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

[xtina]

You need to brush up on your knowledge of due process (both in Portugal and England).

doesn't matter how you scrub it up .......crime is still unkown

[ferryman]

The identity of Madeleine's abductor is not in the public domain (possibly, or possibly not, known to the second joint enquiry).

[G-Unit]

The identity of Madeleine's abductor is not in the public domain (possibly, or possibly not, known to the second joint enquiry).

What abductor? Crime unknown. There is no joint inquiry by the way;

April 2014
It is also revealed that Portuguese authorities have rejected the Met's request (supported by the McCanns) for the formation of a Joint Investigation Team.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id483.html

(Year tweaked from 2004 to 2014.)

[xtina]

The identity of Madeleine's abductor is not in the public domain (possibly, or possibly not, known to the second joint enquiry).

The identity of Madeleine's abductor


there is no proof there is one .

[pegasus]

so there is no evidence of a cadaver being in 5a...good to get that clear....hopefully posters will accept this

Agreed Davel, and anyone here can do the simple maths - start with the time last seen of about 21:05 then add the CSST 85mins minimum that makes 22:30 earliest which truly would be going back to square one wouldn't it?

[jassi]

Of course if 21.05 is not correct, then its a whole different ballgame.

[xtina]

Of course if 21.05 is not correct, then its a whole different ballgame.

yep ...right again .....who's for tennis 

[pegasus]

Of course if 21.05 is not correct, then its a whole different ballgame.

On the contrary, if 21:05 is correct, then it's a whole different ballgame.
I checked my Mr Maths book and it says he never fibs.

[pegasus]

1. Sensor position immediately before bark
2. Same shelf early 4th May

[Brietta]

1. Sensor position immediately before bark
2. Same shelf early hours 4th May

I don't think it works like that for crime scene photographs.  No one should have to enlarge areas; that is the job of the photographer who should take shots of objects from different angles and different distances;  a descriptive list of what has been photographed should also be attached.

These aren't fuzzy holiday snaps and to be able to be presented as evidence a good camera with the best lens possible should have been used as I am sure was done ... as well as some indication of scale.

I strongly suspect there are more crime scene photographs which for one reason or another we have not seen. 
The evidence that the photographer knew what was required is in the various shots of the children's bedroom ... and if proper procedure was carried out in this instance why wouldn't it have been done for the other images in the shoot?

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_PHOTO_REPORT.htm

[Alice Purjorick]

yep ...right again .....who's for tennis 

Well forgetting the hooha about Mr Hall's theory going on next door, the cops maintain the last independent sighting was 17:30 on May 3rd 2007

[pegasus]

I don't think it works like that for crime scene photographs.  No one should have to enlarge areas; that is the job of the photographer who should take shots of objects from different angles and different distances;  a descriptive list of what has been photographed should also be attached.

These aren't fuzzy holiday snaps and to be able to be presented as evidence a good camera with the best lens possible should have been used as I am sure was done ... as well as some indication of scale.

I strongly suspect there are more crime scene photographs which for one reason or another we have not seen. 
The evidence that the photographer knew what was required is in the various shots of the children's bedroom ... and if proper procedure was carried out in this instance why wouldn't it have been done for the other images in the shoot?
(snip)

On 4th May quality photos were taken of the north bedroom (because that is where the child was and the open window and shutter were) and of the route from there to balcony door. It was assumed it was wandering or abduction.

No importance at all was placed on the south bedroom on 4th May - absolutely no forensics were done in there - minimal photos were taken in there - and I doubt any police even searched that pile of clothes nor the case above - because on 4th May no scenario was envisaged which involved the south bedroom - that intelligence came only on 1st Aug.

[mercury]

Agreed Davel, and anyone here can do the simple maths - start with the time last seen of about 21:05 then add the CSST 85mins minimum that makes 22:30 earliest which truly would be going back to square one wouldn't it?

Youre assumng she was seen alive there...included in the telling of the story is that that is the only check of all the dozens made all week that GM actually looked in to the bedroom because the door was a bit more open...the last check before abduction was the only visual check..bad coincidence? And befor some smartarse wonders, no I dont mean he killed her!!

[pegasus]

Youre assumng she was seen alive there...included in the telling of the story is that that is the only check of all the dozens made all week that GM actually looked in to the bedroom because the door was a bit more open...the last check before abduction was the only visual check..bad coincidence? And befor some smartarse wonders, no I dont mean he killed her!!

Just to make it clear Merc, Mr Amaral's theory states that the child was alive and well at the 21:05 check. His film shows the actress representing the child walk out of the north bedroom into another room just after the 21:05 check. So it doesn't really matter whether the 21:05 check was visual, or just non-visual popping into the lounge and bathroom.

[mercury]

Just to make it clear Merc, Mr Amaral's theory states that the child was alive and well at the 21:05 check. His film shows the actress representing the child walk out of the north bedroom into another room just after the 21:05 check. So it doesn't really matter whether the 21:05 check was visual, or just non-visual popping into the lounge and bathroom.

But we are not talking about amarals theory here