Was the video footage of the dog inspections 'doctored'?

[Eleanor]

Now was that toy forensically examined ?

Second there are reports, I heard them at the time, that Kate Mccann washed the toy.Now if true, and I will look that up later, why should she do that and why was it allowed to happen ?

As far as I can remember, Martin Grime advised forensic examination, but it wasn't done.

As for washing the toy, apparently it was dirty and covered in suntan oil and needed a wash.  I don't know when this happened but it was in Kate's care until the dog searches and again afterwards.  But there was no reason for taking it away from her.

[stephen25000]

Despite Grime's claim that he recommended it should be, no.

Why wasn't it ?

It could well have been a crucial piece of evidence.

[ferryman]

As far as I can remember, Martin Grime advised forensic examination, but it wasn't done.

As for washing the toy, apparently it was dirty and covered in suntan oil and needed a wash.  I don't know when this happened but it was in Kate's care until the dog searches and again afterwards.  But there was no reason for taking it away from her.

Somewhere in the files there is a list of stuff returned to the McCanns following the inspections.

Cuddle-cat is on that list.

[ferryman]

Why wasn't it ?

It could well have been a crucial piece of evidence.

It wasn't (forensically tested) because it wasn't (a crucial piece of evidence).

[Eleanor]

Why wasn't it ?

It could well have been a crucial piece of evidence.

Your guess is a good as mine.

[stephen25000]

It wasn't (forensically tested) because it wasn't (a crucial piece of evidence).

Well if it was supposed to be Madeline's favourite toy. then it is reasonable to assume it would carry 'traces' of hair, e.g. strands of hair.

Likewise, if the PJ suspected that she had died, and as children do tend to cling onto objects, it could be a reasonable supposition the toy would also contain 'organic residues'.

[Eleanor]

Well if it was supposed to be Madeline's favourite toy. then it is reasonable to assume it would carry 'traces' of hair, e.g. strands of hair.

Likewise, if the PJ suspected that she had died, and as children do tend to cling onto objects, it could be a reasonable supposition the toy would also contain 'organic residues'.

Do you see why some of us think that there was a bit of a cock up?

[Benice]

Why wasn't it ?

It could well have been a crucial piece of evidence.

Only the PJ know the answer to that Stephen.       IMO everything that was on Madeleine's bed, including CC should have been been bagged up and removed for forensic examination on day 1.     

[ferryman]

There might have been a point to forensically analysing the toy in the very earliest days of Madeleine's abduction.

But months down the line there was none.

Benice beat me to the punch ...

[sadie]

The key question is why, aside from the sequence remembered by so many of us, of Eddie literally and physically playing with the toy, Eddie (apparently, even on what we see today), took no interest in alerting to the toy until after it had put in the cupboard.

Even on what we still see, Eddie erred, either in "failing" to alert to a scent all the time wasn't hidden, or in alerting to a "scent" as soon as it was.

There's no getting away from it.

Cutting out the sequence so many of us remember of Eddie, literally, playing with the toy, slightly mitigates the extent of the scandal.  It doesn't make the scandal go away.

Whilst the edit, is itself, scandalous

Eddie did NOT alert to CCat in that cupborad, he alerted when his nose came close to the pile of  (?)folders on the counter top about 70 cm directly above where CCat lay ... These folders had a sheet of lose paper on top as well.  So what exactly carried the cadavar scent?

And whose papers/folders were they?

Who put them there?



Do we have a picture of Martin Grime placing Ccat in the cupboard?  Are they in situ then?  Do we have any other shots showing that cupboard before Ccat went in?  Were the folders and piece of paper in situ then?

Sorry but I am not feeling up to searching videos atm, so if any of you have reason to view it again, perhaps you could keep your eyes open and let us know.

Thanks in anticipation.

[Mr Gray]

Only the PJ know the answer to that Stephen.       IMO everything that was on Madeleine's bed, including CC should have been been bagged up and removed for forensic examination on day 1.   

this is just another example of the very poor bungled investigation the PJ carried out. No wonder theres no evidence of an abductor...they didn't even look. Then they have the gall to say they are searching for the truth

[sadie]

Now was that toy forensically examined ?

Second there are reports, I heard them at the time, that Kate Mccann washed the toy.Now if true, and I will look that up later, why should she do that and why was it allowed to happen ?

According to earlier posts and info dug out, washing does not totally remove cadavar odour.  So what are we worrying about?


Especially as Ccat never had any cadavar odour on it originally as proven by the several times that Eddie picked it up without alerting



Ccat is irrelevant

[sadie]

According to earlier posts and info dug out, washing does not totally remove cadavar odour.  So what are we worrying about?


Especially as Ccat never had any cadavar odour on it originally as proven by the several times that Eddie picked it up without alerting



Ccat is irrelevant

What we should be looking at is WHO did those folders + the sheet of paper belong to?

1)  The Mccanns
2)  Martin Grime
3)  The PJ officers
4)  Sylvia Baptista

Any other thoughts to add to the list?


'Twould be interesting to know who placed them there.

[stephen25000]

According to earlier posts and info dug out, washing does not totally remove cadavar odour.  So what are we worrying about?


Especially as Ccat never had any cadavar odour on it originally as proven by the several times that Eddie picked it up without alerting



Ccat is irrelevant

No Sadie.

You can't say that with absolute certainty, and unless I'm mistaken you are not a forensic scientist either.

As I said earlier dogs also play with objects as well, that is patently obvious to anyone who has a dog, and Eddie or Keela would have been no different.

Having some knowledge of Chemistry, I do know that some compounds can be adsorbed onto another surface(s) and/or within the material for extended periods of time. True they are many variables involved, but the failure of the toy to be tested, and, as Benice said the other material should have been bagged and tested as well, was poor practice  to say the least.

I've never said what the PJ did was perfect, but then what Police Service is.

A simple examination of newspapers/internet, will reveal many failures in UK police forces.

[Brietta]

Now was that toy forensically examined ?

Second there are reports, I heard them at the time, that Kate Mccann washed the toy.Now if true, and I will look that up later, why should she do that and why was it allowed to happen ?

Maybe she watched the footage of the dog with Cuddle Cat in his mouth.  Hygenic? ... most certainly not.  In like circumstances, I would probably have washed it too.