Madeleine McCann

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Jane Tanner - Record Of Tape Recorded Interview I

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

Yes I know of this interview - did you not?
Still not replying to me? :rolleyes:

Btw the above Rogatory interview was recorded in April 2008 when Jane once again inexplicably changed her opinion as to whom she saw carrying a child on the night in question.

Background: 6th May 2007. Where a British reporter contacts the UK police and informs them of her suspicions regarding Robert Murat. This is then relayed to the Portuguese Police. The British Police under the instruction of Bob Small of the Leicester Police set up a surveillance operation with Jane Tanner to verify whether the abductor was Murat or otherwise (e 13th May 2007) in PdL. This sets in train a series of events which lead to Robert Murat being declared an 'Arguido'.

The truth of the lie

Chapter 7
SUSPICIOUS BEHAVIOUR AND CONTRADICTIONS

JANE TANNER FORMALLY RECOGNISES ROBERT MURAT

Before the search, we want to assure ourselves that Jane Tanner recognises him as the
individual she saw on the night of the disappearance.

She is sitting inside an unmarked car, whose tinted windows allow her to see out without being spotted. The vehicle is parked at the exact spot where she was on the night of May 3rd.

Robert Murat, anonymous amongst plain clothes police officers, goes up the road in the same way as the alleged abductor. Jane Tanner is adamant: it certainly is Robert Murat that she saw that night. She definitely recognises his way of walking

On the 14th May 2007 Robert Murat is made an arguido.....

And then fast forward to April 2008 where Jane once again bizarrely changes her mind....

Jane Tanner Rogatory (UK Police interview) April 2008

Erm well I think it’s when I’d done the, well I did the surveillance and then the next day after that, I think it came on Sky News about whether they were searching, what the MURAT’s house, so that’s Rachel sort of came running down at that point and sort of said, have you seen this blah, blah and at this point, nobody knew that I’d done the surveillance cos the Portuguese Police were very adamant that I shouldn’t tell anybody and I didn’t tell anybody for days actually, I didn’t even tell them then that it was actually, that I’d done it, I mean it was a couple of days afterwards. 

So Rachel came down and sort of said, oh I saw him blah, blah, blah and then I think Russell, I can’t remember who else but then somebody else said oh they, they saw him and etc., so at that point it was, I rang Bob SMALL cos I’d got, I’d got his number from the day before for them and you know, they sort of, you know to say, oh is this, is this relevant *and also I wanted to tell him that I’d seen him on the way to the doing the surveillance as well yeah just for that, so I think it’s just to make the point really that I think at that point, they didn’t know that Robert MURAT said he wasn’t there on the night”.

4078    “Right”.

Reply    “You know, or said yeah, had said that he wasn’t there on the night, so you know was immediately, I think it was immediately, I’m not trying to push anything onto Robert MURAT’s door, cos as I say I don’t think it was him that I saw”.

4078    “No”.
 
Reply    “But I just thought it was”.

...

Note:
For clarification purposes. JT could not identify Murat before the day of the surveillance operation as she had not met Murat in person previous to this and was therefore not mentioned by name in her primary police interviews. The surveillance operation is compromised* however when Jane and her husband bump into Murat before the actual operation. The surveillance goes ahead anyway....

Now perhaps you would be good enough to detail the exact location in the PJ files of that piece of misogynistic commentary you quoted about the Gaspar statement in your previous post. Because it is certainly not contained at the link in those files which you included... 'woman Scorned' etc etc indeed :rolleyes:

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

The police will always take new evidence into consideration and if that points them a different direction then that’s where they will go. The police will focus their resources on the most probable scenario which at this stage is an abduction because at this stage they can effectively rule out the parents’ involvement by disproving the DNA, the dog “evidence”, the e-fit for the tanner sighting which was corroborated allows them to rule out other suspects. It’s a process of elimination and the gathering of information and evidence at this stage point points to an abduction.

The Maddie Podcast DNA episode revolves around the advances in DNA testing since the FSS labs did the initial testing. Supposedly Cybergenics in America and one other facility in New Zealand now can solve the case using the existing DNA evidence. They will be able to say with clarity the boot sample. Whos DNA is and isn't present. If this testing isn't completed and make public. You will know it's a police cover up.

v638sg7k1a92bx

OwlsZat wrote: »

The Maddie Podcast DNA episode revolves around the advances in DNA testing since the FSS labs did the initial testing. Supposedly Cybergenics in America and one other facility in New Zealand now can solve the case using the existing DNA evidence. They will be able to say with clarity the boot sample. Whos DNA is and isn't present. If this testing isn't completed and make public. You will know it's a police cover up.

We already know who's DNA is present and I know my DNA isn't present so why don't you give us a walkthrough of that scenario in your head and how that would play out. This will be interesting. Let's walk through that, why would there be a police cover up?

micks_address

chicorytip wrote: »

What sort of priest would make such a statement, in any event? Like many other claims made by those associated with this case you would have to doubt it's authenticity.

Is this the same priest in the netflix doc? He seems happy out with them

yourdeadwright

Accident happened, parents hid body

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Gets tiresome having to through each of these one by one and no matter what conclusive evidence is put in front of you, it’s just spun into another conspiracy but here goes


But you and others are ruling out the possibility of an abduction on the basis of no evidence but cite other less plausible theories will little and in some cases no evidence. So that truism doesn’t work in all cases because I am not ruling out the abduction theory, you are.

It’s not my opinion, it’s a fact! The scientific tests on the DNA and the cadaver dog evidence do not implicate the McCanns.
The DNA sample that was taken from the car three weeks after the disappearance matched five different people. Some of that DNA matched Madeline, however half of Madeline’s DNA is made up of her mother and the other half is made up of her father not to mention her twin brother and sister were in that car. Therefore, the DNA “evidence” proves absolutely nothing.
Leaving those facts aside for a second, and for arguments sake you believe that the DNA evidence is credible (which it isn’t) that means you would have to believe that the Mccanns moved their dead child’s body in that rental car 3 weeks after her disappearance while the world’s media and police were watching them. Not only that, you would also have to believe that they hid her body for three weeks in a fridge without being discovered. This is a totally and utterly implausible suggestion.


You’re missing the point. It doesn’t matter that Smith’s statement was taken by the police, who else would you expect to take the statement? It’s the fact that he had been predisposed to Gerry McCann via the constant media coverage for weeks before he made identified the man he allegedly saw as being Gerry McCann. It can also be the case that the police found Smith to be telling the truth but it is also often the case that that people believe that they are telling the truth and they believe what they have seen to be real. False memory is a real thing and police and investigators are aware of this as it happens so often in police investigations because witnesses want to inject themselves into the investigation of feel that they are helping the police, the attention that comes with it. False memory happens to people every day, did it ever happened to you where you could have swore you did, saw or said something only to find out that you recalled it incorrectly? Or you could have been certain that you were told something by person A only and find out later that you were told by person B. That’s why people write things down, email reminders, why we keep diaries, because our memories are not as good as we think they are.
There is not one person reading this thread who can honestly say that this has never happened to them, not one.


In the Tanner sighting, a witness came forward who confirmed that he was carrying his child home from the night crèche that night which gives the Tanner sighing more credibility than the Smith sighting because the witness can corroborate the approximate time, the location and he bore a similar physical and clothing resemblance to the e-fit that was sketched by the police before the witness came forward.

As for the “independence” of Jane Tanner, we now start going back down the rabbit hole of “pact of silence” between the Tapas 7. At the beginning of an investigation you would have to ask the question why would this person lie, and for you to believe that conspiracy you would also have to believe that the McCanns accidentally or intentionally killed their daughter, that Gerry McCann hid or disposed of the body and made it back in time for dinner in approx. 2.5 hours (Madeline was last seen approx. 6pm and Gerry was at the restaurant at approx. 8.30pm. At some point during dinner the McCanns would have told their seven friends what just happened and for everyone to please keep it a secret, they would then have to stage this manic scene when the alarm was raised for Madeline’s disappearance and in the twelve years since not one of them has come forward. As any police investigator will tell you, not only is it difficult for two people to maintain a cover story, especially in a murder or disappearance, but for seven people to maintain a cover story for 12 years and two police investigations would be nothing short of a miracle.
Before you go down the route of “oh look their stories didn’t match, they lied, they changed their stories” this is normal and to be expected in this type of scenario. It would be unusual if all their statements matched. Furthermore, the changes in their statements were not cases we see in other investigations where people give false alibis or say they were in one place when they were in another, or got the day and time wrong. The changes in the statement by the Tapas 7 were differences of 15/20 minutes, where they realised they went in back door instead of a front door or other minor differences where they thought this information would be used to help the police investigation.


The police will always take new evidence into consideration and if that points them a different direction then that’s where they will go. The police will focus their resources on the most probable scenario which at this stage is an abduction because at this stage they can effectively rule out the parents’ involvement by disproving the DNA, the dog “evidence”, the e-fit for the tanner sighting which was corroborated allows them to rule out other suspects. It’s a process of elimination and the gathering of information and evidence at this stage point points to an abduction.


It blows my mind why people find this so difficult to get their heads around but I suppose that is to be expected when posters come on and make statements like “I trust dogs over people any day”

The fact of the matter is you like everyone else Police included have NO IDEA what happened that night,

It could have been the parents
it could have been a gang
it could have been a lone wolf,

No one has the foggiest

gozunda

Something Else

OwlsZat wrote: »

Smith said 60-80% reliable. That's indicative of not being sure. 50 - 50 being honest.

It was more relating to this reference

Irish officers (Gardai) found him credible. A local garda who interviewed him on behalf of the Portuguese authorities described him as a genuine, decent man who did not want to court the press or seek publicity.

https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2018/02/maddie-did-the-bbc-bend-the-truth/

I think there was something similar said by a British police officer. I'll check to see if I can find it.

gozunda

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

We already know who's DNA is present and I know my DNA isn't present so why don't you give us a walkthrough of that scenario in your head and how that would play out. This will be interesting. Let's walk through that, why would there be a police cover up?

No 'we' dont. The results of the tests undertaken were ruled to be inconclusive.

https://meaww.com/madeleine-mc-cann-parents-dna-rental-car-kate-testing-portugal-scientist-technology

As for a 'cover up'? - who knows. I'd say they are very wary of losing face considering that it was the UK police who insisted that the forensic material recovered was tested in the UK by a firm linked to the UK police. But that's just me guessing tbh.

Imo I can think of no reason why that the data etc shouldnt be released for retesting.

v638sg7k1a92bx

gozunda wrote: »

No 'we' dont. The the data was deemed to be "too complex for meaningful interpretation" and therefore inconclusive.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/new-dna-analysis-could-help-solve-madeleine-mccann-mystery-expert-says-20190329-p518zx.html

As for a 'cover up'? - who knows. I'd say they are very wary of losing face considering that it was the UK police who insisted that the forensic material recovered was tested in the UK by a firm linked to the UK police. But that's just me guessing tbh.

Imo I can think of no reason why that the data etc shouldnt be released for retesting.

The DNA matched 5 people some of which matched Madeline. This is a know fact. Deal with it.

But it also begs the question that if the DNA was too complex to begin with then why was it used by the police against the McCann's. Amaral has some questions to answers.

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

The DNA matched 5 people some of which matched Madeline. This is a know fact. Deal with it.

But it also begs the question that if the DNA was too complex to begin with then why was it used by the police against the McCann's. Amaral has some questions to answers.

Amaral didn't use it, he completely lied about the result and used the lie.

Interesting tidbit - Joanna Cipriano's body was never found. A close relative's bank account had a deposit of €50,000 at about the same time. When the question of Lenore Cipriano's appeal came up, some family members apparently said they didn't want her back. Hmmmm.....

gozunda

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

The DNA matched 5 people some of which matched Madeline. This is a know fact. Deal with it. But it also begs the question that if the DNA was too complex to begin with then why was it used by the police against the McCann's. Amaral has some questions to answers.

That the data was deemed to be "too complex for meaningful interpretation" and therefore inconclusive is the conclusion of the scientists who undertook the analysis. This is a known fact. Deal with it.

The shenanigans which went on between the UK and Portuguese relating to the results presented by FFS has already been discussed here many times. Look it up if you are ignorant of these facts.

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

gozunda wrote: »

No 'we' dont. The the data was deemed to be "too complex for meaningful interpretation" and therefore inconclusive.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/new-dna-analysis-could-help-solve-madeleine-mccann-mystery-expert-says-20190329-p518zx.html

As for a 'cover up'? - who knows. I'd say they are very wary of losing face considering that it was the UK police who insisted that the forensic material recovered was tested in the UK by a firm linked to the UK police. But that's just me guessing tbh.

Imo I can think of no reason why that the data etc shouldnt be released for retesting.

Listen to the podcast. Can't believe you haven't with the amount of posts you've made here. Too complex. What do you believe that to even mean?

It was the UK police who told the PJ it was a search for a body and not Madeline aparently. Came up in court with the deflamation suit against Amaral.

The McCanns phone call erasing should be followed up forensically. As should the location data.

gozunda

Something Else

OwlsZat wrote: »

Listen to the podcast. Can't believe you haven't with the amount of posts you've made here. Too complex. What do you believe that to even mean?

It was the UK police who told the PJ it was a search for a body and not Madeline aparently. Came up in court with the deflamation suit against Amaral.

The McCanns phone call erasing should be followed up forensically. As should the location data.

I have. That quote is from the original forensic report btw. Take a read if you haven't already.
I dont disagree with what you say there btw. You're not doing too bad yourself tbh.

MonkieSocks

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

The Met Police already have access to the same type of software used to analyse complex mixed results.


LiRa is EUROFINS FORENSIC SERVICES’s newly validated mixture interpretation software that uses a discrete interpretation model to quantitatively evaluate DNA evidence. LiRa has been developed in-house and is designed to perform likelihood calculations on complex DNA profiles from up to 3 people.. This software has already demonstrated its capability by allowing a statistical weight of evidence to be calculated in cases where this was previously not possible.
Sep 25, 2018

https://www.policeprofessional.com/n...nvestigations/


____________________________________________________

In order to carry out the determined by the 4.a Brigada of Departamento of Investiga?o Criminal of Policia Judici?ia, concerning the process number 201/07.OGALGS, between 15:00h of 4th August, 2007, and 06:30h of 5th August, 2007, were recovered the following evidences in the living room of the apartment 5A, Ocean Club Villas, Praia da Luz, Lagos, Portugal.


The swab mentioned 3a was recovered from the apartment of 5a where the McCann family were staying,

3A - Stain on the floor recovered with a Dry swab;

It could from of anyone who had stayed in that apartment

v638sg7k1a92bx

gozunda wrote: »

That the data was deemed to be "too complex for meaningful interpretation" was the conclusion of the scientists who undertook the analysis. This is a known fact. Deal with it.

The results found that there were matches to 5 people, some of which matched Madeline McCann. 0% of her DNA is made up of her mother and 50% is made up of her father so it is perfectable acceptable that this DNA would be in the car. That is an objectionable fact which you chose to accept that fact or decide that the truth no longer matters and continue to consider the possibility that the McCanns kept their dead child's body in a fridge, hired a rental car and disposed of body three weeks after the disappearance while they world's media and the Portugues police were watching them.

gozunda wrote: »

The shenanigans which went on between the UK and Portuguese relating to the FFS has already been discussed here many times. Look it up if you are ignorant of these facts.

Wrong again. Shenanigans are not facts. I'll rely on the scientific evidence and you can rely on hearsay.

gozunda wrote: »

Imo the biggest mistake was allowing the British authorities to take over the DNA analysis through a company which has not only now been wound up but whose methods have been subject to serious criticism even outside the mccann case.

As to the usual criticism of Amaral, the Portuguese etc - the facts are that FFS didn't retract their preliminary findings on the publishing of the second report even though these contained significant differences

Unfortunate that you don't apply the same level of scepticism to Amaral who was made a formal suspect in a very similar case of a child abduction/disappearance, the day after Madeline McCann went missing where he came up with the same theory that the parents were involved the disappearance, with dodgy DNA evidence, where the body was allegedly kept in a fridge!!! Any of this sound familiar? You should apply the same level of scepticism to those facts that you do to verified forensic DNA evidence.

gozunda

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

The results found that there were matches to 5 people, some of which matched Madeline McCann. 0% of her DNA is made up of her mother and 50% is made up of her father so it is perfectable acceptable that this DNA would be in the car. That is an objectionable fact which you chose to accept that fact or decide that the truth no longer matters and continue to consider the possibility that the McCanns kept their dead child's body in a fridge, hired a rental car and disposed of body three weeks after the disappearance while they world's media and the Portugues police were watching them. Wrong again. Shenanigans are not facts. I'll rely on the scientific evidence and you can rely on hearsay. Unfortunate that you don't apply the same level of scepticism to Amaral who was made a formal suspect in a very similar case of a child abduction / disappearance, the day after Madeline McCann went missing where he came up with the same theory that the parents were involved the disappearance, with dodgy DNA evidence, where the body was allegedly kept in a fridge!!! Any of this sound familiar? You should apply the same level of scepticism to those facts that you do to verified forensic DNA evidence.

Unless you are a geneticist and qualified to interpret the results of that report - I would suggest you leave the expert opinion to the experts - which btw your interpretation is clearly not. Please put down the ususl tabloid reports on this case.

I have quoted from the actual report as published by FFS. Your imaginings are amusing but unfortunately bear no resemblance to any 'facts' no matter how much you may wish that to be so.

As stated FFS were flagged as being criticised for the method employed in a range of high profile casesaround the time of the Madeleine investigation. They have now been shut down - all that is fact.

Btw I do not postulate anything about the McCanns. There are many possibilities - see the poll for details - the fate of the child remains unknown. That is what is being discussed. But please continue to use the hyperbole.

Btw I am sceptical of all the players in this case. Unfortunately the only ones I see most often and constantly promoted is the usual - [/i]'it was everyone else's fault- nothing to see here bull****e'[/i]. Hence the scrutiny and scepticism of stupid blanket statements . Dont like that? Tough.

v638sg7k1a92bx

gozunda wrote: »

Unless you are a geneticist and qualified to interpret the results of that report - I would suggest you leave the expert opinion to the experts - which btw your interpretation is clearly not. Please put down the ususl tabloid reports on this case.

I have quoted from the actual report as published by FFS. Your imaginings are amusing but unfortunately bear no resemblance to any 'facts' no matter how much you may wish that to be so.

The only tabloid reports being cited are the edited FFS results that were leaked to the media which you keep referring to. The FFS haven't retracted their report because there was no need to, their original report was massively qualified but the PJ selectively chose which parts of the report to publish.

Fact of the matter is the the FFS report proves nothing. Absolutely nothing. So why would you keep invoking this document as evidence. Nothing!

gozunda wrote: »

As stated FFS were flagged as being criticised for the method employed in a range of high profile casesaround the time of the Madeleine investigation. They have now been shut down - all that is fact.

This is just hearsay and irrelevant. Next!

gozunda wrote: »

Btw I do not postulate anything about the McCanns. There are many possibilities which are under discussion- see the poll for details - the fate of the child remains unknown. That is what is being discussed - not whether you side with the McCanns or otherwise. But please continue to use the hyperbole and attempt to shut down discussion..

More wishy washy talk here, nothing of substance. Next!

gozunda wrote: »

Btw I am sceptical of all the players in this case. Unfortunately the only ones I see most often and constantly promoted are the usual - 'it was everyone else's fault- nothing to see here bull****e'. Hence the scrutiny and scepticism of stupid blanket statements . Dont like that? Tough.

Nothing of substance here again.

Creol1

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Unfortunate that you don't apply the same level of scepticism to Amaral who was made a formal suspect in a very similar case of a child abduction/disappearance, the day after Madeline McCann went missing where he came up with the same theory that the parents were involved the disappearance, with dodgy DNA evidence, where the body was allegedly kept in a fridge!!! Any of this sound familiar?

Amaral was never made a formal suspect in a child abduction. If he had been, I am sure the McCanns would have wasted no time in bringing it to the public's attention in their battles with him.

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Have the Met said they aren't investigating the McCanns or Tanner. Surely they haven't ruled anyone in or out. To explain to Tickers why I believe the parents are implicated.

1. All the lies
They might lie because they were being negligent fair enough but then why is Jane Tanner lying? The McCanns end up lying so much Gerry even ends up talking about the window saying "and I'm not lying about that". I believe Tanner is lying on their behalf because there is shared culpability. Kate McCann and Fiona Payne are both qualified anaesthetists I believe they accidentally killed Madeline. Tanner lies about text messages, lies about the abductor witness statement, lies in the reconstruction, and the McCanns the very same. They lie about checking on the kids, line of sight, the window, the bed... the list of their lies literally goes on forever. The problem is it's much harder to lie then tell the truth especially when multiple people are telling the lie and your having to do it over and over.

2. The phones calls/messages
Tanner has a message she sent someone a year previous just before the discovery. She sent the same number another message 30 minutes previous. She doesn't have that. Both Kate and Gerry's phone logs had been altered selected calls are deleted out of the logs but the record still show they took place. I believe these calls would tell the full story. They were likely to other medical professionals desperately seeking what they could do to resuscitate/hide Madeline.

3. The phones triangulation
Phone record signals show the McCanns visited a new area 30 minutes from PDL just before the Cadevar and Blood dog were due. Twice ie,, once to scope it out, once to move the body

4. The dogs
The dogs might be unreliable but they both signaled in the rental car boot. They are validating each other signals. The dog hander made the call for the Met to reclassify the case to that of locating a corpse. That's a big call and you'd have to trust his experience.

5. The boot
A witness who lived beside the McCann villa which they stayed in after the "abduction" gave a statement saying the rental car's boot was left open every night across July. I believe the McCanns were doing this to try to let all odors escape. Both the sun and wind are known as two great ways to let these odors escape.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4Ea8TLvuWE&t=1s

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Do you know that network providers keep comprehensive records for years - effectively forever when any authority asks for details?

There can be no mystery about phone calls other than 'supposedly' the content. The Met and PJ would know exactly who rang whom, and when.

The PJ have actually logged and followed up on, just about every single mobile phone call in PDL at around the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

No blood found in the car, so BS.

Boom_Bap

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

The only tabloid reports being cited are the edited FFS results that were leaked to the media which you keep referring to. The FFS haven't retracted their report because there was no need to, their original report was massively qualified but the PJ selectively chose which parts of the report to publish.

Fact of the matter is the the FFS report proves nothing. Absolutely nothing. So why would you keep invoking this document as evidence. Nothing!




This is just hearsay and irrelevant. Next!



More wishy washy talk here, nothing of substance. Next!



Nothing of substance here again.

I think I mentioned before that this was a discussion forum, not a dismissal forum.

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

cnocbui wrote: »

Do you know that network providers keep comprehensive records for years - effectively forever when any authority asks for details?

There can be no mystery about phone calls other than 'supposedly' the content. The Met and PJ would know exactly who rang whom, and when.

The PJ have actually logged and followed up on, just about every single mobile phone call in PDL at around the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

No blood found in the car, so BS.

Less do ya knows, and BS calling ya mardy twat. I've not the slightest understanding why people get emotional defending a viewpoint of a legal case. You'd swear you were implicated yourself. Grow up a bit.

Read the phone records or some analysis of them yourself. Obviously your not concerned by the fact Kate concealed lots of calls/messages or on the night their daughter "disappeared" didn't even bother searching.

A full analysis is also not possible because some of the phone's were pay-as-you-go.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PHONE_TEXTS.htm
http://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/t290-telephone-records-for-the-week-28th-april-to-4th-may-2007

The boot sample is critical. It might still solve the cold case.

https://www.9news.com.au/world/madeleine-mccann-dna-perlin-operation-grange-maddie-podcast/0e861bfc-e835-408d-9fbd-e795935aa553

MonkieSocks

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Looks like that TrueAllele/Perlin test from Cybergenetics had already been provided to the FSS.

Mark W. Perlin, Ph.D., MD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, PA

The British Forensic Science Service (FSS) has selected TrueAllele™ automated scoring for scaling up the UK National DNA Database.

Perlin also used samples from the FSS for some of the images here

https://www.promega.co.uk/~/media/files/resources/conference%20proceedings/ishi%2011/oral%20presentations/perlin.pdf

gozunda

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

The only tabloid reports being cited are the edited FFS results that were leaked to the media which you keep referring to. The FFS haven't retracted their report because there was no need to, their original report was massively qualified but the PJ selectively chose which parts of the report to publish.

The quote is from the actual ffs report. You should stop using tabloids for various daft 'interpretations' of that report which do not stand up to scrutiny btw.

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Fact of the matter is the the FFS report proves nothing. Absolutely nothing. So why would you keep invoking this document as evidence. Nothing!

And that is the point my friend. Not 'invoking it as evidence' either lol. That's what the report says verbatim. And that is one of the main reasons why there are calls for the data to be reviewed and reanalysed considering the questionable methodology used etc. Glad you agree.

Ask yourself this why are some do reluctant to allow that the DNA may help bring some light to the case? I find that very strange tbh.

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

This is just hearsay and irrelevant. Next!
More wishy washy talk here, nothing of substance. Next!Nothing of substance here again.

Cant answer for those? Lol

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Looks like that TrueAllele/Perlin test from Cybergenetics had already been provided to the FSS.
Mark W. Perlin, Ph.D., MD Cybergenetics, Pittsburgh, Perlin also used samples from the FSS for some of the images here

The FSS used DNA profiling technique called LCN (low copy number). The FFS methodology and interpretation has increasingly been questioned as to its reliability.

FSS was now shut down in 2012 and is no longer in operation.

TrueAllele is a relatively modern method of DNA analysis. Nowhere in the FSS report of 2007 is there any reference to such testing

https://imageresizer.static9.net.au/2TLGmT9Qn0vIghLyyXs4nX2Fu-c=/1000x0/smart/http%3A%2F%2Fprod.static9.net.au%2Ffs%2F392b9fd5-607e-4056-8dbd-d4bdc9097c21

MonkieSocks

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

In order to carry out the determined by the 4.a Brigada of Department of Investigation Criminal of Policia Judiciara, concerning the process number 201/07.OGALGS, between 21:30h of 6th August, 2007, and 06:00h of 7th August, 2007, were recovered the following evidences in a vehicle Renault Scenic


Samples Taken from luggage area

7A. Head hair collected from the left seat of the luggage area.

7B. Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the left seat in the vehicle luggage area

7C. Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom in the left area of the back seat

8A. Head hair collected from the right seat of the luggage area

8B. Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the right seat in the vehicle luggage area.

8C. Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom of the right seat in the vehicle luggage area.

9. Head hair collected from the vehicle luggage area.

10. Parts of the vehicle luggage area.

11. Fibres and possible head hair in the rear shelf/luggage cover.

Anyone know which sample does Perlin want to re-test.

McCanns had rented the car 25 days after Madeleine disappeared.

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

MonkieSocks wrote: »

In order to carry out the determined by the 4.a Brigada of Department of Investigation Criminal of Policia Judiciara, concerning the process number 201/07.OGALGS, between 21:30h of 6th August, 2007, and 06:00h of 7th August, 2007, were recovered the following evidences in a vehicle Renault Scenic


Samples Taken from luggage area

7A. Head hair collected from the left seat of the luggage area.

7B. Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the left seat in the vehicle luggage area

7C. Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom in the left area of the back seat

8A. Head hair collected from the right seat of the luggage area

8B. Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the right seat in the vehicle luggage area.

8C. Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom of the right seat in the vehicle luggage area.

9. Head hair collected from the vehicle luggage area.

10. Parts of the vehicle luggage area.

11. Fibres and possible head hair in the rear shelf/luggage cover.

Anyone know which sample does Perlin want to re-test.

McCanns had rented the car 25 days after Madeleine disappeared.

The swabs taken from where both the cadaver and blood dogs alerted in the boot. That's the money shot. If you can prove Madeline DNA is in that patch as residue. It's very reasonable to conclude they transferred her corpse in the boot and suggests it was frozen or wet.

"The evidence relates to swabs lifted from the McCann family’s holiday flat and hire car after sniffer dogs allegedly detected the “scent of death”.

www.thesun.co.uk/news/8771145/madeleine-mccann-cops-test-dna-samples/amp/

maebee

Accident happened, parents hid body

It's strange how the McCanns, who professed to wanting to leave no stone un-turned in the search for their daughter's disappearance, are not jumping on TrueAllele, who are trying to help solve the mystery of their daughter's disappearance.

hawkelady

Something Else

Can anyone confirm if the pm at the time ,Gordon brown, intervened and personally requested that the main investigator leading the disappearance be taken off the case? If this is true, it stinks of people pulling favors for reasons I can only assume is to protect the mccanns

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

hawkelady wrote: »

Can anyone confirm if the pm at the time ,Gordon brown, intervened and personally requested that the main investigator leading the disappearance be taken off the case? If this is true, it stinks of people pulling favors for reasons I can only assume is to protect the mccanns

Are you talking about the removal of Amaral, who was convicted of falsifying evidence?

The disgraced former head of the Madeleine McCann police investigation was today sensationally found guilty of falsifying evidence in a separate missing child case.

Goncalo Amaral, 49, who was thrown off the Madeleine inquiry, was given an 18-month suspended jail sentence by a court in Portugal.

Amaral was found guilty of falsifying evidence to help cover up for three of his officers who were accused of torture.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1186727/Madeleine-chief-detective-convicted-falsifying-evidence-separate-missing-child-case.html

Unless Gordon Brown was the presiding judge and involved in finding Amaral guilty, I doubt he had anything to do with it. It's pretty obvious you can't continue to allow a convicted criminal to head an investigation into the disappearance of young girl, with the worlds attention on the case, when he's acted corruptly in another case involving the disappearance of a young girl.

OwlsZat

OwlsZat wrote: »

The swabs taken from where both the cadaver and blood dogs alerted in the boot. That's the money shot. If you can prove Madeline DNA is in that patch as residue. It's very reasonable to conclude they transferred her corpse in the boot and suggests it was frozen or wet.

"The evidence relates to swabs lifted from the McCann family’s holiday flat and hire car after sniffer dogs allegedly detected the “scent of death”.

www.thesun.co.uk/news/8771145/madeleine-mccann-cops-test-dna-samples/amp/

Correct me if wrong, but in the documentary it was explained that the McCann's didn't have that car the whole time - they rented it after she was abducted?

v638sg7k1a92bx

howmuchunder wrote: »

Correct me if wrong, but in the documentary it was explained that the McCann's didn't have that car the whole time - they rented it after she was abducted?

Correct. But still people will suggest that somehow the parents managed to hide her body in a fridge undetected for three weeks, in a foreign country, and then move and dispose of the body while the police and world's media were watching them.

It's so farcical that no matter what facts or logic you present to these people, they will spin that into another conspiracy i.e. that there was a government cover up etc.

hawkelady

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Correct. But still people will suggest that somehow the parents managed to hide her body in a fridge undetected for three weeks, in a foreign country, and then move and dispose of the body while the police and world's media were watching them.

It's so farcical that no matter what facts or logic you present to these people, they will spin that into another conspiracy i.e. that there was a government cover up etc.

Can you tell me why the mccanns felt the need to leave the boot of their rented car open for a few days, even over night? Strange wouldn’t you think?

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

hawkelady wrote: »

Can you tell me why the mccanns felt the need to leave the boot of their rented car open for a few days, even over night? Strange wouldn’t you think?

I have no idea who harmed Madeleine or how she happened to be missing . I am open to all opinions and none of us know for sure
But just to answer your post , my son spilled milk in his boot a few years ago . It was in hot weather and after days of not noticing the spill suddenly the car boot absolutely stank to high heaven
He had to open the boot as much as he could for a few days . Now imagine it with a few rubbish bags that might have leaked and in the heat would absolutely stink
Not every smell in a car that needs a good airing is a dead body .

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

maebee wrote: »

It's strange how the McCanns, who professed to wanting to leave no stone un-turned in the search for their daughter's disappearance, are not jumping on TrueAllele, who are trying to help solve the mystery of their daughter's disappearance.

Further testing of supposed genetic material from the car serves no purpose in finding Madeline. If the testing methods used in 2007 were flawed, then how can anyone confidently state that present methods aren't also flawed and that in another 10 years further advances won't reveal that 2019 methods were based on bad science?

Back in 2007, a lot of commentators would have been happy to find the McCanns guilty on the basis of DNA testing methods which some are now saying were unreliable.

I think the only safe course with DNA testing is to legally disallow any testing methods used for fringe samples that are impure or without a a complete sequence.

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

hawkelady wrote: »

Can you tell me why the mccanns felt the need to leave the boot of their rented car open for a few days, even over night? Strange wouldn’t you think?

Can you provide the name of this supposed witness and link to the PJ files where their testimony was given?

hawkelady

Something Else

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I have no idea who harmed Madeleine or how she happened to be missing . I am open to all opinions and none of us know for sure
But just to answer your post , my son spilled milk in his boot a few years ago . It was in hot weather and after days of not noticing the spill suddenly the car boot absolutely stank to high heaven
He had to open the boot as much as he could for a few days . Now imagine it with a few rubbish bags that might have leaked and in the heat would absolutely stink
Not every smell in a car that needs a good airing is a dead body .

Fair enough point. Agree with the not every smell is a dead body but when a cadaver dog alerts to the same boot ads some weight to it.

v638sg7k1a92bx

hawkelady wrote: »

Fair enough point. Agree with the not every smell is a dead body but when a cadaver dog alerts to the same boot ads some weight to it.

We've covered this numerous times. The cadaver dogs are a red herring and not reliable evidence in their own right. To accept the cadaver do theory, you would also have to accept that the parents concealed a body for three weeks, undetected, in a foreign country, while the police and world media are watching them.

yourdeadwright

Accident happened, parents hid body

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

We've covered this numerous times. The cadaver dogs are a red herring and not reliable evidence in their own right. To accept the cadaver do theory, you would also have to accept that the parents concealed a body for three weeks, undetected, in a foreign country, while the police and world media are watching them.

Something that people miss is she didn't have to be in the boot for that reaction from the dog ,

If the clothes she died in (if she did die) where in the boot for a period of time the dogs would react the same, ,

If it was the parent's the logically answer is they bins that night that went to landfill , It takes a minute to take a bin out ,

Bins is a risky option but one that 100% is possible of working , Remember no one is clamming there criminal masterminds, they could have just got lucky

I believe in these things the answer is always staring you in the face

They kept her clothes then decide they need to get rid of them and they disposed of using the car ,They used the car to dispose of rubbish in the bump a number of times ,

If she was taken it was alone wolf to hard for a trafficking gang to keep it quite this long , someone would look for the reward money or use the info for leverage,

Boom_Bap

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Something that people miss is she didn't have to be in the boot for that reaction from the dog ,

If the clothes she died in (if she did die) where in the boot for a period of time the dogs would react the same, ,

Not trying to nit pick, it's clothes that she or anyone else died in. The dogs don't pick up the scent of Madeline alone.

v638sg7k1a92bx

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I believe in these things the answer is always staring you in the face

How about the most obvious one, that somebody walked into the apartment, picked up the child and walked out???

yourdeadwright

Accident happened, parents hid body

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

How about the most obvious one, that somebody walked into the apartment, picked up the child and walked out???

I don't see why that is more obvious that other theory ,

A person walking out with her had the same chance of being seen as a parent walking over to the bin's with a sack ,

Infact a person adducting her had more of a chance of being seen ,

For instance if your an adductor and 4 people check the room every 20 minutes. there are 4 times in 80minutes the you can be spotted ,

If Gerry and Kate done it THEY only have to worry about being spotted 2 times in 80 minutes ,

Again putting a bag in a bin takes 1- 2 minutes max ,

Don't forget its also more likely when a child goes missing that it is a person know to them that has taken them ,

So its more probably it was the parents but you constantly pretend you know otherwise,

Could she have been taken by someone they didn't know yes of course but it is a lot less likely,

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

There is no way those kids were checked every 20 minutes .

yourdeadwright

Accident happened, parents hid body

Boom_Bap wrote: »

Not trying to nit pick, it's clothes that she or anyone else died in. The dogs don't pick up the scent of Madeline alone.

That is correct

MonkieSocks

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

A dog alert on its own is not considered evidence on its own and the reasons for this are fundamentally clear -

EVRD dogs can tell us that they can smell "something", but not "what" or "who" that might be.

This is further complicated by the ease of scent transferal and the fact that the scent can linger for years.

The dogs in the Shannon Matthews case alerting to the "scent of death" on second-hand furniture bought in a shop, which had come from a house where someone had died.

None of the dog alerts in the Shannon Matthews case turned out to be related to the case.

Shannon Matthews was found alive.

Additionally, the proven error rate of sniffer dogs is significant and proves that it is not an exact science upon which we can rely to charge anyone with a serious crime.

It should be remembered that as medical doctors, both of the McCanns are likely to come into contact with corpses.

At the time Kate was a GP.

In some incidents where a person is under the care of their GP, dies under care at home.

That said GP would come in. examine the body and then go through the process of Death Notification Certification.

__________________________________

The family of the deceased then has to get this registered to get a Death Certificate

In Ireland:

A death can be registered in the office of any Registrar of Births, Marriages and Death,

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I don't see why that is more obvious that other theory ,

A person walking out with her had the same chance of being seen as a parent walking over to the bin's with a sack ,

Infact a person adducting her had more of a chance of being seen ,

For instance if your an adductor and 4 people check the room every 20 minutes. there are 4 times in 80minutes the you can be spotted ,

If Gerry and Kate done it THEY only have to worry about being spotted 2 times in 80 minutes ,

Again putting a bag in a bin takes 1- 2 minutes max ,

Don't forget its also more likely when a child goes missing that it is a person know to them that has taken them ,

So its more probably it was the parents but you constantly pretend you know otherwise,

Could she have been taken by someone they didn't know yes of course but it is a lot less likely,

That's possibly because you are not willing to apply Occam's Razor due to bias.

I can provide at least 4 examples of criminals entering homes and either kidnapping or raping daughters while the parent/s were actually in the house. Can you provide a single instance of parents covering up the death of their child while on holiday, keeping the child's body in a freezer for almost a month and then disposing of it?

v638sg7k1a92bx

When you say:

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I believe in these things the answer is always staring you in the face

and then you go on to explain a long convoluted answer follows:

yourdeadwright wrote: »

I don't see why that is more obvious that other theory ,

A person walking out with her had the same chance of being seen as a parent walking over to the bin's with a sack ,

Infact a person adducting her had more of a chance of being seen ,

For instance if your an adductor and 4 people check the room every 20 minutes. there are 4 times in 80minutes the you can be spotted ,

If Gerry and Kate done it THEY only have to worry about being spotted 2 times in 80 minutes ,

Again putting a bag in a bin takes 1- 2 minutes max ,

Don't forget its also more likely when a child goes missing that it is a person know to them that has taken them ,

So its more probably it was the parents but you constantly pretend you know otherwise,

Could she have been taken by someone they didn't know yes of course but it is a lot less likely,

Do you realise how difficult it is to kill and dispose of a body without being detected, especially in a country and a terrain that you are not familiar with?

If you think or consider that the McCanns were responsible for the disappearance of their daughter, then by default you have to accept that the answer is not staring you in the face.

gozunda

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

That's possibly because you are not willing to apply Occam's Razor due to bias.

I can provide at least 4 examples of criminals entering homes and either kidnapping or raping daughters while the parent/s were actually in the house. Can you provide a single instance of parents covering up the death of their child while on holiday, keeping the child's body in a freezer for almost a month and then disposing of it?

On that.

Firstly the use of the first scenario is meaningless for the reason that the child was not at 'home' nor were the parents 'actually in the house'

Claiming that because there were other children abducted - everyone should then accept your conclusion on this issue does not follow.

Using such a false dichotomy fallacy so it looks like there are only two choices also makes any such argument redundant tbh. For the reason that using that fallacy is a blatant attemp to eliminate that one cherry picked scenario, so it seems that we are left with only one option: the one you want for us to pick in the first place.

It remains there are a number of different options, not just two—the issue of how the child disappeared remains unsolved. In attempting to explain this a number of possibilities have been presented and discussed and not only the one of the fridge / freezer which you appear to be obsessed with for some strange reason to the exclusion of all other possibilities

Addendum:
As to Occam's razor - this theorises that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones.

However Occam's razor would normally only be used to adjudicate between theories that have already passed theoretical scrutiny tests and are equally well-supported by evidence.

So far in this case neither of those criteria have been met in respect with any of the listed scenarios imo.

gozunda

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

Further testing of supposed genetic material from the car serves no purpose in finding Madeline. If the testing methods used in 2007 were flawed, then how can anyone confidently state that present methods aren't also flawed and that in another 10 years further advances won't reveal that 2019 methods were based on bad science?

Back in 2007, a lot of commentators would have been happy to find the McCanns guilty on the basis of DNA testing methods which some are now saying were unreliable.

I think the only safe course with DNA testing is to legally disallow any testing methods used for fringe samples that are impure or without a a complete sequence.

So you are saying that these new techniques shouldn't be used because:

• They won't find the child anyway

• Theres no point in doing anything because it didnt work the first time

• That such testing should be hamstrung by populous opinion before it is even contemplated?

Eh?

Let me ask why would any police force try and solve any such cold case?

The advances in DNA detection and identification have been used to solve many cold cases is a fact. I believe the current criticism is not that such methods 'were flawed' (sic) but that the interpretation of the results were limited by the methods used.

New advances means that such limitations have been removed.

It's a fact that the retesting of the data may very well help the investigation find out what happened. It could even completly exonerate any likley or previous suspects.

It is immaterial whether you believe that
"a lot of commentators would have been happy to find the McCanns guilty" or otherwise. Thankfully populist opinion is not part of any European legal system afaik.

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

The armchair detective videos on YouTube are all worth watching. Do your own DD.

chicorytip

Something Else

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote:

We've covered this numerous times. The cadaver dogs are a red herring and not reliable evidence in their own right. To accept the cadaver do theory, you would also have to accept that the parents concealed a body for three weeks, undetected, in a foreign country, while the police and world media are watching them.

The body could have been removed and concealed by the parents before they raised the alarm. This could have been accomplished with the help of somebody local, already known to the couple who perhaps had access to a vacant property which contained a freezer. It's not clear whether their entire movements were being monitored by police during the period beginning three weeks after the disappearance when they were driving the hired car and staying in a rented villa. They were no longer formal suspects at that stage so it's unlikely. An opportunity to finally dispose of the corpse could have arisen.