Is This True? ""partial footwear mark" found just outside Madeleine's bedroom"?

[Robittybob1]

What I meant was what if the person with the information was in England at the time, would they still be bound by the Portuguese laws?

I see the timing of the leak really significant, it being only a couple of weeks * after the McCanns fled back to the UK.

IMO the PJ wanted to show extra evidence which they must have believed showed they were on the "right track".

Would a bloodied shoe print found in the McCann's apartment make you think the PJ were on the right track?

I think there could still be other explanations for that if it was true.

* The article in the Standard was dated "Saturday 13 October 2007 22:37"  or just over 5  weeks after the McCann arguido interviews.

[G-Unit]

I see the timing of the leak really significant, it being only a couple of weeks * after the McCanns fled back to the UK.

IMO the PJ wanted to show extra evidence which they must have believed showed they were on the "right track".

Would a bloodied shoe print found in the McCann's apartment make you think the PJ were on the right track?

I think there could still be other explanations for that if it was true.

* The article in the Standard was dated "Saturday 13 October 2007 22:37"  or just over 5  weeks after the McCann arguido interviews.

There's no doubt that the media has consistently given out incorrect information about this case. The 'bloody footprint' story, like the 'woman in purple' story has come and gone. Your very first post linked to an article by the News of the World dated 11th May 2008 mentions it and the supposed print recovered from the boot of the car;

 The view of the wardrobe in Maddie’s room, right, shows the spot where controversial forensic “evidence” was found——a bloody footprint which was visible to the naked eye.

Inconclusive lab tests found there was a “moderate” chance the blood was Madeleine’s.

There was a report that this footprint matched another in the McCanns’ hire car—although there has never been any confirmation of this.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

So the story certainly wasn't new in October 2007.

[G-Unit]

The Mirror came up with a different unsubstantiated story in October 2007;

Is Madeleine McCann in reservoir?
Police will search an isolated reservoir where they believe Madeleine McCann's body could have been disposed of.

On the topic of the thread they said;

Friends of the McCanns blasted reports that police had found a "bloody footprint" in their holiday apartment which apparently matched another on the bumper of their hire car.

The partial print, believed to match Kate's shoe size, was apparently on floor tiles outside the bedroom and allegedly contained blood which tests showed was a "moderate" match to Madeleine's.

Reports said the same shoe was rested on the car bumper in a manner "consistent with someone lifting a body in or out of the boot".

But a source at the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham, which is helping Portuguese police, said they had not even tested the bumper of the car - which is in Portugal - "so they have not had anything to match with any other prints".
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/is-madeleine-mccann-in-reservoir-513599

[Robittybob1]

There's no doubt that the media has consistently given out incorrect information about this case. The 'bloody footprint' story, like the 'woman in purple' story has come and gone. Your very first post linked to an article by the News of the World dated 11th May 2008 mentions it and the supposed print recovered from the boot of the car;

 The view of the wardrobe in Maddie’s room, right, shows the spot where controversial forensic “evidence” was found——a bloody footprint which was visible to the naked eye.

Inconclusive lab tests found there was a “moderate” chance the blood was Madeleine’s.

There was a report that this footprint matched another in the McCanns’ hire car—although there has never been any confirmation of this.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

So the story certainly wasn't new in October 2007.

OK the story wasn't new to the PJ, who had been sitting on this information for operational purposes.  That is certain if the story is true.

So if the story is old, are you saying it wasn't a story being made up by the press?

[G-Unit]

OK the story wasn't new to the PJ, who had been sitting on this information for operational purposes.  That is certain if the story is true.

So if the story is old, are you saying it wasn't a story being made up by the press?

Your statement of opinion seems to be lacking an acknowledgement that it has no factual basis.

I've no idea where the story originated, but I do know that there's no evidence that any interesting footprints were found in 5A.

[Robittybob1]

The Mirror came up with a different unsubstantiated story in October 2007;

Is Madeleine McCann in reservoir?
Police will search an isolated reservoir where they believe Madeleine McCann's body could have been disposed of.

On the topic of the thread they said;

Friends of the McCanns blasted reports that police had found a "bloody footprint" in their holiday apartment which apparently matched another on the bumper of their hire car.

The partial print, believed to match Kate's shoe size, was apparently on floor tiles outside the bedroom and allegedly contained blood which tests showed was a "moderate" match to Madeleine's.

Reports said the same shoe was rested on the car bumper in a manner "consistent with someone lifting a body in or out of the boot".

But a source at the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham, which is helping Portuguese police, said they had not even tested the bumper of the car - which is in Portugal - "so they have not had anything to match with any other prints".
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/is-madeleine-mccann-in-reservoir-513599

Note in the later article (15th Oct 2007) the FSS doesn't deny doing the DNA testing, no, they're just not involved in the comparison of one shoe print with the other.

[Robittybob1]

Your statement of opinion seems to be lacking an acknowledgement that it has no factual basis.

I've no idea where the story originated, but I do know that there's no evidence that any interesting footprints were found in 5A.

That statement is conditional on the shoe print in the apartment being a true story.  I'm not saying it is true or not true, but I must admit you saying it was an old story made me think you are coming around to believing it is a true story.
I see a consistency to all the reports that only happen if it was a fact.  Who in 2007 says it isn't true?

"Friends of the McCanns blasted reports that police had found a "bloody footprint" in their holiday apartment which apparently matched another on the bumper of their hire car." 

See they are only denying that the shoe print in the apartment matched one on the bumper.  Who did the matching?  The FSS deny matching the two.

[Robittybob1]

There's no doubt that the media has consistently given out incorrect information about this case. The 'bloody footprint' story, like the 'woman in purple' story has come and gone. Your very first post linked to an article by the News of the World dated 11th May 2008 mentions it and the supposed print recovered from the boot of the car;

 The view of the wardrobe in Maddie’s room, right, shows the spot where controversial forensic “evidence” was found——a bloody footprint which was visible to the naked eye.

Inconclusive lab tests found there was a “moderate” chance the blood was Madeleine’s.

There was a report that this footprint matched another in the McCanns’ hire car—although there has never been any confirmation of this.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

So the story certainly wasn't new in October 2007.

G-unit: If it wasn't new in October 2007 when did it originate then? 

[jassi]

That statement is conditional on the shoe print in the apartment being a true story.  I'm not saying it is true or not true, but I must admit you saying it was an old story made me think you are coming around to believing it is a true story.
I see a consistency to all the reports that only happen if it was a fact.  Who in 2007 says it isn't true?

"Friends of the McCanns blasted reports that police had found a "bloody footprint" in their holiday apartment which apparently matched another on the bumper of their hire car." 

See they are only denying that the shoe print in the apartment matched one on the bumper.  Who did the matching? The FSS deny matching the two.

[/b]

I presume you mean FSS UK. Portugal had its own forensic service.

[Robittybob1]

[/b]

I presume you mean FSS UK. Portugal had its own forensic service.

As per the article quoted by G-unit:
"But a source at the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham, which is helping Portuguese police, said they had not even tested the bumper of the car - which is in Portugal - "so they have not had anything to match with any other prints"."

[Robittybob1]

G-unit: If it wasn't new in October 2007 when did it originate then?

G-unit I'd like an answer please.

[G-Unit]

As per the article quoted by G-unit:
"But a source at the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham, which is helping Portuguese police, said they ha in the opinion of most membersd not even tested the bumper of the car - which is in Portugal - "so they have not had anything to match with any other prints"."

There was no footprint recorded by the forensic people, Therefore this is is a false story in the opinion of most members.

[Robittybob1]

There's no doubt that the media has consistently given out incorrect information about this case. The 'bloody footprint' story, like the 'woman in purple' story has come and gone. Your very first post linked to an article by the News of the World dated 11th May 2008 mentions it and the supposed print recovered from the boot of the car;

 The view of the wardrobe in Maddie’s room, right, shows the spot where controversial forensic “evidence” was found——a bloody footprint which was visible to the naked eye.

Inconclusive lab tests found there was a “moderate” chance the blood was Madeleine’s.

There was a report that this footprint matched another in the McCanns’ hire car—although there has never been any confirmation of this.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

So the story certainly wasn't new in October 2007.

That News of the World article is months after the story of the bloody foot print first broke
"Maddie World Exclusive: First pictures and video in flat News of the World

 

 
How fiend could have kept out of sight
 
By Keith Gladdis & Dominic Herbert
Sunday, May 11, 2008"

Are the dates I see in the OP link.   

You have not shown me any evidence that it wasn't new in October 2007.

[Robittybob1]

There was no footprint recorded by the forensic people, Therefore this is is a false story in the opinion of most members.

Opinions are not what make something true or false.

[G-Unit]

That News of the World article is months after the story of the bloody foot print first broke
"Maddie World Exclusive: First pictures and video in flat News of the World

 

 
How fiend could have kept out of sight
 
By Keith Gladdis & Dominic Herbert
Sunday, May 11, 2008"

Are the dates I see in the OP link.   

You have not shown me any evidence that it wasn't new in October 2007.

Oh yes, sorry, I got my dates mixed up.