela wasn't shown the clothes that Eddie alerted to, so the odour was NOT cadavar odour, but the odour of dried blood from a living person.
Eddie and Keela DID NOT find any evidence of a cadavar. NONE.
Furthermore there were no forensics that confirmed anything bad.
It was all a myth, folks !
But from the full video, it appears that Keela was only used piecemeal. She didn't examine all the clothes that Eddie did .... she didn't examine the clothes that Eddie alerted to.
To remind you.
For there to be any indicators at all both dogs had to be shown everything ... and then only could anything be taken from Eddies alerts
For it to be an indicator to cadavar odour, it was necessary that both dogs sniffed and that Keela did not alert ,... but Eddie did Both dogs sniffing was a must.
If Eddie sniffed without Keela, then it was most likely dried blood from a living person
If both dogs alerted then it was blood from a living person that they were both alerting to
Keela wasn't shown the clothes that Eddie alerted to, so the odour was NOT cadavar odour, but the odour of dried blood from a living person.
Eddie and Keela DID NOT find any evidence of a cadavar. NONE.
Furthermore there were no forensics that confirmed anything bad.
It was all a myth, folks !
To be fair Sadie there were a load of substances that Eddie would alert to and in such a situation I would be surprised had he not alerted to something. I'm surprised he didn't alert more often in those apartments and the two villas.
The culmination of a murder investigation is that the McCanns were made arguidos in the (suspected) murder of their daughter, and offered a choice between either confessing (to hiding and concealing 'a body', that of her loved and cherished daughter Madeleine), for a which a comparatively lenient sentence would be imposed against one arguido (Kate); or that Kate and Gerry would face murder charges.
I repeat that the culmination of a murder investigation was that Kate and Gerry were made arguidos in the (alleged!) murder of their daughter.
Page 243 (hardback copy) Madeleine:
In the spirit of providing full context, so as not to be personally guilty of libel, this
Speaking of Kate's book;
''If the poster Heidi Ho (who produced this video) doubts the veracity of Kate's account, she should try something novel such as reading the files, then she would know beyond doubt that Kate is telling the truth.''
I have read the files and used them to demonstrate that Kate's book is not completely correct in every detail.
''Before charges are brought, a plea-bargain is impossible, and in countries such as Portugal, where the police and judiciary operate independently of each other, they are not possible at all.''
Rubbish! The PJ are part of the Judiciary.
It is integrated into the Ministry of Justice, under the supervision of the Public Ministry. For the criminal investigation, the Public Ministry also controls the activity of the Judiciary Police.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Ministry_(Portugal)
This post is off topic, but I will answer.
On 7th of September 2007 Kate Healy was declared arguida on the basis of strong presumptions of the crime of concealing a body and simulating an abduction. At 4pm Gerald McCann was declared arguido for the same reasons.
According to Kate Healy/McCann after her interview on 6th May;
Paulo Ferreira stopped me in the corridor and said in a portentous tone, ‘You must go back now and listen very carefully to your lawyer. He has something important to say to you.’
Her lawyer did indeed speak to her and her husband and he advised them what to do, which is part of a lawyers job;
Carlos announced what the police had proposed. If we, or rather I, admitted that Madeleine had died in an accident in the apartment, and confessed to having hidden and disposed of her body, the sentence I’d receive would be much more lenient: only two years, he said, as opposed to what I’d be looking at if I ended up being charged with homicide. [Madeleine]
There was no offer of a plea bargain. It had all been "a misunderstanding", the McCann lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, explained the following day.'
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/sep/17/mondaymediasection13
No mention of murder and a denial that a bargain was offered by the person alleged to have offered it. It seems you are adding your own opinions into the mix again. It's quite possible that de Abreu advised Kate Healy/McCann to think carefully about her position, but the idea that it was a bargain offered by the police comes solely from her.
"Homicide" is something like murder though isn't it?
G-Unit
There is no evidence that the McCanns were suspected of murder or that they were made arguidos because of that suspicion.
I copied your post and put my response (to part of it) in red in your post.
Here it is again:
Part of your post:
And my reply:
Are you?
It is Kate's impression that that was the suspicion. Doesn't mean it was true or the alternative.
Kate Healy/McCann knew exactly what she was suspected of;
Breaking down in tears, distraught Kate said of the Portuguese police: "They want me to lie - I'm being framed.
...."Police don't want a murder in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming us."....."They are basically saying, 'If you confess Madeleine had an accident, and that I panicked and hid the body in a bag for a month then got rid of it in a hire car, I'd get two or three years' suspended sentence.'
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id16.html
She attributes what her lawyer told her to the police, but the lawyer said she misunderstood. Note she doesn't mention being suspected of murder.
Harrison mentioned murder because Encarnacao did. We don't know why Encarnacao mentioned it, his request to the NPIA isn't in the official files.
It is Kate's impression that that was the suspicion. Doesn't mean it was true or the alternative.
The lawyer was referring to the remark (of Kate's sister-in-law) Philomena McCann that the McCanns had been offered a 'plea-bargain'.
They were offered a deal but not (strictly) a 'plea-bargain'.
Look what I found;What page is that from?
I’m not saying the police did believe we had killed Madeleine. I have never for one second thought that. [Madeleine]
How do you know?
Because I believe Kate.
What page is that from?
Look what I found;
I’m not saying the police did believe we had killed Madeleine. I have never for one second thought that. [Madeleine]
What became clear to us, however, is that some faction within the PJ was, indeed, the source of the story (that the McCanns had murdered Madeleine)
That's why I put the remainder in brackets (to make clear that I was not quoting Kate's words direct).I thought so but just concerned about the speech marks missing in the original post.
Look to Harrison's report for confirmation that this was, indeed, a murder enquiry.
And I will add the obligatory follow-up (this time, without the highlights)
Let that be an end to discussion on whether the (shelved) enquiry was a murder enquiry.
It was.
I thought so but just concerned about the speech marks missing in the original post.
Beg your pardon.You would wonder what evidence they had. Was just an idea? When would it have happened? So they would try for a murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence, but having minimal circumstantial evidence only.
Scrap that.
Ive got the wrong quote.
Somewhere, there is a report by Joao Carlos that confirms that (for a while) they believed Madeleine had been murdered. I thought that was it, but it's not.
Processo pages 2068 and 2069
A note for the case file dated 1 August 2007 with respect to the dog search reports from 31 July and 1 August requesting the authorisation necessary to search the then-residence of the McCann family and the hire vehicle.
Faced with the new matters brought to the file through the dog search reports above, [those searches being] based on Mark Harrison's report already on file, and which [search results] support that Madeleine McCann may have died inside apartment 5A, Ocean Club, Luz, Lagos, where she was on holiday with her parents and two siblings.
The above reports state that the dogs alerted to cadaver odour and human blood inside the apartment, it already having been established that no death has occurred there previously.
In point a) [apartment 5A] of the report we can infer the locations of cadaver odour as well as the presence of traces of human blood. Also at point f) we see that cadaver odour was detected in the garden immediately adjacent to apartment 5A. Nothing was signalled in the other places.
In order to allow us to thoroughly examine this situation, which could have its conclusion through new evidence, it is requested for a voice record, legally sanctioned, specifically of two locations:
1 - Rua das Flores, no 27, Vivenda Vista do Mar, Luz Park, Luz, Lagos (the present residence of the McCann family in Luz)
2 - Hired vehicle used by the McCanns, the "Renault Scenic", number plate 59-DA-27.
Further, and of no small importance, it is also requested that a magistrate issue search warrants for [the above two locations] to enable us to recover new items/clues.
I ask that you consider the above and decide at your convenience.
Portimao, 1 August 2007
Inspector
Joao Carlos
This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim's life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim's behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
Not come across this, before.
Looks as if my suspicion that Harrison had nothing to do with the inspection at the villa (where Madeleine never lived!) is confirmed:
Note also, still no mention of the inspection at the gym.
And, of course, to avoid libel, I will add the obligatory (and vital!) rider:
Portuguese Prosecutors.
It recommended.
Not Harrison recommended.
A vital semantic distinction.
What was 'it'? It was the “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document”
Who wrote it? Mark Harrison;
Mark Harrison MBE
National Search Adviser
Homicide, Missing Persons, Mass Fatality Disasters
Email: markha&n@npia.pnn.police.uk
Dlrect dlal: +44797XXXXXXX
23/07/2007
Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document
In compiling this report I have driven and walked around the relevant areas of Praia Da Luz during the hours of darkness and then during daylight hours. I have conducted reconnaissance flights using the Civil defence helicopter. Consultation has been made with various colleagues and subject matter experts in the development of this report.
Harrison formed his own action-plan which was meddled with and amended.
The questions are:
Why?
And by whom?
What ferryman has been doing is asserting that Harrison didn't recommend or approve of the searches of the McCann's villa, their clothing or hire car.
Those searches were actually added to the planned searches following the dog alerts in G5A. Harrison was present at all of them, and claimed in his final report that he did recommend them.
Now ferryman is asserting that 'someone' tampered with Harrison's reports.
I challenged him to provide proof of his accusations or cease making them.
I'm unclear what your difficulty is in distinguishing between Harrison's chosen pronoun, it, and the pronoun he would have chosen (if the non-sensical and illogical decision to search in places Madeleine never lived in or went near had had anything to do with him), I?
I'm also unclear why you think Harrison, in his summary of searches, would have described both inspections at villa and gym as PJ exercises?
I think that puts the ball back in your court.
Explain the anomalies.
The only anomalies on this thread are your increasingly desperate attempts to read something into Harrison's reports which just isn't there. When you failed your next step was to accuse 'someone' of tampering with his reports; an allegation for which you are unable to provide any evidence, it seems.That could have been done to make sure they had the appearance of being sanctioned and approved part of Harrison's search.
I have repeatedly demonstrated what Harrison referred to when he wrote 'it'.
I have repeatedly demonstrated that he claimed credit for recommending all the searches carried out.
I have demonstrated that he was present at all of them.
Please note that all the searches were PJ exercises. Harrison's role was;
Throughout and at all locations I acted as an observer and search adviser.
The PJ appointed a Chief Inspector as a search manager who was present throughout. Additionally, separate PJ officers were appointed to record and map each search location and provide a contemporaneous video commentary of all search activity undertaken. This system of management and recording was based on my reports recommendation to ensure record accuracy, transparency and facilitate any future clarification of any search activity undertaken.
It was also essential that the official management and recording of the search was conducted by the Portuguese Police themselves rather than by British officers without any powers and not conversant with Portuguese law and judicial processes.
The only anomalies on this thread are your increasingly desperate attempts to read something into Harrison's reports which just isn't there. When you failed your next step was to accuse 'someone' of tampering with his reports; an allegation for which you are unable to provide any evidence, it seems.
I have repeatedly demonstrated what Harrison referred to when he wrote 'it'.
I have repeatedly demonstrated that he claimed credit for recommending all the searches carried out.
I have demonstrated that he was present at all of them.
Please note that all the searches were PJ exercises. Harrison's role was;
Throughout and at all locations I acted as an observer and search adviser.
The PJ appointed a Chief Inspector as a search manager who was present throughout. Additionally, separate PJ officers were appointed to record and map each search location and provide a contemporaneous video commentary of all search activity undertaken. This system of management and recording was based on my reports recommendation to ensure record accuracy, transparency and facilitate any future clarification of any search activity undertaken.
It was also essential that the official management and recording of the search was conducted by the Portuguese Police themselves rather than by British officers without any powers and not conversant with Portuguese law and judicial processes.
.... I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to previous examination
Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.
Holiday apartments
Murat's House and Garden.
Murat's Vehicles. (my addition; note, none other vehicles)
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
Praia Da Luz Beach and Shoreline.
That could have been done to make sure they had the appearance of being sanctioned and approved part of Harrison's search.
Part of Harrison's brief was to;
4. Consider further opportunities or areas for search in order to locate M McCann as applicable to the latest intelligence and information provided.
After the dog alerts in G5A the PJ, with little knowledge of the dog's capabilities, were unlikely to think of searching the villa because, as someone has commented, Madeleine was never there. Harrison and Grime knew exactly what the dogs could do and would know that further clues could be obtained by screening the villa and the car. So they very likely advised that those warrants should be obtained.
Harrison said he did, anyway;
“Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
Here, pared (for clarity and simplicity) is what Harrison recommended:
Those were Harrison's recommendations.
None others.
That is why Harrison prefaced his (own) recommendations with the personal pronoun I
This time, I shan't add the statutory disclaimers, because I don't think there's anything defamatory in that post.
In his report he said 'I recommend' He then named it “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” and submitted it to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
In his final report named ''OP TASK Madeleine McCann'' dated 22nd August 2007, written on headed paper belonging to the NPIA he refers to his previous report by name. Then he writes down WHAT IT RECOMMENDED [it being his report, submitted on 23rd July];
It recommended considering re searching:
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
If he wasn't referring to his report, pray tell what you think he was referring to????????
Like so much in this case a lot will have gone on behind the scenes which has never been reported and will remain secret. Only those who participated know the whole truth as to what went on and why.
I have found that police like to write reports with the full benefit of hindsight and tend to leave out the bits which, lets say, tend to show them in a somewhat less than favourable light.
So the moral of the story is don't believe everything you see written down.
Why (in your opinion) did Harrison (retrospectively) describe both inspections at villa and gym as (sic) PJ holding exercises?
Why (in your opinion) did Harrison (retrospectively) acknowledge the input of Grime and his dogs only in those inspections he (Harrison) recommended (by name) in what I cited earlier?
Why (in your opinion) did Harrison give no clue (retrospectively) as to who took part in inspections of vehicles (a hint for you) having personally recommended that only vehicles (sic) owned or driven by Murat (should be inspected)?
In this case we only have certain things, mostly written information. I think the correct way to proceed is to accept what is written rather than trying to 'read between the lines' in order to support your own viewpoint.
In his report he said 'I recommend' He then named it “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” and submitted it to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
In his final report named ''OP TASK Madeleine McCann'' dated 22nd August 2007, written on headed paper belonging to the NPIA he refers to his previous report by name. Then he writes down WHAT IT RECOMMENDED [it being his report, submitted on 23rd July];
It recommended considering re searching:
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
If he wasn't referring to his report, pray tell what you think he was referring to????????
In this case we only have certain things, mostly written information. I think the correct way to proceed is to accept what is written rather than trying to 'read between the lines' in order to support your own viewpoint.
In this case we only have certain things, mostly written information. I think the correct way to proceed is to accept what is written rather than trying to 'read between the lines' in order to support your own viewpoint.I doubt if the PJ or Mark Harrison thought like that! Everyone is telling the truth? Hardly.
I don't disagree but we have to bear in mind that a lot went on which we will never hear about.
What point are you trying to make John? I'm sure an awful lot went on behind the scenes, but I can't imagine what it was and then present it as a fact in a debate. I understood the forum tried to debate using known facts.
All my points on this thread are supported by cites. I haven't suggested that 'someone' tinkered with Harrison's reports, nor have I tried to draw conclusions [to support my standpoint] from the way he writes his points.
He was accepting the fait-accompli of the additions (to his own recommendations) added (by someone else).
Your cites directly contradict what (you suggest) is the case.
So you believe, without any evidence to support it, that a National Search Adviser working for the National Police Improvement Agency would cover up the fact that some unknown person added searches to the itinerary which he had agreed with the PJ Algarve regional Director?
Would you care to explain why? Why keep it secret? All he had to say in his final report was that x searches were carried out in addition to those recommended and they were suggested and authorised by x.
I doubt if the PJ or Mark Harrison thought like that! Everyone is telling the truth? Hardly.
What I'm doing is precisely that: accepting what's written.
Mark Harrison was employed to search for the scenario of Madeleine's deceased body being somewhere in PDL. Enter the specialist dog team of Eddie and Keela to find evidence.
"These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
p.s. If blood were on the clothes Keela would have alerted.
Well I was sure that I had proved the alert on Cuddlecat was untrue and that the PJ said there was an alert to Madeleine's clothing that actually belonged to Sean. Yet both of those situations still can't be written down here as true, even though it is well documented that all police forces use ruses to try and elicit a confession. So when I say the Police used Cuddlecat and the top as part of a ruse that is not libeling them but showing they were doing their job in their normal manner.
It is when Goncalo continues to use the results of the ruse as fact that makes me wonder if Goncalo was fully in control of the operation.
I have my thoughts which I will keep off (this discussion) but does anyone else have thoughts on why Harrison waited until after both inspections at Villa and Gym to issue PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct inspections in vehicles and buildings?To me, it seems that he saw errors in the way the earlier inspections were made.
To me, it seems that he saw errors in the way the earlier inspections were made.
Seems after those errors, he decided to put instructions on how to conduct inspections in writing.
Police may be known to use ruses, but you have to show that they did it in this case. You can't accuse them without evidence. Most small children who disappear have been harmed by family or close friends, but you can't use those statistics to accuse anyone in this case. There are always exceptions.It was fully evidenced in the thread on Cuddlecat, and the top is well documented that it belonged to Sean not Madeleine. OK so they didn't get their ruse to work properly, and Kate being a very astute emergency doctor has trained herself to look for the slightest tell tale signs of something going wrong. I see that clearly when I read her book, she is always analysing things. She would have worked out the PJ were playing tricks on her and she rightly refused to answer anymore questions.
To me, it seems that he saw errors in the way the earlier inspections were made.
Seems after those errors, he decided to put instructions on how to conduct inspections in writing.
That's an assumption.
They took a day off on that day, presumably to gather themselves, discuss progress and plan the next phase, which was a two day search of Murat's property and then the car searches the following day.
It is equally possible that he was asked to provide written instructions for everyone so they knew how to proceed during the following searches.
The correct answer is that we don't know because he doesn't say.
It was fully evidenced in the thread on Cuddlecat, and the top is well documented that it belonged to Sean not Madeleine. OK so they didn't get their ruse to work properly, and Kate being a very astute emergency doctor has trained herself to look for the slightest tell tale signs of something going wrong. I see that clearly when I read her book, she is always analysing things. She would have worked out the PJ were playing tricks on her and she rightly refused to answer anymore questions.
The correct answer is (implicit in the written record) that Harrison saw bad practice and stepped in (too late in the day) to try to correct it.
I don't think I've seen the Cuddlecat thread? The children were known to wear each other's clothes, so you need to present evidence that the top was Sean's and worn only by Sean and even then you're forgetting cross-contamination.I think it is quite possible that the twins wore Madeleines clothes, especially ones she had grown out of
I read Kate's book and formed different opinions. As neither of us [I assume] know her they are just opinions. We could both be wrong.
I think it is quite possible that the twins wore Madeleines clothes, especially ones she had grown out of
BUT,
I cant see how Madeleine would have been able to wear her younger siblings clothes; their clothes would have been too small for her.
If Kate or Gerry had tried to get Madeleine into that tee-shirt Eddie picked up (at least on that holiday) there MIGHT have been a case for child-cruelty ....
No, that's what you think happened, not what can be shown to have happened.
1. Between 23h20 and 23h30 the two dogs were allowed to reconoitre the entire area to guarantee that there were no existing odours - and none were detected by them.
2. Between 23h30 and 23h40 items from the box labelled 'common room' were inspected by the blood dog without result.
- At 23h41 the cadaver dog began its inspection and 'marked' some clothing on the edge of the area. The inspection ended at 23h52 with the clothing having been collected for later direct examination and photographic report.
Later the same day PJ officers conducted a screening procedure involving items removed from the McCann’s villa.
On 03-08-07 PJ and GNR officers were given instruction based on translated extracts from NPIA doctrine on search management and procedures. This focused on search procedures relating to buildings and vehicles.
I know that didn't happen.
It wouldn't have been physically possible to begin inspecting clothing (without pause) following the pre-inspection 'inspection' (of the gym, to rule out prior scents).
The 'pre-inspection' of the gym (if it was to have any meaning at all) should have been carried out with all clothes well off the scene and (certainly) outside the dogs' scent-range.
On 02-08-07 the PJ conducted a search warrant at a villa in Praia da Luz currently occupied by the McCann family.
I know that did happen, following both inspections at villa and gym.
And I've already highlight one (obvious!) flaw (in the documented, written, record of that inspection).
Add that clothes (already inspected in the villa, without reaction from Eddie) was transported (in bog-standard cardboard boxes) with zero regard to principles of cross-contamination from there to the gym and you have clear evidence of bad practice.
It is also appalling practice that both dogs should have trampled all over stuff they were tasked to inspect and that one should have picked stuff up in its mouth.
That's an assumption.Both your enboldened sentences are assumptions too!
They took a day off on that day, presumably to gather themselves, discuss progress and plan the next phase, which was a two day search of Murat's property and then the car searches the following day.
It is equally possible that he was asked to provide written instructions for everyone so they knew how to proceed during the following searches.
The correct answer is that we don't know because he doesn't say.
Harrison and Grime were present and involved. The Portuguese worked to their instructions. Are you qualified in any way whatsoever to criticise the work of any of these officers? I expect they have forgotten more than you will ever learn about such matters.
August 2nd 2007 - 11.20pm
On that date, following the home visit made to the McCann's' current residence, on the Rue des Fleurs, various items of clothing were laid out in an appropriate place for this purpose, to carry out an inspection by the dog handling unit.
The collected items of clothing were set out individually with the agreement and under the directions provided by the British technicians, the dogs having previously covered the space where the clothing was laid out.
My biggest grumble about the inspection of vehicles has long been the simple fact of 10 cars inspected simultaneously.I thought they were considered sufficiently spaced.
There was an innocent scent in the Renault (spots of Gerry's blood on the ignition key) and there might, easily, have been innocent scents in any of the other 9 cars.
That could only risk confusion for the dog.
In what sense is that good practice?
What is good practice is what the PJ (in writing up their 'official' not! report of the inspection at the gym) say: to test an area beforehand (for prior scents) then introduce whatever you want the dogs to test.
Grime's performance at PdL is littered with evidence of poor practice, and the documented records (closely studied) prove it.
I thought they were considered sufficiently spaced.
My biggest grumble about the inspection of vehicles has long been the simple fact of 10 cars inspected simultaneously.
There was an innocent scent in the Renault (spots of Gerry's blood on the ignition key) and there might, easily, have been innocent scents in any of the other 9 cars.
That could only risk confusion for the dog.
In what sense is that good practice?
What is good practice is what the PJ (in writing up their 'official' not! report of the inspection at the gym) say: to test an area beforehand (for prior scents) then introduce whatever you want the dogs to test.
Now we were in an underground garage where 8 or so cars (actually 10) were parked, including our rented Renault Scenic. It was hard to miss: the windows were plastered with pictures of Madeleine. In medicine we would call this an 'unblinded' study, one that is susceptible to bias. One of the dogs ran straight past our car, nose in the air, headed towards the next vehicle. The handler stopped next to the Renault and called the dog. It obeyed, returning to him, but then ran off again. Staying by the car, Grime instructed the dog to come back several times and directed it several parts of the vehicle before it eventually supplied an alert by barking.
Kate McCann.
(My own addition) At one point in the video, Eddie actually squatted several seconds under the boot of the Renault, before getting up, wandering off and being called back again by Grime.
Grime had no control over the arrangements, if anyone was to blame it was Harrison for allowing shoddy practise in the first place. If the arrangements provided by the Portuguese were inadequate he should have stopped the examinations. Your obsession with Grime is misplaced ferryman, he was a lowly constable who had to do whatever he was tasked to do.
Harrison should definitely have been more intrusive.
Both your enboldened sentences are assumptions too!
I made is clear that I didn't know (was assuming ) by starting with "To me, it seems ...."
Why pick on me when you are guilty of the same?
If it was a random (simultaneous) selection of vehicles (it wasn't; there was only one vehicle in the line-up with "Find Madeleine" stickers on the back) then there might have been an equal chance (of any vehicle in the line-up) containing a scent within the dog's scent-range.I don't understand your question.
If there was more than one (vehicle in the line-up) with such a scent, then what was Eddie supposed to choose?
Sorry, replying to this (from G-Unit)
What you have picked up is something translated from the French by Anna Esse and without official index referencing.
Let's stick to the official files, shall we?
Do you agree that the 'official' record (of the inspection at the gym) is a pile of crock?
Sorry Sadie, I wasn't intending to 'pick on' you. I was trying to make the point that assumptions don't really add anything to the debate. To demonstrate that I offered another assumption, different to yours.
As neither can be proved right or wrong using the evidence available both assumptions are useless.
What I 'picked up' was a quote from the official files, I forgot to post the link;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm
08-Processo Volume 8 pages 2186 to 2188
I think the British cops got carried away with it all and left their brains at Passport Control.
I don;t suppose they ever imagined that their work would be subjected to detailed scrutiny by armchair detectives in their hundreds. The British police did their best to get stuff kept secret when it dawned on them that the Portuguese intended to release the files, but some was missed. I note one of Harrison's reports was marked 'Restricted' but it was released.
Expecting people to be perfect at all times is unrealistic in my opinion. How many people would be confident that their work is so good that no-one could ever criticise it? Not many, if they were honest. Only recently a murderer was caught in part because a police officer didn't follow correct procedure. He got his man but lost his job.
I totally agree regardless of my own views in this case, the dog handler should never have been made aware which vehicle was of most interest. Several identical Scenics should have been tested together because the whole world knew the McCanns had a Scenic hire car.
Eddie's behaviour changed when passing that car. That is on video and clear evidence of him finding the scent. It didn't change passing another car but the Scenic regardless of posters or what others think. The dog behaviour changing is clear to all.
Eddie's behaviour changed when passing that car. That is on video and clear evidence of him finding the scent. It didn't change passing another car but the Scenic regardless of posters or what others think. The dog behaviour changing is clear to all.
Good points G-Unit. Something I don't understand though is, were the dogs sent to PdL to clear the arguidos or implicate them?
After Harrison had looked round PdL he recommended using the dogs. He recommended searching the creche area, the apartments of the T9, Murat's house and garden and other areas nearby. His brief was to suggest areas where a body may have been or where it might be hidden.
All options seem to have been covered; an abductor taking, killing and disposing on nearby wasteland, Murat the arguido taking her to his house and disposing, or parental/friend involvement. The surprise, imo, was the alerts pointed exclusively to parental involvement. I really don't believe anyone expected that.
After Harrison had looked round PdL he recommended using the dogs. He recommended searching the creche area, the apartments of the T9, Murat's house and garden and other areas nearby. His brief was to suggest areas where a body may have been or where it might be hidden.
All options seem to have been covered; an abductor taking, killing and disposing on nearby wasteland, Murat the arguido taking her to his house and disposing, or parental/friend involvement. The surprise, imo, was the alerts pointed exclusively to parental involvement. I really don't believe anyone expected that.
In considering the two scenarios that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body disposed of by a person on foot or in a vehicle, [why Amaral lied that 'we talked about death by others, not murder, heaven only knows] I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to forensic examination.
Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.
This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann. Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.
McCann's Apartment.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.
Murat's House and Garden.
The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.
A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.
Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.
This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.
An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.
Page 2228 :
Deploy geophysical instruments in the house and garden to detect any burial of a body or concealment in voids.
These specialists should be supported by physical search teams exploring and accessing all areas where concealment of a child's body could be made typically 0.5m.
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
Thing is Ferryman, Harrison's recommendation of using the EVRD in 5a could only point to one thing.
Harrison's recommendation was on the back of the brief handed to him by the PJ that he investigate that Madeleine had been murdered.
Harrison could only have concluded his final report (by frankly admitting that he had no clue what happened to Madeleine) for one reason ....
The point has already been made that for death scent to be discovered in 5a a body would have to have lain there for hours which rules out any intruder and implicates the parents by default. Harrison's brief was thus aimed at implicating or clearing the parents imo.
However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.
Very true. What surprised me about the villa inspections was that there were seemingly no reported alerts in the Murat's villa. I find that very hard to believe since Eddie would have alerted to dried blood and many other human substances while Keela would have alerted to dried blood.
Why was the video taken in the Murat villa not made public?
No idea about Murat's footage but there were no alerts by Eddie.
Dogs get in close to sniff for traces of blood the human eye cannot see. Eddie's behaviour will change straight away when detecting a stronger scent e.g. cadaver scent so he goes in first. If Eddie alerts then the blood dog Keela is used. At his first alert location no blood was detected by Keela.
"My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant." Martin Grime
Let's put it in simple layman terms for you. Dried microscopic blood traces would be found in every apartment Eddie searched but he doesn't go in there to sniff every inch of the apartments for that. He goes in first to detect a stronger scent e.g. cadaver scent and if found alerts. These dogs work as a team to find evidence of death.
'Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal'.
The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark. The variations in the vocal alert can be explained by many reasons such as 'thirst' or 'lack of air due to effort'.
Let's put it in simple layman terms for you. Dried microscopic blood traces would be found in every apartment Eddie searched but he doesn't go in there to sniff every inch of the apartments for that. He goes in first to detect a stronger scent e.g. cadaver scent and if found alerts. These dogs work as a team to find evidence of death.Between 3rd May and the day the dogs carried out the searches how many different people entered that apartment and who were they, what were their names and professions?
Let's put it in simple layman terms for you. Dried microscopic blood traces would be found in every apartment Eddie searched but he doesn't go in there to sniff every inch of the apartments for that. He goes in first to detect a stronger scent e.g. cadaver scent and if found alerts. These dogs work as a team to find evidence of death.That is the bit I don't understand yet. How does Mr Grime switch the dog from one mode to the other. I don't hear him commanding his dog to find "find death" and later "find blood".
That is the bit I don't understand yet. How does Mr Grime switch the dog from one mode to the other. I don't hear him commanding his dog to find "find death" and later "find blood".
That is the bit I don't understand yet. How does Mr Grime switch the dog from one mode to the other. I don't hear him commanding his dog to find "find death" and later "find blood".
Microscopic blood was found under a tile behind the sofa. There is no way that changed Eddie change in behaviour as soon as he arrived at apartment 5A which was confirmed when Eddie first alerted at the wardrobe in the apartment. Keela came into that same area and found no blood. Eddie was trained to detect and alert to cadaver scent and in Grime's professional opinion that suggested the source of Eddie's alerts.
That is the bit I don't understand yet. How does Mr Grime switch the dog from one mode to the other. I don't hear him commanding his dog to find "find death" and later "find blood".
Implicates the parents by default how?
Very simply, if cadaver odour was found in 5a it had nothing to do with an intruder as any intruder had to be in and out of there in minutes.
Very simply, if cadaver odour was found in 5a it had nothing to do with an intruder as any intruder had to be in and out of there in minutes. As you well know, a person has to be deceased for quite a while before the death scent forms.
there is no evidence cadaver odour was found in 5a....if it was it does not confirm the previous presence of a cadaver
But it is justifiable suspicion as le agencies have asserted
Btw there IS no way to prove the existence of remnant cadaver scent so you can stop harping on about that
It remains an indication/intelligence.
what is meant by intelligence....it aint evidence...
This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.
not intelligence according to grime
It is according to harrison and im sure grime, even if he didnt soell it out for slow people, if you think grime thnks its NOT intelligence you WILL have to prove your assertion
I never said intelligence was evidence of anything, i was reminding you about youf ignorance on proof of remnant cadaver scent.
Steady on old chap, loosing your focus here?
what is meant by intelligence....it aint evidence...
This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.
not intelligence according to grime
These were Harrison's recommendations:
Harrison mentioned nothing about any vehicles other than those (sic) owned or driven by Murat.
Harrison mentioned nothing about the villa (in what I quote above).
Harrison makes no reference at all (to the inspection in the gym) and (retrospectively) dismissed it as (sic) a PJ holding-exercise.
ETA: I can't for the moment, place it, but somewhere in the files, it is made plain that Murat, also, had no case to answer (his arguido status was revoked, just as the McCanns' arguido status was revoked).
grime said no intelligence reliability....thats proof to anyone with intelligence
These were Harrison's recommendations:
Harrison mentioned nothing about any vehicles other than those (sic) owned or driven by Murat.
Harrison mentioned nothing about the villa (in what I quote above).
Harrison makes no reference at all (to the inspection in the gym) and (retrospectively) dismissed it as (sic) a PJ holding-exercise.
ETA: I can't for the moment, place it, but somewhere in the files, it is made plain that Murat, also, had no case to answer (his arguido status was revoked, just as the McCanns' arguido status was revoked).
Sorry Sadie, I wasn't intending to 'pick on' you. I was trying to make the point that assumptions don't really add anything to the debate. To demonstrate that I offered another assumption, different to yours.Thanks for the apology Gunit, much appreciated.
As neither can be proved right or wrong using the evidence available both assumptions are useless.
No idea about Murat's footage but there were no alerts by Eddie.
Dogs get in close to sniff for traces of blood the human eye cannot see. Eddie's behaviour will change straight away when detecting a stronger scent e.g. cadaver scent so he goes in first. If Eddie alerts then the blood dog Keela is used. At his first alert location no blood was detected by Keela.
"My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant." Martin Grime
Your response is ambiguous. Did Keela actually go into Murats? Do you KNOW ?
Eddie didn't alert at Murat's or in the other apartments so Keela wasn't used. Of course Keela could be used at Murat's if needed.T.Y Pfinder.
Please cite Grime quote...
grime said no intelligence reliability....thats proof to anyone with intelligence
Thanks for the apology Gunit, much appreciated.
I can see nothing wrong with theories orassumptionsdeveloped thoughts, if based upon fact, so long as they are clearly labelled as such. It is called lateral thinking.
Personally, so long as it is identified as such, I cannot see what is wrong with it
after all this time and all the dog threads are you not aware of this
We know about the evidential reliabity it was the intelligence reliability I was interested in.
In complying with these terms I undertook a series of briefings and site visits. These were with GNR and PJ personnel who had been involved in the previous searches conducted the week following Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in Praia da Luz.
The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
That is, indeed, the key part.
There seems to be little or nothing to suggest that Harrison, personally and directly, had anything to do with those inspections apart from those he, personally, recommended.
Except his documented claim that he recommended all the searches which took place, of course. @)(++(*
Claim by whom?
The documented record suggests Harrison (retrospectively and metaphorically) did the equivalent of hold his nose and try to make a bad smell go away (after witnessing those inspections)
The claim by Mark Harrison in his final report that he recommended all the searches which took place. It's quite clear.
Suggests? Only to those who are 'reading between the lines' and finding things which exist only in their fertile imaginations. 8((()*/
Can I have the exact quote?
Do you have a cite for the bolded bit please? I can only find this;
Later the same day PJ officers conducted a screening procedure involving items removed from the McCann’s villa.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
The warrant to search the McCann's villa and hire car wasn't applied for until after the alerts in G5A. Note the date at the bottom of Joao Carlos' request below.
Then consider who might suggest applying for these new search warrants? The PJ, who knew little about the capabilities of the British dogs, or the British, who knew that personal items such as clothes and soft toys retain scents? Perhaps that's why Harrison claims to have recommended the searches in his final report?
1 - Rua das Flores, no 27, Vivenda Vista do Mar, Luz Park, Luz, Lagos (the present residence of the McCann family in Luz)
2 - Hired vehicle used by the McCanns, the "Renault Scenic", number plate 59-DA-27.
Further, and of no small importance, it is also requested that a magistrate issue search warrants for [the above two locations] to enable us to recover new items/clues.
I ask that you consider the above and decide at your convenience.
Portimao, 1 August 2007
Inspector
Joao Carlos
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DOGS_INSPECTION.htm
You've got the right wording (of Harrison's description of the inspection at the gym)
And it's not to do with the the abilities of the dogs.
It's to do with searches that even stood a chance of advancing the investigation. Clothing examined 3 months after the crime didn't.
So the question (of how inspections, or components of inspections with clearly no prospect of likelihood of advancing the investigation) came about remains unanswered.
Nothing (in the public domain) helps us to answer them.
Just answer my question. What was Harrison referring to when he said 'it' in his final report.
The claim by Mark Harrison in his final report that he recommended all the searches which took place. It's quite clear.
Suggests? Only to those who are 'reading between the lines' and finding things which exist only in their fertile imaginations. 8((()*/
I find the strongly worded denials of the usefulness of the alerts by Harrison and Grime interesting.if a sniffer dog alerts to a person and no drugs are found on them for how many more years must we remain suspicious of them? Forever?
UK police use dog alerts in other situations as arousing 'reasonable suspicion'. Reasonable suspicion is not, of course, proof.
Suspecting a person of having committed a criminal offence falls a long way short of having demonstrable proof that this is the case
http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/Arrest-Reasonable-Suspicion-and-Court-Appeal
Nevertheless, reasonable suspicion allows further action. If a drug sniffer dog alerts, the person alerted to can then be searched for possession. Without the dog alert they cannot [PACE forbids stopping and searching at random].
http://www.release.org.uk/blog/uk-festivals-sniffer-dogs-their-regulations-your-rights
If alerts by drug detection dogs create reasonable suspicion, it follows that alerts by cadaver dogs do the same. So it can't be said the alerts were meaningless.
We know about the evidential reliabity it was the intelligence reliability I was interested in.
It's been in grimes statement for the last nine years.... It seems some are not aware of what grime has said
The claim by Mark Harrison in his final report that he recommended all the searches which took place. It's quite clear.
Suggests? Only to those who are 'reading between the lines' and finding things which exist only in their fertile imaginations. 8((()*/
Some recommendation made (by someone else) for inspections that were never going to carry the investigation forward.
And no mention of the inspection of the gym until (just) before it happens.
Well cite it then.
Have you really never seen it
That says a lot about your knowledge of the alerts
That was not what Harrison was referring to when he said 'it'.
He was referring to the report “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document”, and 'it' recommended searching;
All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
The author of that report he refers to was Mark Harrison;
I undertook a series of briefings and site visits. These were with GNR and PJ personnel who had been involved in the previous searches conducted the week following Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in Praia da Luz.The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document”
If the document was written by Harrison and he says 'it' recommended something then it was Harrison who recommended it. That's a logical statement, ferryman.
Have you really never seen it
That says a lot about your knowledge of the alerts
Just answer my question. What was Harrison referring to when he said 'it' in his final report.
if a sniffer dog alerts to a person and no drugs are found on them for how many more years must we remain suspicious of them? Forever?
Not letting you get away with that.
What Harrison (personally) recommended I have already cited.
And those recommendations have a ring of logic: the places Madeleine either had been or (conceivably) might have been.
The McCanns moved into the villa after Madeleine vanished.
They hired the car 3 weeks later.
The gym?
All we can say about that is that Madeleine never (in her life) went near it.
No logic or rationale whatever.
Actually, there is .....
That is, indeed, the key part.
There seems to be little or nothing to suggest that Harrison, personally and directly, had anything to do with those inspections apart from those he, personally, recommended.
wheres the evidence that harrison did not personally recommend inspection of the mccanns villa and car?
I quoted you the evidence, you are saying the black and white truth in the documents is not that, so which is it?
It's all a conspiracy apparently. Someone else recommended searching the villa and car and somehow persuaded Harrison to say it was him! This search expert was persuaded to risk ruining his reputation by claimimg he had recommended something which he didn't actually recommend. This mysterious someone must have been very persuasive. @)(++(*Had it resulted in an admission of guilt even to the lesser charge (accidental death and disposing the body) they would have considered it worthwhile.
Well I found it, so you don't need to worry about finding it. It would have been easier if you had cited it in the first place. If you want the link, let me know.
I find the strongly worded denials of the usefulness of the alerts by Harrison and Grime interesting.
UK police use dog alerts in other situations as arousing 'reasonable suspicion'. Reasonable suspicion is not, of course, proof.
Suspecting a person of having committed a criminal offence falls a long way short of having demonstrable proof that this is the case
http://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/Arrest-Reasonable-Suspicion-and-Court-Appeal
Nevertheless, reasonable suspicion allows further action. If a drug sniffer dog alerts, the person alerted to can then be searched for possession. Without the dog alert they cannot [PACE forbids stopping and searching at random].
http://www.release.org.uk/blog/uk-festivals-sniffer-dogs-their-regulations-your-rights
If alerts by drug detection dogs create reasonable suspicion, it follows that alerts by cadaver dogs do the same. So it can't be said the alerts were meaningless.
reasonable suspicion is a vague term......the fact that the McCanns are the parents of a missing child puts them under reasonable suspicion so thats about how much the alerts are worth. Some here use the alerts to raise unreasonable suspcion. The alerts without confirmation are basically of no evidential or intelligence valueI tend to disagree. If there was a cadaver at some stage in the apartment and it had been removed, and the dogs produce an alert. What does it tell us? It is just that we can't absolutely go backwards and say because there was an alert there must have been a cadaver but it opens that option as a possibility.
Had it resulted in an admission of guilt even to the lesser charge (accidental death and disposing the body) they would have considered it worthwhile.
What is the immediate question that would have been asked before a "lesser" charge was made?But if they or Kate made a confession hopefully she would be able to answer that question. Hopefully she wasn't going to make a false confession.
"What did you do with the body?" springs to mind. Where do you think that might have taken the investigation if armed with a 'confession'?
Why was Mark Harrison eventually called in to advise the investigation? For his expertise and experience, perhaps?
.......
What is the immediate question that would have been asked before a "lesser" charge was made?
"What did you do with the body?" springs to mind. Where do you think that might have taken the investigation if armed with a 'confession'?
Why was Mark Harrison eventually called in to advise the investigation? For his expertise and experience, perhaps?
Unfortunately the investigation did not take on board his and the handler's advice regarding the exact significance of the dogs' aPJrts.
Nor did the investigation seem to understand the importance of having the patience to await confirmation of the results of forensic investigation. Or perhaps they did only too well.
The McCanns were easily accessible ... so why the rush to have them constituted arguido a few days before Portuguese law changes were due to come into effect which would have required firm supporting evidence.
Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'
A new penal code was introduced on Sep 15
By Fiona Govan in Praia da Luz5:01PM GMT 05 Dec 2007
Madeleine McCann’s parents might have been spared the anguish of being named suspects over her disappearance if Portuguese police had not rushed their case through before a change in the law, it has been claimed.
Kate and Gerry McCann were made arguidos - formal suspects - just eight days before new legal measures were introduced which would have required firmer evidence against them.
The couple’s Portuguese lawyer has claimed that detectives may have deliberately fast-tracked the investigation to ensure they were put in the frame.
Investigators named the McCanns, both 39, as arguidos on September 7 after allegedly finding microscopic traces of blood in their holiday apartment and "bodily fluids" they thought could have belonged to Madeleine in the boot of their hire car.
Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.
"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.
"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.
"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.
His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.
"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.
Clarence Mitchell, the official spokesman of the McCanns, said he hoped the introduction of the new law would work in their favour.
"Being declared arguidos almost three months ago caused the McCanns’ immense anguish and continues to do so," he said.
"To think they could have been saved that under a law introduced only days later makes a mockery of the case against them.
"They are entirely innocent victims of a horrible crime that has taken away their daughter and they want to be cleared as soon as possible so the focus can return to finding Madeleine.
"If it is true that changes to the law would have meant that they would not have been made arguidos that’s all the more reason for their status to be dropped now.
"Regardless of any changes in the law they should be eliminated forthwith from the inquiry."
Portuguese police were told last week that forensic results requested from Birmingham’s Forensic Science Service had so far proved "inconclusive".
They plan to travel to Britain next week to re-interview the McCanns and the seven friends who dined with them at the Tapas restaurant on the night of May 3, when Madeleine went missing from the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
Kate McCann tells us in her book that DCS Bob Small informed the PJ that they were going back to the UK. She doesn't say when this was done, but on 3rd September Paiva appeared to tell them they were going to be interviewed;
He clarified with us the date of our planned departure back to the UK and told us that the PJ wanted to ‘interrogate’ me on Wednesday and Gerry on Thursday. We’d waited almost four weeks for these interviews and it was obvious they had been hastily arranged once Bob Small notified the PJ that we would be leaving the country. Otherwise, why now? As far as we knew, they didn’t have the forensic results back yet. [Madeleine]
It was the planned departure of the McCanns that forced the hand of the PJ. It was speak to them now or never.
Hmmm ... I see ... information about European Arrest Warrants hadn't filtered through to Portugal at that time?
Had the Policia Judiciaria gained evidence to justify recalling the McCanns to Portugal to face questioning, charges and trial, the police in Britain would have complied.
The fact that they had no evidence with which to prefer charges when they made the McCanns arguidos is self evident. The fact that there was no future evidence to justify charges being laid against them is self evident.
That making them arguidos was precipitate is affirmed by Portugal’s Attorney General, Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html as well as on February 4th 2008 when - Portugal's top detective, Alipio Ribeiro, says in a radio interview that police were "hasty" in making Madeleine's parents suspects in her disappearance.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-officially-cleared-729039
It is disingenuous to suggest the McCann's proposed return home was responsible for yet another devastating lapse of judgement in the conduct of Madeleine's case.
Nor is it a decision on which Harrison was consulted despite his expertise and consultancy status ... unless you know different?
Hmmm ... I see ... information about European Arrest Warrants hadn't filtered through to Portugal at that time?
Had the Policia Judiciaria gained evidence to justify recalling the McCanns to Portugal to face questioning, charges and trial, the police in Britain would have complied.
The fact that they had no evidence with which to prefer charges when they made the McCanns arguidos is self evident. The fact that there was no future evidence to justify charges being laid against them is self evident.
That making them arguidos was precipitate is affirmed by Portugal’s Attorney General, Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html as well as on February 4th 2008 when - Portugal's top detective, Alipio Ribeiro, says in a radio interview that police were "hasty" in making Madeleine's parents suspects in her disappearance.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-officially-cleared-729039
It is disingenuous to suggest the McCann's proposed return home was responsible for yet another devastating lapse of judgement in the conduct of Madeleine's case.
Nor is it a decision on which Harrison was consulted despite his expertise and consultancy status ... unless you know different?
Hmmm ... I see ... information about European Arrest Warrants hadn't filtered through to Portugal at that time?
Had the Policia Judiciaria gained evidence to justify recalling the McCanns to Portugal to face questioning, charges and trial, the police in Britain would have complied.
The fact that they had no evidence with which to prefer charges when they made the McCanns arguidos is self evident. The fact that there was no future evidence to justify charges being laid against them is self evident.
That making them arguidos was precipitate is affirmed by Portugal’s Attorney General, Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1571699/Police-rushed-Madeleine-McCann-case.html as well as on February 4th 2008 when - Portugal's top detective, Alipio Ribeiro, says in a radio interview that police were "hasty" in making Madeleine's parents suspects in her disappearance.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-officially-cleared-729039
It is disingenuous to suggest the McCann's proposed return home was responsible for yet another devastating lapse of judgement in the conduct of Madeleine's case.
Nor is it a decision on which Harrison was consulted despite his expertise and consultancy status ... unless you know different?
The EAW was introduced in 2004. If you take the scuttlebutt on this here site as being pukkah gen then Portugal is a backwoodsy, third worldy, slow moving hicksville type of a place so I guess by 2007 the cleft stick runner bringingthe news from Aix to Ghentthe EU Directive was stuck up in the Serra da Estrela.
A EAW can only be issued for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution, not merely an investigation, or enforcing a custodial sentence. It can only be issued for offences carrying a maximum penalty of 12 months or more in prison. Where sentence has already been passed a EAW can only be issued if the prison term to be enforced is at least four months long.
To return to the thread topic......I am of the opinion that Mark Harrison was complicit in and approved of all the searches undertaken between 31st July and 8th August 2007, as he says in his final report dated 22nd August 2007.Can I ask why any of this matters?
There is no evidence that he disagreed with any of the searches undertaken. Anyone saying he did is making unsupported allegations.
Can I ask why any of this matters?
Can I ask why any of this matters?
As the opening poster of this thread, it falls on me to answer that.
I think it matters because the subject matter illustrates that there was a dichotomy between 2 (prominent) English investigators in the (shelved) enquiry, Martin Grime and Mark Harrison.
(I suspect) that's as far as this board will allow me to take it ....
Your first statement is wrong. I started the thread to investigate the searches recommended and involving Mark Harrison.
In 18 pages of trying you have completely failed to demonstrate any dichotomy between the two British investigators involved.
If it doesn't matter to you feel free to ignore it Alfie.That's not the question I asked. I asked why it matters, perhaps you could explain for the benefit of dumb little old me?
Had it resulted in an admission of guilt even to the lesser charge (accidental death and disposing the body) they would have considered it worthwhile.
My first statement is entirely accurate.
Attempts to refute all I have said have failed.
So do you believe the dog inspections were merely a ruse, a stick to beat a confession out of the McCanns?The two bits where I could see actions which prove it were:
You are suggesting that there was a dichotomy between Harrison and Grime. The word dichotomy suggests opposite ideas. If you are suggesting they disagreed about something the 'evidence' you have cobbled together shows no such thing. Why? Because other interpretations are just as valid as yours.
I've yet to spot an interpretation as valid as mine.
I've yet to spot an interpretation as valid as mine.
You need to look harder.
No I don't
I've yet to spot an interpretation as valid as mine.
Thank you. You have just confirmed that your assertions are based on your interpretation of the evidence, not on what it actually says.
Therefore your interpretation isn't factual, however much you try to say it is.
You can only say you think, you cannot say you know.
I can only point to the facts that confirm my interpretation as correct, which I have done, repeatedly.
All the facts tell us is that two of the searches carried out were not recommended in the first report. If you pointed that out to the author and he said he thought they were, but he now remembers it was a verbal recommendation, you cannot disprove that statement.
Three of the searches were not recommended by Harrison (at all).
Harrison played no part in the decision to extend the length of vehicle-inspection (from vehicles owned or driven by Murat) to 8 other vehicles (including the Renault Scenic, hired 3 weeks after Madeleine's abduction)
Three of the searches were not recommended by Harrison (at all).Which three?
Harrison played no part in the decision to extend the length of vehicle-inspection (from vehicles owned or driven by Murat) to 8 other vehicles (including the Renault Scenic, hired 3 weeks after Madeleine's abduction)
Cite for these allegations?
The question is why are you making allegations which you cannot prove?
It is plain barking to suppose that Harrison would have recommended canine-inspections of a vehicle hired (by the McCanns) 3 weeks after her disappearance.
THAT IS MERELY YOUR AMATEUR OPINION.
The written record demonstrates that Harrison didn't (recommend such an inspection).
THE REPORT WRITTEN BY HARRISON CLAIMS HE DID RECOMMEND IT.
Who did?
ACCORDING TO HARRISON HE DID.
It is similarly plain barking that there should have been canine inspections in the residence the McCanns moved into after vacating the holiday apartment and after Madeleine had vanished.
THAT IS MERELY YOUR AMATEUR OPINION.
Who recommended those?
HARRISON WROTE IN HIS REPORT THAT HE DID
He just recommended that holiday apartments be inspected.
IN HIS FIRST REPORT. BUT THE SITUATION CHANGED LEADING TO ADDITIONAL SEARCHES, WHICH HE CLAIMED TO HAVE RECOMMENDED
I am stating a fact (that Harrison had nothing to do with inspections Madeleine never lived in or went near) and inviting speculation as to who might have.
It is plain barking to suppose that Harrison would have recommended canine inspection of a vehicle hired 3 weeks after Madeleine vanished (the Renault Scenic) and Harrison was not plain barking.
He recommended only that vehicles (sic) owned or driven by Murat should be inspected.
That's what the record says.
Who recommended the (other) searches?
Obviously not Harrison.
Harrison just touched his forelock and accepted a fait accompli that these other searches should be conducted.
I have answered each point underneath it.
Could the actual words used to support an argument be referenced please?
I only giving someone a clue as to a feature that might be in the document. It is not intended as a speculation.
If you posted passages from a document which seemed inconsistent in style that's one thing. Speculating that they might exist is another. The moon might be made of green cheese, but there's no point in saying that without supporting evidence, is there?No I'm saying if you think the moon is made of green cheese there could be mice.
Could the actual words used to support an argument be referenced please?
I have repeatedly posted the references. Read the thread or try reading the reports for yourself.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
I have read them and quoted them and they do not suggest that Harrison was browbeaten by anyone to claim he recommended something when he didn't. It's ludicrous to suggest that he would agree to do that. It's equally ridiculous to suggest that anyone 'tampered' with his reports.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO SUPPORT THOSE CLAIMS.
What you have cited is Harrison touching his forelock and accepting (recommendations of others) for inspections in places or locations Madeleine never lived in or went near.
What nothing you cite answers is who proposed or got approved these (additional, and non-sensical) searches.
OK, one last reply.
All of the above are figments of your imagination, not facts.
Everything (I state) is factually based, including that Harrison
1. In respect of additional searches prefaced his comments with it not I
2. In respect of search-recommendations unmistakably Harrison's, he uses the personal pronoun I
3. Retrospectively (after witnessing all inspections) Harrison owns Grme and his dogs only in those inspections he (Harrison) recommended.
4. After witnessing both inspections at villa and gym, Harrison issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct inspections in buildings and vehicles.
This document follows on from the author’s two previous search documents and provides a summary of the search activity undertaken by the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) in Praia da Luz, Portugal between 20-07-07 and 10-08-07 following the authors search review and submission of his decision support documents.
The authors search review terms of reference were set and agreed with the PJ Algarve regional Director Guilhermino Encarnacao, they were;
On 25-07-07 the PJ Director decided his officers would re-search some of the areas suggested within the report. He also decided the order of their priority. These were the accommodation the McCann’s and their friends have occupied in Praia da Luz, the villa and the grounds occupied by Robert Murat, wasteland that surrounds these locations and any known vehicles the suspect, the McCanns and their friends had access to when Madeleine disappeared.
Again? Not really. It's on the thread several times.
In complying with these terms I undertook a series of briefings and site visits. These were with GNR and PJ personnel who had been involved in the previous searches conducted the week following Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in Praia da Luz.
The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
You're referring to that (as amended by Encaranado (sp)) from Harrison's original proposal
So, just as I have insisted from the outset, a set of proposals (made by Harrison) were amended (we now know, by Amaral's boss).
What about the inspection at the gym?
On 25-07-07 the PJ Director decided his officers would re-search some of the areas suggested within the report. He also decided the order of their priority. These were the accommodation the McCanns and their friends have occupied in Praia da Luz, the villa and the grounds occupied by Robert Murat, wasteland that surrounds these locations and any known vehicles the suspect, the McCanns and their friends had access to when Madeleine disappeared.
That does.
Still no reference to the gym
Let's see.
We know that the PJ record of the inspection at the gym was a pile of crock.
So they probably made it all up as they went along.
I take it you don't deny Harrison's report says what is says?
You obviously don't understand that investigations occur in a linear progression. Something is planned and depending on the results other possibilities arise. Hence the decision to search the McCann villa and car was taken after the alerts in 5A, not on 25th July as you mistakenly assumed by performing one of your 'interpretations'.
I know exactly what Harrison's last report says; that he recommended all the searches which took place.
You obviously will (try to) deny what the written record says. The amendment to Harrison's proposal came from Amaral's boss.
It's there, in Harrison's report.
Wrong. Read Joao Carlos; request.
If Encarnacao decided to search the villa and the car on 25th July, explain Joao Carlos' request for a search warrant dated 1st August 2007, as a direct result of the alerts in 5A;
Processo pages 2068 and 2069
A note for the case file dated 1 August 2007 with respect to the dog search reports from 31 July and 1 August requesting the authorisation necessary to search the then-residence of the McCann family and the hire vehicle.
Faced with the new matters brought to the file through the dog search reports above, [those searches being] based on Mark Harrison's report already on file, and which [search results] support that Madeleine McCann may have died inside apartment 5A, Ocean Club, Luz, Lagos, where she was on holiday with her parents and two siblings.
The above reports state that the dogs alerted to cadaver odour and human blood inside the apartment, it already having been established that no death has occurred there previously.
In point a) [apartment 5A] of the report we can infer the locations of cadaver odour as well as the presence of traces of human blood. Also at point f) we see that cadaver odour was detected in the garden immediately adjacent to apartment 5A. Nothing was signalled in the other places.
In order to allow us to thoroughly examine this situation, which could have its conclusion through new evidence, it is requested for a voice record, legally sanctioned, specifically of two locations:
1 - Rua das Flores, no 27, Vivenda Vista do Mar, Luz Park, Luz, Lagos (the present residence of the McCann family in Luz)
2 - Hired vehicle used by the McCanns, the "Renault Scenic", number plate 59-DA-27.
Further, and of no small importance, it is also requested that a magistrate issue search warrants for [the above two locations] to enable us to recover new items/clues.
I ask that you consider the above and decide at your convenience.
Portimao, 1 August 2007
Inspector
Joao Carlos
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DOGS_INSPECTION.htm
If Encarnacao decided to search the villa and the car on 25th July, explain Joao Carlos' request for a search warrant dated 1st August 2007, as a direct result of the alerts in 5A;
Processo pages 2068 and 2069
A note for the case file dated 1 August 2007 with respect to the dog search reports from 31 July and 1 August requesting the authorisation necessary to search the then-residence of the McCann family and the hire vehicle.
Faced with the new matters brought to the file through the dog search reports above, [those searches being] based on Mark Harrison's report already on file, and which [search results] support that Madeleine McCann may have died inside apartment 5A, Ocean Club, Luz, Lagos, where she was on holiday with her parents and two siblings.
The above reports state that the dogs alerted to cadaver odour and human blood inside the apartment, it already having been established that no death has occurred there previously.
In point a) [apartment 5A] of the report we can infer the locations of cadaver odour as well as the presence of traces of human blood. Also at point f) we see that cadaver odour was detected in the garden immediately adjacent to apartment 5A. Nothing was signalled in the other places.
In order to allow us to thoroughly examine this situation, which could have its conclusion through new evidence, it is requested for a voice record, legally sanctioned, specifically of two locations:
1 - Rua das Flores, no 27, Vivenda Vista do Mar, Luz Park, Luz, Lagos (the present residence of the McCann family in Luz)
2 - Hired vehicle used by the McCanns, the "Renault Scenic", number plate 59-DA-27.
Further, and of no small importance, it is also requested that a magistrate issue search warrants for [the above two locations] to enable us to recover new items/clues.
I ask that you consider the above and decide at your convenience.
Portimao, 1 August 2007
Inspector
Joao Carlos
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DOGS_INSPECTION.htm
2836 to 2839 - English version of pages 2771 through 2812
2771 to 2812 - Portuguese version of the report 22 August 2007 "OP TASK Madeleine
You obviously don't understand that investigations occur in a linear progression. Something is planned and depending on the results other possibilities arise. Hence the decision to search the McCann villa and car was taken after the alerts in 5A, not on 25th July as you mistakenly assumed by performing one of your 'interpretations'.
I know exactly what Harrison's last report says; that he recommended all the searches which took place.
This document follows on from the author’s two previous search documents and provides a summary of the search activity undertaken by the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) in Praia da Luz, Portugal between 20-07-07 and 10-08-07 following the authors search review and submission of his decision support documents.
Having thoroughly analysed all the supposed alerts to Cadaver odour, we now understand more precisely what was alerted to .... and it was unlikely to be cadavar odour. More likely the dessicated blood from a living person.
Harrison's reports are written in the past tense.
So Harrison (after the round of these meetings/discussions he refers to) wrote his reports.
Encarnadio gave (prior) direction on the nature of the inspections that he wanted conducted, contrary to, or perhaps, more accurately, expanding on, the proposals of Harrison.
But Encarnardio gives (gave) no clue of how the inspection in the gym came about.
Any ideas?
And indeed, prefacing Harrison's third, and final, report is this:
I find your attempts to suggest that Harrison's recommendations were overruled in some way quite distasteful and insulting actually. It's distasteful because you are now making unfounded insinuations at a new victim, and insulting to Harrison who worked with and advised the PJ before and during all the searches undertaken.
The PJ had less expertise than the British in identifying search areas and in search techniques and that's why they requested Harrison's help.
You can pore over Harrison's reports and twist them as much as you like, but nothing can be shown to have happened when the only 'evidence' quoted is the way a report was written.
The final report written by Harrison clearly states that he recommended all the searches which took place. It's time you accepted that FACT and stopped insinuating that he didn't mean what he wrote. He wrote it, he meant it, and it's time you accepted it.
I'm the one who has stated facts you have failed (miserably) to refute.
The document was Harrison's; the proposals in it were partially his.
There is heaps (besides the two FOI questions-and-answers I, personally, hold) to question the provenance of the 'enhanced' victim recovery dog.
In respect of the investigation at PdL, Harrison (broadly) divided his judgements between carrying out the instructions of his employer (the PJ directorate) to investigate that Madeleine had been 'murdered' and a measure of objectivity sufficient to make clear (in the sum of all his reports) that he had no clue what, ultimately, happened to Madeleine.
Harrison also went as far as, presumably, he dared, in highlighting the deficiencies in deployment of the dog(s) in PdL.
Harrison wrote the final report all by himself and, I feel sure, as both a professional person and a police officer was prepared to stand by what he wrote in it.
Are you per chance trying to suggest that Harrison didn't attend those inspections that he never suggested?
No.
He was given orders (by Encardicao) and obeyed them.
I think you should rephrase that post, Encardicao had no authority to give any English police officer orders.
Then how do you account for the fact that Harrison was handed a brief to investigate that madeleine had been murdered, yet concluded (his final report) by admitting that he had no clue what happened to Madeleine?
I must admit it, Harrison was right to state what he did since even now the police don't have a clue what happened to her. That said, there only are so many possibilities including abduction/murder, accident or accident/abduction. Each in its own way was possible to a greater or lesser degree, that is what keeps it an enduring mystery.
We are not really privy to up-to-date information about the present enquiry, though, John.
Not in dispute.
And? ....
Then how do you account for the fact that Harrison was handed a brief to investigate that madeleine had been murdered, yet concluded (his final report) by admitting that he had no clue what happened to Madeleine?
Ferryman, Harrison wrote a report.
He wrote it in a certain way.
Why did he write it the way he did?
I don't know. Perhaps that's how he writes things, perhaps he wrote it in a hurry, perhaps he's just not a great writer.
You, however, have decided he was communicating 'hidden messages' which, it seems, only you can decipher.
Really? Are you serious?
Hidden messages?
Harrison writes in plain and clear English, which anyone who comprehends English, (and that certainly includes you, whether you are actually English or not) ought to be able to understand .....
That someone who has interpreted Shakespeare and Chaucer should mangle and misrepresent Harrison so badly is beyond belief.
Then again, I haven't heard your interpretations of Shakespeare and Chaucer.
Have you even grasped that the PJ instructed Harrison to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered?
Harrison first report tells us what he was asked to do;
This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Is that the same as investigating that Madeleine had been murdered?
I read it as saying there's a possibility that Madeleine McCann was murdered.
If so, her remains may be concealed within the previously searched area Zone 1.
Please advise which areas within that Zone should be re-searched.
Other possibilities or scenarios will be considered on request
(Mark Harrison).
Is there any evidence he was requested (to consider other possibilities or scenarios)?
Why would he be?
To return to the thread title this is what Mark Harrison OBE, the national search advisor to all UK police said in July 2007. If the police are the experts, Harrison's opinion has to be taken into account 9 years later also. The Metropolitan Police have certainly never contradicted his opinion.
This report has highlighted the extensive and professional efforts made by the Portuguese authorities regarding the search to locate Madeleine McCann alive. It has now begun to consider further opportunities to re search locations in order to address the possibility that she has been murdered and concealed nearby. This would be a proportionate and appropriate response given the elapsed time since her disappearance and previous experience in such similar cases.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Harrison concluded his third, and final, report by making clear he, personally, had no idea what happened to Madeleine.
But did offer a hedged, and tentative, view diametrically opposite from that Amaral (either incompetently or dishonestly) claimed Harrison concluded in his book.
So after 21 pages dare I ask if we have established if Harrison recommended all the searches or was he taking instructions from elsewhere despite his better judgement?
Could the exercise have been done better?
So after 21 pages dare I ask if we have established if Harrison recommended all the searches or was he taking instructions from elsewhere despite his better judgement?
Could the exercise have been done better?
Harrisons investigations and recommendations were carried out at the request of Encarnacao. It was Encarnacao's prerogative to choose which areas to search and in which order, which he did.
Encarnacao had every right to decide to search other areas if he wished, so why would Harrison want or need to cover it up if that's what happened?
The exercise was carried out according to Harrison's instructions and under his guidance. I can assume, as the national search adviser to all UK police forces, that he knew what he was doing.
A good post G unit which seems to fit with both your position and that of ferryman. See what happens when everyone works together.
I think you'll find ferryman believes Harrison covered something up, Angelo, and that the text demonstrates that.
My opinion is that he had no reason to do that and the text shows no such thing. Sorry!
I think you'll find ferryman believes Harrison covered something up, Angelo, and that the text demonstrates that.
My opinion is that he had no reason to do that and the text shows no such thing. Sorry!
No.
My position is that Harrison went as far as he dared (not nearly far enough!) to demonstrate that his own position and recommendations had been undermined, superseded and even overridden.
With no evidence to back up your position.
Re-read my posts in this thread.
All the evidence is there.
I have and it isn't.
... I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to forensic examination.
Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.
This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann. Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.
McCann's Apartment.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.
Murat's House and Garden.
The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.
A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.
Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.
This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.
An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.
Page 2228 :
Deploy geophysical instruments in the house and garden to detect any burial of a body or concealment in voids.
These specialists should be supported by physical search teams exploring and accessing all areas where concealment of a child's body could be made typically 0.5m.
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
This open area between the village urban limits and the Boavista golf club to the east and includes a plateau on which sits a trig point and mobile phone mast.
This area has been previously searched by officers and dogs walking through the area to check for Madeleine McCann's visible remains. However considering the new scenario of Homicide and concealed deposition this area affords many opportunities to dispose of a body. Within this area there are old empty properties, wells, thick vegetation, pockets of soft sand and natural fissures in the cliffs. Whilst there is no intelligence she is buried or concealed in this land it would be a natural place an offender may choose dose to the Village using the least effort principle. A proportionate response may therefore be considered to conduct a search of this area using a team of Victim Recovery Dogs (VRD) that are specifically trained to located concealed human remains.
Prior to undertaking this task it would be beneficial to consult with a Forensic Anthropologist with knowledge of this region of Portugal to give opinion as to the likely state of any remains to be found. Further research could also be conducted with regards to the natural scavenging predators in the area.
Let's take it step-by-step, shall we?
These are Harrison's recommendations:
Any disagreements so far?
Mark Harrison said he recommended all the searches which took place. He was present at, and supervised, all of them.
On 25-07-07 the PJ Director decided his officers would re-search some of the areas suggested within the report. He also decided the order of their priority. These were the accommodation the McCann’s and their friends have occupied in Praia da Luz, the villa and the grounds occupied by Robert Murat, wasteland that surrounds these locations and any known vehicles the suspect, the McCanns and their friends had access to when Madeleine disappeared.
As far as I can judge, all recommendations of Harrison were endorsed by Amaral's boss, who added recommendations besides of his own.
Why?
Look at it in the light of which party was "Main Contractor" and which party was "Sub-Contractor".
The question is now answered yes ?. Well whether you like or not the question is answered.
If however you wish to major in conspiracy and incompetence theories be my guest but in that event expect me to fall about laughing.
Fall about laughing at the truth, if that's what rocks your boat.
You have yet to present a cogent argument that demonstrates your assertions are anything other than your unsubstantiated opinions.
I have comprehensively demonstrated the truth of all I have stated.
It's not quite enough to convince yourself, ferryman. You have to present evidence which convinces others. As Harrison's report contradicts what you say your 'evidence' is useless.
Convice?
You either accept the truth or you don't.
Convince doesn't come into it.
Mark Harrison said he recommended all the searches which took place. He was present at, and supervised, all of them.What difference would it make if he hadn't?
What difference would it make if he hadn't?
It wouldn't make any difference whatsoever. The whole point of the exercise imo is an attempt to absolve Harrison of any responsibility for the search of the McCann's villa, hire car and clothes. Why? Because in the opinion of some 'armchair experts' those searches a) made no sense and b) were badly done.In other words they went into the McCann villa with the expectation, hope even, of corroborating the alert in apartment 5A - what effect does that expectation have on unconscious handler cueing I wonder...? &%+((£
Of course it's unlikely that anyone else would have thought of searching the villa. The PJ weren't trained searchers and they had no experience of using those dogs. Only Harrison and Grime imo knew that the dogs might find their target scents in the villa due to cross contamination.
Given the alerts in 5A it made perfect sense to search other McCann locations in order to connect the alerts to them, rather than merely to the accommodation they had occupied.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search.
You could also say that searching anywhere provided further opportunity to search.
In other words they went into the McCann villa with the expectation, hope even, of corroborating the alert in apartment 5A - what effect does that expectation have on unconscious handler cueing I wonder...? &%+((£
Sorry, Alfie, that was me speculating as to why they may have decided to search the villa. The reason isn't actually given in the files.What other reasons could there have been for searching the villa?
What other reasons could there have been for searching the villa?
I actually know the answer to that
What other reasons could there have been for searching the villa?
I haven't read all of this thread, so apologies if this has already been raised.
Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.
This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann. Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.
Was this area ever searched?
Processo pages 2056 and 2057
These two pages are an official document for the case file regarding the search dog examination of areas around the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Lagos on 1 August 2007.
The thirteen participants are indicated as being four members of the Policia Judiciaria (PJ); UK NPIA specialist, Mark Harrison; the UK dog handler Martin Grime, and another English police officer, Jose Freitas [known to be a Portuguese-speaking officer with Scotland Yard]; the English Springer spaniel - Eddy; and five officers from the GNR (national police force).
The area surrounding the Ocean Club having been previously assessed with respect to place-names, soil characteristics and proximity to apartment 5A [refer Mark Harrison's report for details], the following areas were selected for search by the "cadaver" dog, all without results:
1 - Between 06h40 and 07h15 the area between Rua da Piteira and Rua da Oliveira;
2 - Between 07h25 and 07h45 the area immediately adjacent to the property known as "Beijaflor" in Rua da Figueira, which area was accessed through the electricity sub-station on Rua do Ramalhete;
3 - Between 07h55 and 08h05 the dirt road and area immediately adjacent to the residence known as "Casa Azul", in front of the residence known as "Casa Pandora", on Rua da Figueira;
4 - Between 08h20 and 08h40 the area between the residences known as "Casa Pandora" and "Quinta Mimosa", in front of the residence known as "Casa Ladeira".
Photographs and a map showing the areas is included in the report. The work stopped at 09h00.
That's the only one I could think of. You?No. They believed the McCanns were guilty, the dog alerted in Apartment 5a and so they went to the villa in the hopes of finding incriminating evidence. My point is, with this hope and expectation in mind, I wonder if unconscious handler cueing can be ruled out as a reason for the alerts there?
I actually know the answer to thatCould you tell us then please? If you can't do it on the board a PM will suffice.
Could you tell us then please? If you can't do it on the board a PM will suffice.
No. They believed the McCanns were guilty, the dog alerted in Apartment 5a and so they went to the villa in the hopes of finding incriminating evidence. My point is, with this hope and expectation in mind, I wonder if unconscious handler cueing can be ruled out as a reason for the alerts there?
Bump this from a couple of days ago:
Many pages on we do not seem to have a text of what might be decribed as Sr Encarnacao's "Design Brief" to Mr Harrison. We have a copy of Mr Harrison's preliminary report where he alludes to what he thought it was and what he [Mr Harrison] thought he could offer but nothing from the other side that I can see. If a formal written request from the Portuguese to Mr Harrison exists does anyone have a copy of it ? It might shed some light.
It would seem such document is not in the public domain. If there is such document.
It should, of course, have been filed. The fact that it wasn't suggests it was either secret and kept back or not shared with the investigators. As Harrison observed, of course, it was an appropriate response. Repeated by SY seven years later. 8(0(*
Humans and dogs have been working in tandem for millennia with varying degrees of success. If there is a phone to be found Murphy will find it.
If there is no phone to be found ... Murphy won't find it for the simple reason there is nothing there to be found.(http://www.londondogforum.co.uk/images/murphy2350.jpg)Kevin Spencer and Murphy's story
http://www.londondogforum.co.uk/kevin-spencer-and-murphys-story-c625.html
Eddie and Keela found nothing of evidential value in Praia da Luz. That is because there was nothing there to be found, if there had been the searches organised by the Portuguese in the days after Madeleine's disappearance or the searches organised by Mark Harrison would have found it.
The problem lies not so much in the fact the dogs found nothing but in those who will not accept that fact and move on.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1406.msg259976#msg259976
Humans and dogs have been working in tandem for millennia with varying degrees of success. If there is a phone to be found Murphy will find it.
If there is no phone to be found ... Murphy won't find it for the simple reason there is nothing there to be found.(http://www.londondogforum.co.uk/images/murphy2350.jpg)Kevin Spencer and Murphy's story
http://www.londondogforum.co.uk/kevin-spencer-and-murphys-story-c625.html
Eddie and Keela found nothing of evidential value in Praia da Luz. That is because there was nothing there to be found, if there had been the searches organised by the Portuguese in the days after Madeleine's disappearance or the searches organised by Mark Harrison would have found it.
The problem lies not so much in the fact the dogs found nothing but in those who will not accept that fact and move on.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1406.msg259976#msg259976
How true. Even 10 years on there are still those who claim that because Eddie barked - that is irrefutable proof that a dead body must once have been in that spot, even though according to the experts (whom they simultaneously defend to the hilt! ) - that is simply not true.
Incomprehensible logic IMO.
How true. Even 10 years on there are still those who claim that because Eddie barked - that is irrefutable proof that a dead body must once have been in that spot, even though according to the experts (whom they simultaneously defend to the hilt! ) - that is simply not true.
Incomprehensible logic IMO.
How true. Even 10 years on there are still those who claim that because Eddie barked - that is irrefutable proof that a dead body must once have been in that spot, even though according to the experts (whom they simultaneously defend to the hilt! ) - that is simply not true.
Incomprehensible logic IMO.
Are you saying once blood has left the body it can become dry and / or putrefied?On a surface it would dry.
... I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to forensic examination.
Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.
This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann. Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.
McCann's Apartment.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.
Murat's House and Garden.
The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.
A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.
Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.
This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.
An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.
Page 2228 :
Deploy geophysical instruments in the house and garden to detect any burial of a body or concealment in voids.
These specialists should be supported by physical search teams exploring and accessing all areas where concealment of a child's body could be made typically 0.5m.
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
This open area between the village urban limits and the Boavista golf club to the east and includes a plateau on which sits a trig point and mobile phone mast.
This area has been previously searched by officers and dogs walking through the area to check for Madeleine McCann's visible remains. However considering the new scenario of Homicide and concealed deposition this area affords many opportunities to dispose of a body. Within this area there are old empty properties, wells, thick vegetation, pockets of soft sand and natural fissures in the cliffs. Whilst there is no intelligence she is buried or concealed in this land it would be a natural place an offender may choose dose to the Village using the least effort principle. A proportionate response may therefore be considered to conduct a search of this area using a team of Victim Recovery Dogs (VRD) that are specifically trained to located concealed human remains.
Prior to undertaking this task it would be beneficial to consult with a Forensic Anthropologist with knowledge of this region of Portugal to give opinion as to the likely state of any remains to be found. Further research could also be conducted with regards to the natural scavenging predators in the area.
An inhibiting factor is that since the disappearance of the child an old empty house adjacent to the Trig Point on the Rocha Negra has been demolished and all rubble removed, If she was concealed within this property the search would be unlikely to detect her now.
Praia Da Luz Beach and Shoreline.
The beach and shoreline are bounded by high cliffs and shallow waters. The beach has fine granular sand and provides easy digging. However the beach is extensively used by tourists and locals and af?rds minimal areas of cover from view for concealment. It may be considered appropriate to use the VRD dog team supported by geophysical GPR to sweep the beach. This would be
So bringing it all back on-topic, these are the searches Harrison recommended:
There is no mention of vehicles other than those driven by Robert Murat.
There is no mention of the villa.
There is no mention of the gym.
Later on, Harrison accepts a direction of Amaral's boss that the villa should be included, and also vehicles owned or driven by people never arguidos in the investigation plus the Renault Scenic.
And, even then, still no mention of the gym.
How did these searches Harrison never said anything about, in places Madeleine never lived in or went near, come about?
Any suggestions?
I suggest posting facts.
There is nothing in the files which says Encarnacao suggested the extra searches.
There is evidence in the files that Harrison claimed to have recommended the extra searches.
All the facts are posted (by me!)
An aficionado of Shakespeare and Chaucer should certainly be able to work out the metaphorical allusion to what actually happened.
So you are saying, again, that there are 'hidden meanings' in Harrison's text that only you have managed to uncover? In other words, his writings contain veiled hints as to what he really means, but doesn't actually say?
Sorry, but no. Literary works are often written to offer different interpretations, but reports by policemen are not.
Not only that, you can offer no realistic reason why an expert of Harrison's standing would either allow his professional advice to be over-ruled or, if it was, he would hide that.
So you are saying, again, that there are 'hidden meanings' in Harrison's text that only you have managed to uncover? In other words, his writings contain veiled hints as to what he really means, but doesn't actually say?
Sorry, but no. Literary works are often written to offer different interpretations, but reports by policemen are not.
Not only that, you can offer no realistic reason why an expert of Harrison's standing would either allow his professional advice to be over-ruled or, if it was, he would hide that.
I'm sure Harrison did accept what was dictated to him by Amaral's boss about those searches, other than those Harrison, himself, recommended, should be carried out.
These included:
The rented villa of the McCanns
Vehicles besides those owned by Robert Murat and including the Renault Scenic, hired 3 weeks after Madeleine was abducted.
It did not include the gym.
How did the inspection at the gym come about?
The searches were recommended by Harrison and carried out in his presence and to his specifications. He said so in his final report.
The searches of all holiday accommodation of the McCanns and their friends, all vehicles owned or driven by Murat and surrounding areas of PdL were recommended by Harrison, yes.
The searches of the villa and vehicles other than those owned by Murat (including two driven by people not even arguidos in the process) were, apparently, the recommendations of Amaral's boss.
And heaven knows how the inspection at the gym came about.
The searches of all holiday accommodation of the McCanns and their friends, all vehicles owned or driven by Murat and surrounding areas of PdL were recommended by Harrison, yes.
The searches of the villa and vehicles other than those owned by Murat (including two driven by people not even arguidos in the process) were, apparently, the recommendations of Amaral's boss.
And heaven knows how the inspection at the gym came about.
You can't support the bolded text by cites, it's just your [unfounded] belief.
Why does it matter? The police are entitled to do whatever they like ( as long as they remain within the law)It seems the PJ police are entitled to do whatever they like, even if it is not within the law (eg: breaking judicial secrecy by leaking like a sieve)
I really cannot understand your obsession with these trivial issues.
I have supported the bolded text with cites countless times.
Particularly a scholar of Shakespeare and Chaucer should be able to understand my cites.
How do frayed knots come into any of this?
Afraid not. You've posted reams of text purporting to support your deductions, but not one saying that Encarnacao chose searches not recommended by Harrison.
I don't make allegations, I state facts with cites to support. Why should Sadie go to the trouble of reproducing what I have already produced (countless times) and will do so again.
Here is what Harrison recommended:
No mention of vehicles besides those owned or driven by Murat.
No mention of living-quarters besides the holiday apartments of the McCanns and their friends and the Murats' place.
Mention of places in and around PdL.
That's it.
Harrison's recommendations.
The places Madeleine either had been or (please God, not) might have been.
All the rest was slung in by Amaral's boss and had no ring of logic at all.
The question is why was Harrison's (entirely logical) schedule of proposed searches tampered with and extended, and by whom?
That was Harrison's first report.
In his final report, written after that one, he claimed to have recommended ALL the searches.
You have failed to adequately explain why he did that, because the cites you have used all require 'interpretation' and if your interpretation is wrong..............
No he didn't.
You claim he claimed.
Just as Amaral claimed Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead.
That never happened, either.
No he didn't.
You claim he claimed.
Just as Amaral claimed Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead.
That never happened, either.
Regardless of who recommended which inspection/search by Grime and his dogs, Harrison was tasked in all the inspections and wrote his Report based on them.
I suppose it matters not. It will be what the PJ and MPS think about all things doggy, their men and reports that will count.
Should it ever wind up in court I don't see ferryman being called to give expert testimony on the matter of the doggies.
Aside from retrospectively, to dismiss the exercise in the gym as a 'PJ one', where does Harrison make reference to the gym?
Harrison didn't write his post-inspection summary based on them at all.
What you seem to be unable to grasp is that things develop. At the time of writing his first report Harrison recommended searching in certain locations. The aim was to ''provide assurance as to the absence or presence of M McCann's concealed remains.''
Had no dog alerts occurred no extra searches would have been carried out.
After the dogs alerted in 5A the situation changed and in accordance with his terms of reference, so did Harrison's recommendations;
''Consider further opportunities or areas for search in order to locate M McCann as applicable to the latest intelligence and information provided.''
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Preceded by the vital words you conveniently omit: it recommended.
Not, I recommended .....
"It" refers to Harrison's report.
No, it doesn't.
Harrison wrote in his final report;
This document follows on from the author’s two previous search documents and provides a summary of the search activity undertaken by the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) in Praia da Luz, Portugal between 20-07-07 and 10-08-07 following the authors search review and submission of his decision support documents.
So it's his third written document. His first one was named “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” and his second one was named “NPIA OP TASK Search Doc Beach and Marine”.
He refers again to his first document;
The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:
What did?
Answer; “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document”.
Who wrote it?
Answer; Harrison wrote it.
No, it doesn't.
So what do you think "It" is?
The document.
The document.
Harrison's document.
No.
Harrison's recommendation of searches were those contained in his first report.
No.
Harrison's recommendation of searches were those contained in his first report.
No.
Harrison's recommendation of searches were those contained in his first report.
So who wrote this?
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P11/11_VOLUME_XIa_Page_2836.jpg)
Harrison's terms of reference.
Clearly Harrison didn't write his own terms of reference.
They were delivered to him and he tailored his search-strategy according to them.
Those are the terms of reference, incidentally, that make it plain the Madeleine enquiry was a "murder" enquiry.
Harrison concludes his third, and final, report by making plain he had no clue what happened to Madeleine.
What happened in the middle is the intriguing bit ....
Before moving on please confirm your acceptance of the fact that Harrison wrote three reports as below.
Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document on 23rd July
NPIA OP TASK Search Doc Beach and Marine on 31st July
OP TASK Madeleine McCann Search Activity 1 – 8 August 2007 on 22nd August
Harrison wrote three reports, all incorporating the terms of reference handed to him by Amaral's boss that he was to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered, and worked to them.
Harrison offered to consider other possibilities or scenarios (sic) on request.
There is no evidence he was requested to do so.
Harrison concluded his third, and final, report by making plain he had no clue what happened to Madeleine.
I finish with a challenge.
Even theoretically, what does anyone think might have arisen from the inspection at the gym that could benefit the enquiry?
And another question:
Of England and Portugal, who was the lead-investigator in the shelved enquiry?
Show me where he 'proves' that Encarnacao chose to carry out searches not recommended by Harrison then.
So I take it you concede that Harrison was handed a brief by Amaral's boss to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered, but could, personally, find no evidence to corroborate that conclusion, and ended his third, and final, report by admitting that he, Harrison, had no clue what might have happened to Madeleine?
What's the point in re-showing what's already been shown countless times.
If you don't believe the truth first time, odds are you're never going to believe it.
He wasn't searching for someone who may or may not have been dead. His remit was to consider just one possibility;
This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz.
Given that, all his investigations were undertaken with the aim of deciding and recommending where and how to search for her remains in one named zone. Nothing else.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Harrison offered to consider other possibilities or scenarios (sic) on request.
There is no evidence he was requested to do so.
Harrison wasn't asked to investigate whether or not there had been a murder. He was asked to advise on how and where to search for remains in Zone 1.
His opinion at the end of his final report isn't that he had no clue what had happened to Madeleine; probably because that wasn't a question he was asked.
His opinion was that if she had been murdered the remains were likely to have been disposed of in the ocean.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
Initial Action
On Friday 20.07.2007 a request was made by the Portuguese Judicial Police to the NPIA for search advisory assistance. As a result of this the following terms of reference were produced.
Terms of reference to provide assistance to the Portuguese Judicial Police.
He would not have offered to investigate other possibilities or scenarios (sic) on request if he had drawn up a strategy of investigating 'murder'.
Nor did Harrison write his own terms of reference.
Harrison did not write his own terms of reference.
He would not have offered to investigate other possibilities or scenarios (sic) on request if he had drawn up a strategy of investigating 'murder'.You're assuming other possibilities and scenarios means NOT MURDER rather than perhaps a study of murder and concealed further afield than the original remit distance wise
Nor did Harrison write his own terms of reference.
Harrison did not write his own terms of reference.
In considering the two scenarios that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body disposed of by a person on foot or in a vehicle, I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to forensic examination.
Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.
This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann. Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.
McCann's Apartment.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.
Murat's House and Garden.
The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.
A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.
Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.
This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.
An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.
Page 2228 :
Deploy geophysical instruments in the house and garden to detect any burial of a body or concealment in voids.
These specialists should be supported by physical search teams exploring and accessing all areas where concealment of a child's body could be made typically 0.5m.
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
This open area between the village urban limits and the Boavista golf club to the east and includes a plateau on which sits a trig point and mobile phone mast.
This area has been previously searched by officers and dogs walking through the area to check for Madeleine McCann's visible remains. However considering the new scenario of Homicide and concealed deposition this area affords many opportunities to dispose of a body. Within this area there are old empty properties, wells, thick vegetation, pockets of soft sand and natural fissures in the cliffs. Whilst there is no intelligence she is buried or concealed in this land it would be a natural place an offender may choose dose to the Village using the least effort principle. A proportionate response may therefore be considered to conduct a search of this area using a team of Victim Recovery Dogs (VRD) that are specifically trained to located concealed human remains.
Prior to undertaking this task it would be beneficial to consult with a Forensic Anthropologist with knowledge of this region of Portugal to give opinion as to the likely state of any remains to be found. Further research could also be conducted with regards to the natural scavenging predators in the area.
An inhibiting factor is that since the disappearance of the child an old empty house adjacent to the Trig Point on the Rocha Negra has been demolished and all rubble removed, If she was concealed within this property the search would be unlikely to detect her now.
Praia Da Luz Beach and Shoreline.
The beach and shoreline are bounded by high cliffs and shallow waters. The beach has fine granular sand and provides easy digging. However the beach is extensively used by tourists and locals and af?rds minimal areas of cover from view for concealment. It may be considered appropriate to use the VRD dog team supported by geophysical GPR to sweep the beach. This would be
Harrison later on goes on to explore the possibility of burial at sea and explicitly rules it out
Harrison was handed a brief by the PJ to explore that Madeleine had been murdered.
That's all.
In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed.
Mark Harrison MBE
National Search Adviser
Homicide, Missing Persons, Mass Fatality Disasters
OP TASK Madeleine McCann
Search Activity 1 – 8 August 2007
This document follows on from the author’s two previous search documents and provides a summary of the search activity undertaken by the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) in Praia da Luz, Portugal between 20-07-07 and 10-08-07 following the authors search review and submission of his decision support documents.
An EVRD dog received additional training on human cadavers which were buried on land and submerged underwater. This took place in America and facilitated by the FBI at the University of Tennessee.
During the searches two Police dogs were deployed and although it has been stated that no physical remains were located in the area these dogs did give indications in several areas. These areas have been subject to a separate forensic examination that is beyond the scope of this report and at the time of writing laboratory tests are being undertaken. The dogs’ handler has submitted a separate report regarding the performance of the dogs (see appendix 4). However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.
Harrison later on goes on to explore the possibility of burial at sea and explicitly rules it out/
Harrison was handed a brief by the PJ to explore that Madeleine had been murdered.
That's all.
9again)/And how would that be done in a practical way?
I notice you make no attempt to answer earlier questions. Is that because you contradicted yourself?
I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.
What do you mean by 'explore'? Harrison wasn't asked to explore, investigate, confirm or deny murder.
And how would that be done in a practical way?
1. Have access to a boat and throw body overboard?
What other methods?
Read the expert;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
The expert who stated clearly that no inferences could be drawn from the alerts
9again)/
I notice you make no attempt to answer earlier questions. Is that because you contradicted yourself?
I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.
What do you mean by 'explore'? Harrison wasn't asked to explore, investigate, confirm or deny murder.
Harrison ruled out burial and tentatively concluded that if Madeleine was dead, it was most likely her remains were jettisoned into the sea.
Report 22/08/2007
The dogs’ handler has submitted a separate report regarding the performance of the dogs (see appendix 4). However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
When the Home Secretary gave the go ahead for a scoping exercise to be carried out in Madeleine McCann's case it is my opinion that Mark Harrison would almost certainly have been asked for a briefing on his time in Praia da Luz.
I think it is significant that when advising that there was sufficient evidence to justify reopening Madeleine's case, Scotland Yard confirmed that Madeleine's parents and friends were not considered to be either suspects or persons of interest.
The investigation into Madeleine's case was as an abduction and it was hoped that Madeleine could still be alive.
It would be quite bizarre if Mark Harrison's first hand experience and advice arising from it had not been sought in the early stages. It would have been even more so if the information he imparted had been disregarded.
You have quoted from the report written after the events. Look what Harrison said before the dogs alerted in 5A;
Report 23/07/2007
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed.
Precisely.
Everything now is "after the event" of Mark Harrison's sojourn in Praia da Luz the purpose of which was to advise and assist the Policia Judiciaria in Madeleine McCann's case.
That time or his observations are not preserved in aspic.
As you yourself have pointed out on this thread ... one step leads to the next.
After the archiving of Madeleine's case a major step in the process was the scoping exercise undertaken by Scotland Yard to ascertain if there was sufficient evidence to allow Madeleine's case to be reopened.
The point I made was that Mark Harrison ... a renowned expert in the field ... who had been on the ground in Praia da Luz as part of the original investigation ... would undoubtedly have been asked for a briefing.
Professional to professional ... I think his report could have put the brake on the whole exercise or certainly coloured it.
As it was, when the reopening of Madeleine's case was announced the non-involvement of her parents and their friends in her disappearance was stressed.
In my opinion that would not have been the case had Mark Harrison's report to the new investigating team of officers indicated otherwise.
The scoping exercise was nothing to do with Scotland Yard;
Former Home Secretary Alan Johnson commissioned a scoping exercise by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (Ceop) centre to look at the feasibility of carrying out a review of the case.
This was completed in March 2010.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13378289
It can only be speculation what went into the report as it was never made public.
In conclusion there is no intelligence specific to this case or generic datasets
that support a scenario of beach burial. Additionally the digability study and
coastal dynamics of the Praia Da Luz beach further limit this as a viable
scenario.
Mark Harrison
There is the confirmation that Harrison ruled out burial on the beach.
It made perfect sense the extend the search to the McCann's villa following the alerts in 5A. They were looking for further evidence. The only person who thinks they may have been looking for a body is you, no-one else.That can't be right the people searching even on the first night were searching for a body as well as an alive Madeleine.
That can't be right the people searching even on the first night were searching for a body as well as an alive Madeleine.
It made perfect sense the extend the search to the McCann's villa following the alerts in 5A. They were looking for further evidence. The only person who thinks they may have been looking for a body is you, no-one else.
The only thing to emerge from the so-called 'search' of the villa was perfectly obscene extended video shots of boxes of anti-Parkinsonian medication taken by Kate's father, no doubt intended to reinforce the impression of some link between drugs and Madeleine's alleged 'demise'.
The 'inspection' of the villa was a disgrace, capped only by the following 'inspection' in the gym ....
Brietta
Your quotes don't address the thread topic at all, though do they? The question is whether Harrison recommended and took part in all the searches. The evidence says he did and Ferryman says he didn't.
I would think that the latter searches were decided upon after careful consideration of the initial results. Objectives at the outset of any live enquiry are seldom set in stone.
There was nothing, even theoretically, that might have come from inspections in places Madeleine never went near that could have advanced, or even assisted, the enquiry.
Is it not for the police to decide what is and what is not relevant to their inquiries?
There was nothing, even theoretically, that might have come from inspections in places Madeleine never went near that could have advanced, or even assisted, the enquiry.
Of course it is, to an extent.
They follow where they believe information that might advance an investigation might be found.
Sometimes they are right; (perhaps) more often they are wrong.
But always, they undertake investigations in the hope that their efforts will unearth something of worth.
There was nothing, even theoretically, that might have come from inspections in places Madeleine never went near that could have advanced, or even assisted, the enquiry.
According to some you are the forum 'expert', but the accredited expert, Mark Harrison MBE, National Search Adviser, NPIA, appears to have disagreed with you.
Why did Harrison (retrospectively) acknowledge Grime and his dogs only in those inspections Harrison recommended?
I have no idea why Harrison wrote his report in the way he did and neither do you. I could make wild guesses like you do but I prefer to stay with the facts. Your guesses will never be facts no matter how often you repeat them.
Everything I state is factual, including that Harrison originally, personally and directly, recommended only inspections in the places Madeleine either had been; or conceivably might have been.
Also, it is factual that retrospectively Harrison owned the input of Grime and his dogs only in those places Harrison (originally) recommended.
What are you actually trying to demonstrate with all this?
That Harrison's (original) recommendations were tinkered and with, altered, and extended.
By someone (not Harrison).
Why would you find that either surprising or sinister?
Ditto but who do you think altered it and why did they alter it ?
Just as an aside: are you aware of how a normal contract works? Don't just glibly say yes because from what you type it would appear you don't.
So the question is : why do you you see it all as being sinister ?
Even hypothetically, what might have come from the 'inspection' in the villa?A buried cadaver!
And the 'inspection' in the gym?
A buried cadaver!
The gym allowed the clothes to be examined in isolation. (too bad about all the prior cross contamination.)
Good post john is it too much to ask for ferrymans nonsence to be stopped, we AREALL bored by bis speculation libel etc etc ffs
A buried cadaver!I had sort of answered that before too.
That's what Harrison's report (distinct from Harrison himself!) says.
And what about the 'inspection' in the gym?
Even hypothetically, what might have come from the 'inspection' in the villa?
And the 'inspection' in the gym?
You have developed an opinion about the search of the villa. You value your opinion so highly that you have spent hours trying to 'prove' that Mark Harrison secretly agreed with you. You have failed, he didn't.That's not so good.
Even hypothetically, what might have come from the 'inspection' in the villa?
And the 'inspection' in the gym?
You have avoided the question.
Why do you see it all as something sinister ?
If you were Kate McCann and you found yourself accused of having handled your daughter's dead body wouldn't you regard it all as sinister?
Similarly with all the 'facts' recorded in the files ... people have always put their own interpretation on them.
Quote
The questioning of the holiday group merely corroborated what had already been established during the investigation, without any detail that could have been reputed as especially relevant being brought forward.
https://madeleinemccannthetruth.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/pj_report_english_translation.pdf
Seems perfectly clear to me ... but to many, "inconsistencies" appear to be the order of the day.
Harrison didn't mention the involvement of Grime and his dogs at certain search sites.
That's a fact.
That's because Harrison didn't recommend those searches.
That's not a fact. It's an opinion.
Harrison DID draw up a set of proposals, prefixed with personal-pro noun I, which exactly reflects Harrison's acknowledgement of the input of Grime and his dogs in his post-inspection summary.
Another fact.
I notice you didn't answer my point about facts and opinions.
You didn't make a point.
You made an erroneous statement.
It's clear you don't understand the difference between facts and opinions. Here they are again;
Harrison didn't mention the involvement of Grime and his dogs at certain search sites.
That's a fact.
That's because Harrison didn't recommend those searches.
That's not a fact. It's an opinion.
No it's not (an opinion)It would be a fact if you could ascertain the facts.
No it's not (an opinion)
More wishful thinking than opinion. Only Harrison knows what his true feelings were on the searches, no Report would ever reveal that imo.
Feelings?IYO In Your Opinion.
Harrison's thoughts and impressions are explicit in his words.
You have to read Harrison's words carefully, but when you do, his thoughts and impressions are clear.
IYO In Your Opinion.
Opinion?Would he not have to state that the report reflected his thoughts to be sure it was a fact otherwise it is your opinion only.
No.
Feelings?
Harrison's thoughts and impressions are explicit in his words.
You have to read Harrison's words carefully, but when you do, his thoughts and impressions are clear.
More wishful thinking than opinion. Only Harrison knows what his true feelings were on the searches, no Report would ever reveal that imo.
Harrison stated very clearly no inferences can be drawn from unconfirmed alerts
And Grime stated that no 'evidential reliability' could be placed upon them. That however does not answer the question which Ferryman asked at the beginning and that was who decided to extend the dog inspections. My own view is that it was a joint decision taken by the PJ and the English police involved in the inquiry.
G-Unit began the thread.
But that was (and remains!) my question.
However, my answer is different ....
Why do you care?
Elsewhere on this board I have posted the proof of how a certain dog-handler turned the Haut de la Garenne enquiry into a fiasco of a hunt for (non-existent!) 'evidence' of murder most foul.
I see not a shred of evidence that the trend began in Jersey; considerable evidence that it began before.
G-Unit began the thread.
But that was (and remains!) my question.
However, my answer is different ....
You correctly say it's your answer. That's the problem you have because you have no supporting evidence for your answer.
Not so much the evidence as the proof is explicit to all except the (metaphorical) blind!
Yeah well I get bored with reams of cut and paste and all that haraz so why not list it down as bullet points you know like two columns actions and proof such that we simpletons can assimilate?
On 31-07-07 the PJ conducted canine searches with a search warrant at apartments in Praia da Luz that had been previously occupied by the McCanns and their friends.
On 01-08-07 the PJ and GNR assisted by a canine, conducted searches on the eastern beach and wasteland in Praia da Luz.
On 02-08-07 the PJ conducted a search warrant at a villa in Praia da Luz currently occupied by the McCann family.
Later the same day PJ officers conducted a screening procedure involving items removed from the McCann’s villa.
On 03-08-07 PJ and GNR officers were given instruction based on translated extracts from NPIA doctrine on search management and procedures. This focused on search procedures relating to buildings and vehicles.
On 04-08-07 and 05-08-07 a search warrant was executed at the villa and gardens belonging to the PJ suspect Robert Murat. This search involved both PJ and GNR personnel supported by civil defence, geophysical equipment operators and a canine handler.
On 06-08-07 ten vehicles were searched associated to the enquiry.
On 07-08-07 the western beach and remaining wasteland areas were searched using canine and GNR personnel.
On 08-08-07 the drains around the apartment block where Madeleine McCann disappeared from were subject to a visual inspection by PJ officers.
Harrison's summary of all searches suffices:
The timeline of these searches was as follows:
Harrison acknowledges Grime and his dogs only in those inspections Harrison recommended
None others.
If you carefully read the 'official' record of the inspection in the gym, you will see it is a pile of crock, unless you believe they managed to lay out the clothes in lighting-fast time, following the apparent 'inspection'.
It seems obvious that PJ cribbed off the instructions Mark Harrison gave them after both inspections at villa and gym.
That Harrison waited until after those inspections to issue instructions, itself, says everything.
I think Martin Grime would have been as gob smacked as anyone when the videos in their edited versions ended up in the public domain.
I still don't know why the videos have no time or date stamp as Harrison said they would and no-one has come up with an explanation why that should be.
They should not have been. But Levy somehow managed to get his hands on them, and then edited them.
The whole thing was a disgrace.
Snip
It seems obvious that PJ cribbed off the instructions Mark Harrison gave them after both inspections at villa and gym.
That Harrison waited until after those inspections to issue instructions, itself, says everything.
That tells me that Harrison wasn't nigh too enthused by the methodology, not that he wasn't supportive of the incentive itself. This of course raises the interesting question as to why these instructions weren't issued BEFORE ANY SEARCHES TOOK PLACE?
That tells me that Harrison wasn't nigh too enthused by the methodology, not that he wasn't supportive of the incentive itself. This of course raises the interesting question as to why these instructions weren't issued BEFORE ANY SEARCHES TOOK PLACE?
Following the search effected at Rua das Flores, 27, during which certain items were seized, this present inspection was performed, in a place appropriated for its purpose, [the gym] attempting to identify particular pieces of clothing possibly indicated by the dogs, namely Eddy [that] indicates cadaver odours and Kila [that] indicates blood odours.
I hope Alice Purjorick is paying attention ....
To what in particular?
It also raises (another!) interesting question of why, in the files, the inspection in the gym gets its first mention just as it is about to happen: to re-inspect clothing already inspected once in the villa without result.
It irritates me that someone keeps making assertions based on nothing. There is absolutely no evidence that Harrison was uncomfortable with what occurred in Luz.
The thread has nothing to do with Amaral, didn't you notice?
It irritates you that I keep asserting facts you can't refute.
You'll have to live with that, I'm afraid ...
McCann's Apartment.
The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present further
opportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim
Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.
Murat's House and Garden.
The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.
A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.
Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.
This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.
An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.
Page 2228 :
Deploy geophysical instruments in the house and garden to detect any burial of a body or concealment in voids.
These specialists should be supported by physical search teams exploring and accessing all areas where concealment of a child's body could be made typically 0.5m.
Murat's Vehicles.
All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered and
examined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.
Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.
This open area between the village urban limits and the Boavista golf club to the east and includes a plateau on which sits a trig point and mobile phone mast.
This area has been previously searched by officers and dogs walking through the area to check for Madeleine McCann's visible remains. However considering the new scenario of Homicide and concealed deposition this area affords many opportunities to dispose of a body. Within this area there are old empty properties, wells, thick vegetation, pockets of soft sand and natural fissures in the cliffs. Whilst there is no intelligence she is buried or concealed in this land it would be a natural place an offender may choose dose to the Village using the least effort principle. A proportionate response may therefore be considered to conduct a search of this area using a team of Victim Recovery Dogs (VRD) that are specifically trained to located concealed human remains.
Prior to undertaking this task it would be beneficial to consult with a Forensic Anthropologist with knowledge of this region of Portugal to give opinion as to the likely state of any remains to be found. Further research could also be conducted with regards to the natural scavenging predators in the area.
An inhibiting factor is that since the disappearance of the child an old empty house adjacent to the Trig Point on the Rocha Negra has been demolished and all rubble removed, If she was concealed within this property the search would be unlikely to detect her now.
Praia Da Luz Beach and Shoreline.
The beach and shoreline are bounded by high cliffs and shallow waters. The beach has fine granular sand and provides easy digging. However the beach is extensively used by tourists and locals and af?rds minimal areas of cover from view for concealment. It may be considered appropriate to use the VRD dog team supported by geophysical GPR to sweep the beach.
I undertook a series of briefings and site visits. These were with GNR and PJ personnel who had been involved in the previous searches conducted the week following Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in Praia da Luz.
The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:
- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.
These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation.
On 31-07-07 the PJ conducted canine searches with a search warrant at apartments in Praia da Luz that had been previously occupied by the McCanns and their friends.
On 01-08-07 the PJ and GNR assisted by a canine, conducted searches on the eastern beach and wasteland in Praia da Luz.
On 02-08-07 the PJ conducted a search warrant at a villa in Praia da Luz currently occupied by the McCann family.
Later the same day PJ officers conducted a screening procedure involving items removed from the McCann’s villa.
On 03-08-07 PJ and GNR officers were given instruction based on translated extracts from NPIA doctrine on search management and procedures. This focused on search procedures relating to buildings and vehicles.
On 04-08-07 and 05-08-07 a search warrant was executed at the villa and gardens belonging to the PJ suspect Robert Murat. This search involved both PJ and GNR personnel supported by civil defence, geophysical equipment operators and a canine handler.
On 06-08-07 ten vehicles were searched associated to the enquiry.
On 07-08-07 the western beach and remaining wasteland areas were searched using canine and GNR personnel.
On 08-08-07 the drains around the apartment block where Madeleine McCann disappeared from were subject to a visual inspection by PJ officers.
Who would like to explain why Harrison waited until after both inspections at villa and gym to issue PJ personnel with translated literature on how to conduct inspections in buildings and vehicles?
Why is the 'official' record of the inspection in the gym screwed?
Would you care to explain why you insist that the way Harrison wrote his reports reveals hidden meanings which only you can decipher? I prefer to read what he wrote and accept what he actually said, not what you think he was too intimidated to say. What a silly idea!
This document follows on from the author’s two previous search documents and provides a summary of the search activity undertaken by the Policia Judiciaria (PJ) in Praia da Luz, Portugal between 20-07-07 and 10-08-07 following the authors search review and submission of his decision support documents.
Would you care to explain why you insist that the way Harrison wrote his reports reveals hidden meanings which only you can decipher? I prefer to read what he wrote and accept what he actually said, not what you think he was too intimidated to say. What a silly idea!
Would you care to explain why Harrison's original recommendations were interfered with and extended?
Who, in your opinion, interfered with them and extended them?
Why did Harrison wait until after both inspections to issue PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct inspections in buildings and vehicles?
Even theoretically, what might have come of benefit to the enquiry in examining clothing, used as clothing commonly is, fully 3 months after the crime?
Any idea?
Why use dogs to re-examine clothing (already examined once without result) in a different location?
Why examine clothing at all?
What, even theoretically, might have come from examining clothing?
Anything, apart from the canard of 'death-scent on Kate's clothes'?
Any answers?
To any of it?
It's quite clear that new searches were added after the dogs alerted in 5A. In his final report Harrison claimed to have recommended them. Why would he do that if he didn't? Please don't insult people's intelligence by suggesting that he was intimidated in some way.
I don't know why Harrison issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct inspections in buildings and vehicles at the point he did so, and neither do you. Unlike you, I haven't invented a reason.
I expect clothing was inspected because the dogs are capable of finding things on textiles even if they have been washed.
Your attempts to twist the events to suit your agenda are very obvious but the evidence to support your assertions isn't there, I'm afraid.
Quite clear how?
Both Harrison and Grime make plain no incriminating inference can be drawn from the reaction of either dog.
Harrison's recommendations leave no doubt that they are Harrison's.
The rest are prefixed by the impersonal pronoun it!
Explains everything.
Harrison had nothing to do with those recommendations prefixed with it!
It's quite clear that new searches were added after the dogs alerted in 5A. In his final report Harrison claimed to have recommended them. Why would he do that if he didn't? Please don't insult people's intelligence by suggesting that he was intimidated in some way.
I don't know why Harrison issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct inspections in buildings and vehicles at the point he did so, and neither do you. Unlike you, I haven't invented a reason.
I expect clothing was inspected because the dogs are capable of finding things on textiles even if they have been washed.
Your attempts to twist the events to suit your agenda are very obvious but the evidence to support your assertions isn't there, I'm afraid.