Madeleine McCann

Deusexmachina

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think it would have to be a corpse that the dog scented in the car, maybe something a corpse had been in was put in the car. A bag with odour maybe? So a corpus wouldn't have to be kept for weeks

So an item of clothing (or blanket or whatever) that the child wore, or was wrapped in, was taken from her corpse and then, weeks later, the McCanns brought that item of clothing with them in their hired car. And then this item of clothing (or blanket or whatever) was removed from that car and buried or burnt or hidden.
And then weeks after that, the cadaver dogs smelt the scent of the dead body from the item of clothing having been in the hired car some weeks previously......

Hardly the smoking gun, is it? (Its actually impossible). And yet this has some people totally convinced.

Ultimate Seduction

Something Else

Heard on the news this morning the government have given 150k to police searching for her. How many kids have gone missing since her 11 years ago and nothing said, no money from the government. It's really weird.

Deusexmachina

gozunda wrote: »

Some off the places investigated by the Portugese police during the investigation was a cold storage facility and the crypt of a local church. Portugal in early May is not as warm as areas further south in neighbouring Spain - with temperatures averaging between 12.5 - 17c for the Month.

Possible methods which would have caused delayed decomposition was one of the areas of the original investigation afaik. Such a scenario would also have meant that the body would not have needed to have been disposed of until much later.

Was it hidden in the crypt for the weeks previous?

gozunda

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

So an item of clothing (or blanket or whatever) that the child wore, or was wrapped in, was taken from her corpse and then, weeks later, the McCanns brought that item of clothing with them in their hired car. And then this item of clothing (or blanket or whatever) was removed from that car.
And then weeks after that, the cadaver dogs smelt the scented the dead body from the item of clothing having been in the hired car some weeks previously......

Hardly the smoking gun, is it? An yet this has some people totally convinced.

I would disagree. The issue of the scent in the car used by the mccanns is yet another piece of evidence to suggest a cover up or that not all the facts of the case have came to light.

It remains that piece of evidence is unexplained in the context of what the parents claimed to have happened.

Deusexmachina

The parents did it

Deusexmachina wrote: »

So an item of clothing (or blanket or whatever) that the child wore, or was wrapped in, was taken from her corpse and then, weeks later, the McCanns brought that item of clothing with them in their hired car. And then this item of clothing (or blanket or whatever) was removed from that car and buried or burnt or hidden.
And then weeks after that, the cadaver dogs smelt the scent of the dead body from the item of clothing having been in the hired car some weeks previously......

Hardly the smoking gun, is it? (Its actually impossible). And yet this has some people totally convinced.

Is it impossible? Why? May not be clothing, may be a luggage?

gozunda

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Was it hidden in the crypt for the weeks previous?

The details of that investigation is contained in the files. It was just one of the areas investigated as to possibility that the body had been kept hidden for a period after death

Deusexmachina

gozunda wrote: »

The details of that investigation is contained in the files. It was just one of the areas investigated as to possibility that the body had been kept hidden for a period after death

Do you realise how ludicrous that sounds? (Not you - the Portuguese Police)

Deusexmachina

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it impossible? Why? May not be clothing, may be a luggage?

How on earth does the scent go from the body of a child to a car weeks later - then staying in the car after the luggage has been removed weeks later?

And how on earth did the McCanns manage all this?

Deusexmachina

gozunda wrote: »

I would disagree. The issue of the scent in the car used by the mccanns is yet another piece of evidence to suggest a cover up or that not all the facts of the case have came to light.

It remains that piece of evidence is unexplained in the context of what the parents claimed to have happened.

But its NOT evidence of anything. A false alert. Dismissed by experts.

Dogs!
I've seen explosives dogs walk past explosive hides & not register a thing.
I've seen drug dogs in the same room as drugs & not find a thing.
I wouldn't put too much time into any results from dogs Tbh.

bubblypop

The parents did it

bubblypop wrote: »

Dogs!
I've seen explosives dogs walk past explosive hides & not register a thing.
I've seen drug dogs in the same room as drugs & not find a thing.
I wouldn't put too much time into any results from dogs Tbh.

Wow!
Where did all this happen?

Deusexmachina

The parents did it

Deusexmachina wrote: »

But its NOT evidence of anything. A false alert. Dismissed by experts.

Who?

iamwhoiam

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

bubblypop wrote: »

Dogs!
I've seen explosives dogs walk past explosive hides & not register a thing.
I've seen drug dogs in the same room as drugs & not find a thing.
I wouldn't put too much time into any results from dogs Tbh.

Have you ? Where did this happen ?

gozunda

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Nope. The REAL victims are a child, her parents, her brother and sister, her grandparents, aunts and uncles, and friends of the family. A child does not die without incredible hurt caused to her family. To dismiss this is callous.

And the possibility of a child's death caused inadvertently or otherwise by a parent or parents - how does that impact on other members of those families in such a situation?

Nothing which has been said has not already been brought into the open by the original investigation imo. It is sad that much of the bad publicity of this case has been generated by the parents themselves.

The family has my sympathies on the loss of the child - however that does not mean that the facts of the case are irrelevant or prohibited by your belief that the parents are incapable of a cover up or worse.

Dont kid yourself for this discussion. The actual victim of the crime remains the child. Perhaps you wish to start a different discussion on different terms?

gozunda

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

But its NOT evidence of anything. A false alert. Dismissed by experts.

You are the one who posed this question

Deusexmachina wrote: »

How on earth does the scent go from the body of a child to a car weeks later - then staying in the car after the luggage has been removed weeks later?
And how on earth did the McCanns manage all this?

Perhaps if you read the investigation with a more open mind - you wouldn't be shouting down everyone else in this way

The investigation of the car and the other areas was conducted by experts in their field. Or is it as you seem to believe that it is only the deniers who have real 'experts?

gozunda

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Do you realise how ludicrous that sounds? (Not you - the Portuguese Police)

Ludicrous that the police investigated every possible avenue of the investigation or that you dont believe that someplace like a local church could not be used to store a body?

Ah I see - so it comes down to the fact that you know categorically more than those who undertook the investigation of the disappearance of the child?

Really?

cnocbui

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

badabing106 wrote: »

Below is a statement from the chief inspector of the Madeleine McCann case and the conclusion of the entire investigation. He was confronted in court , when team McCann took a lawsuit against a book written by one of its leading investigators.

I think we all know what is going on there, given it was Amaral's libel trial.

Detectives coming to private conclusions about the McCanns involvement without any evidence is probably a significant reason this case has remained unsolved. It's also the reason why Amaral - a convicted perjurer - was replaced by Paulo Rebelo.

The files included a 58-page prosecutors' report, which concluded: "No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances.

That is the actual position held by the Portuguese prosecutors and was derived from an analysis by two judges. The report by inspector Tavares de Almeida and his conclusions were rejected by his superiors. Claiming his initial 2007 report represents the official conclusions is pure fantasy as it is factually wrong.

cnocbui

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

gozunda wrote: »

I would disagree. The issue of the scent in the car used by the mccanns is yet another piece of evidence to suggest a cover up or that not all the facts of the case have came to light.

It remains that piece of evidence is unexplained in the context of what the parents claimed to have happened.

The cadaver scent and blood dogs are the biggest red herring ever - they were later proven to give false-positive responses in the Haut de la Garenne childrens home case on the island of Jersey.

£20 million pounds was wasted investigating those false positives!

retro:electro

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

bubblypop wrote: »

Dogs!
I've seen explosives dogs walk past explosive hides & not register a thing.
I've seen drug dogs in the same room as drugs & not find a thing.
I wouldn't put too much time into any results from dogs Tbh.

There’s a reason their findings are rarely admissible in court.
Also even if the dogs did detect blood in the apartment, it still doesn’t tell me Gerry and Kate killed her. The abductor could have harmed her in the apartment either accidently or on purpose, panicked and then took her.

MonkieSocks

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

Forensic Evidence from the McCann hire car.

Objects attributed to the motor vehicle Renault 'Scenic' (matricula 59-DA-27)

286C/2007-CRL1 D Nail ([human] hand)
From this fragment of a nail from the finger of a [human] hand, a DNA result was obtained through the LCN technique which corresponded to Gerald McCann. In the same result an additional DNA component, unique and unconfirmed, was found that left no room for any other interpretation.

FSS-GF-679 Emissao 2, Pagina 7

286C/2007-CRL2E Nail (hand)
From this fragment ... a DNA result was obtained through the LCN technique which corresponded to Kate Healy. In the same DNA result were found two more DNA components, one of which was not confirmed; these DNA components left no room for any other interpretation.

286C/2007-CRL10 Baggage compartment
This object comprised two sections of the baggage compartment of the Renault Scenic, the first being a baggage compartment lined with fabric with ventilation holes (designated in the UK laboratory as CRL/10(1)) and, the second a moulded plastic extension (designated in the laboratory as CRL/10(2)).

A mixed, low-level DNA result, appearing to be from at least three people, was obtained from the cellular material collected (harvested) from the baggage compartment lined with fabric (286C/2007-CRL/10(1)) of the motor vehicle. That sample was submitted to tests to obtain DNA profiles through the LCN technique.

A DNA result through the LCN technique, which appeared to be from at least three persons, was obtained from the cellular material collected (harvested) from the baggage compartment lined with fabric (286C/2007-CRL/10(1)). In my opinion, this result is too complex to make a meaningful interpretation.

FSS-GF-679 Emissao 2, Pagina 8

The attempt to obtain a DNA profile from any cellular material collected from the plastic area on the baggage compartment (286C/2007-CRL /10(2)) was unfruitful [fruitless, in vain, useless, unproductive, unsuccessful], because no DNA profile was obtained.

A mixed, low-level DNA result, that appeared to be from at least two persons, was obtained from a second area of the baggage compartment plastic (286C/2007-CRL /10(2)). This sample was submitted for tests to obtain DNA profiles through LCN.

A DNA result by complex LCN that appeared to be from at least three persons, was obtained from cellular material collected on the section of the baggage compartment 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. In my opinion, that result is too complex for a meaningful interpretation.

An incomplete, low-level DNA profile that matched corresponding components in the profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material present on the card key - (286C/2007-CRL (12)). I guess this is the fob of the car-keys

My colleague, Andrew Palmer, submitted various hair collected from the Renault Scenic for tests, using ... LCN.
Those hairs were designated as 7B hair 1 and 7C hairs 7, 13 e 15. Attempts to obtain a DNA profile of each hair by LCN was unfruitful, because no DNA profile was obtained by LCN, possibly due to there being an insufficient quantity of good quality DNA.

An attempt to obtain a DNA profile from any cellular material recovered from one area of the plastic luggage component (286C/2007-CRL(10(2))) from the motor vehicle was unsuccessful in that no DNA profiles were obtained.

A low level mixed DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least two people was obtained from a second area of the plastic luggage component (286C/2007-CRL(10(2))) from the motor vehicle. In my opinion this result is too complex to interpret at this stage.

A low level mixed DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the fibre coated luggage component (286C/2007-CRL(10(1))) from the motor vehicle. In my opinion this result is too complex to interpret at this stage.

A low level incomplete DNA profile which matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material on the key card (286C/2007-CRL(12)). This sample has not been sent for further testing using LCN DNA profiling tests.

An attempt to obtain an LCN DNA result from any cellular material on the swab from area one of the luggage compartment section (286C/2007 CRL 10) was unsuccesful in that no profile was obtained.

An incomplete LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from a male was obtained from cellular material from the swab (286A/2007 CRL 1a & b). The profile did not match any of those previously tested in this case.

An incomplete LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from a female was obtained from cellular material from the swab (286A/2007 CRL 4a & b). The profile did not match any of those previously tested in this case.

An incomplete LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from a male was obtained from cellular material from the swab (286A12007 CRL 9a & b). The profile did not match any of those previously tested in this case. Furthermore, it did not match the profile obtained from the swab, 286A/2007 CRL 1a & b.

Mixed LCN DNA results which appeared to have originated from at least two people were obtained from cellular material recovered from the swabs (286A/2007 CRL 2a & b, 5a 7 b, 7a & b, 10a & b and 12a & b). in my opinion there is not evidence to support the view that any of the McCann family contributed DNA to Yhis result.

Forensic Science Service Ltd
Birmingham Laboratory, Priory House, Gooch
Street North, Birmingham, B5 6QQ

cnocbui

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

bubblypop wrote: »

Dogs!
I've seen explosives dogs walk past explosive hides & not register a thing.
I've seen drug dogs in the same room as drugs & not find a thing.
I wouldn't put too much time into any results from dogs Tbh.

Spot on. The Clever Hans effect is alive and well. In medicine it is well known that if a researcher in a drug trial knows who received a drug and who the placebo, they will subconsciously communicate their expectations to patients and invalidate the results, which is why double blind testing is the only accepted scientific method for drug trials and others where human responses to stimuli are being assessed.

False Positives
A provocative research paper published in January 2011 showed that, rather than being neutral, police detection dogs alert where their handlers think they should. This research is one of only a handful of scientific attempts to test the validity of law enforcement claims of reliable detection.

The study by Lit, Schweitzer, and Oberbauer caused a stir because, in their experiments to test detection dogs and their handlers, the researchers did not use any explosive or drug scents. Instead, they created a course inside a building and placed red paper markers on various objects to fool handlers into believing that marked locations contained scents and "Slim Jim" meat sticks as decoys to fool the dogs. Even with no legitimate targets present in the experiment, 85% of searches resulted in at least one alert by the handler-led detection dog. Only 21 out of the 144 police dog walk-throughs correctly reported no alerts by the dog, while 123 searches resulted in a combined total of 225 false alerts.

https://erowid.org/freedom/police/police_article1.shtml

iamwhoiam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Have you ? Where did this happen ?

I've seen it professionally, I wont get into specifics, if you understand

gozunda

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

The cadaver scent and blood dogs are the biggest red herring ever - they were later proven to give false-positive responses in the Haut de la Garenne childrens home case on the island of Jersey.
£20 million pounds was wasted investigating those false positives!

And one flower does not make a bunch. There are plenty of cases where dogs have been used successfully to find human remains etc. Dogs have been and continued to be used to locate human remains and trace evidence and also search and rescue worldwide by many police forces and other authorities.

The attempts to discredit this area of expertise based on one singular historic case is at best risible.

It is also interesting that the ones shouting the loudest about how such results are 'red herrings'(sic) etc are those who have steadfastly refused to fully clarify their knowledge of the matter under investigation.

The dogs used in the investigation were brought in from the UK and used by police forces there. Investigative dogs continue to be used by the same police forces in the UK .

In a published study, the forensic pathologist Lars Oesterhelweg, then at the University of Bern in Switzerland, and colleagues tested the ability of three Hamburg State Police cadaver dogs to pick out – of a line-up of six new carpet squares – the one that had been exposed for no more than 10 minutes to a recently deceased person.

Several squares had been placed beneath a clothed corpse within three hours of death, when some organs and many cells of the human body are still functioning. Over the next month, the dogs did hundreds of trials in which they signalled the contaminated square with 98 per cent accuracy, falling to 94 per cent when the square had been in contact with the corpse for only two minutes. The research concluded that cadaver dogs were an "outstanding tool" for crime-scene investigation.

The use of dogs is used as just one of the many detection techniques in forensics and police forces regard them as a valuable search-tool, to be used alongside other scientific techniques and evidence gathering

cnocbui

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

gozunda wrote: »

And one flower does not make a bunch. There are plenty of cases where dogs have been used successfully to find human remains etc. Dogs have been and continued to be used to locate human remains and trace evidence and also search and rescue worldwide by many police forces and other authorities.

The attempts to discredit this area of expertise based on one singular historic case is at best risible.

It is also onteresting that the ones shouting the loudest about how such results are 'red herrings'(sic) are those who have steadfastly refused to fully clarify their knowledge of the matter under investigation.

The dogs used in the investigation were brought in from the UK and used by police forces there. Investigative dogs continue to be used by the same police forces in the UK .

What's risible and unforgivable is asserting that an apparent positive response by a detector dog amounts to evidence or certainty.

I have never said that dogs can't be helpful or very useful. As someone once put it - you can't put a dog in the stand under oath and cross examine them for details about the what and why of their responses. Dogs do not provide evidence, but they sometimes can find it. If forensic tests can't back up the dogs with real evidence, such as tissue, bodily fluids or a body, then what the dogs did just doesn't matter and is evidentially irrelevant.

Eddie and Keela had been used by the UK police in the past but they were not being used by the UK police just prior to their use in Praia da Luz and were not certified for use by the UK police. Of course the UK police continue to use dogs, but not those ones subsequently.

gozunda

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

What's risible and unforgivable is asserting that an apparent positive response by a detector dog amounts to evidence or certainty.

I have never said that dogs can't be helpful or very useful. As someone once put it - you can't put a dog in the stand under oath and cross examine them for details about the what and why of their responses. Dogs do not provide evidence, but they sometimes can find it. If forensic tests can't back up the dogs with real evidence, such as tissue, bodily fluids or a body, then what the dogs did just doesn't matter and is evidentially irrelevant.

Eddie and Keela had been used by the UK police in the past but they were not being used by the UK police just prior to their use in Praia da Luz and were not certified for use by the UK police. Of course the UK police continue to use dogs, but not those ones subsequently.

Wrong. Dog evidence as detailed is a valuable search-tool, to be used alongside other, more scientific techniques and evidence gathering. And that is exactly what it was used for in the Madeleine McCann investigation. The work of cadaver and blood dogs is not submitted as evidence, 

Sniffer dogs Eddie and Keela had been brought to Praia da Luz in July 2007 at the request of Mark Harrison, a British investigator and national adviser to UK police, who specialises in searching for people missing, abducted or murdered.

It's hillarious watching various deniers of this methodology getting their knickers in an absolute twist about the this tbh.

cnocbui

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

gozunda wrote: »

Wrong. Dog evidence as detailed is a valuable search-tool, to be used alongside other, more scientific techniques and evidence gathering. And that is exactly what it was used for in the Madeleine McCann investigation..

It's hillarious watching various deniers of this methodology getting their knickers in an absolute twist about the this tbh.

What the actual F?

gozunda

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

What the actual F?

And yet another colourful and insightful post from cnocbui on the intricacies and details of the Madeleine McCann investigation

:rolleyes:

Guy:Incognito

I never understand people that come from the angle of there's no way they could do that to their own child or cover up the death of their own child.

There's no shortage of people locked up for sexual abuse of their own kids. People have sold their kids to pedos or passed them around child sex rings.

But no way parents could be capable of disposing of their own child's body to cover up their own negligence or worse?

MonkieSocks

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

There is no doubt that sniffer dogs can be useful in police work.

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.

fin12

Accident happened, parents hid body

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Absolutely. Anything else is frankly rubbish. Cadaver dogs sniff a hired car - HIRED WEEKS AFTER THE CHILD GOES MISSING.

How the hell did they hide the body for weeks in the apartment in the full view of police, friends, family, worlds media - and then smuggle this stinking rotten corpse out to the car and then bury it without anyone noticing??

I mean really - this is the stuff we are asked to take seriously...

Maybe you should have a look at the case of Tia Sharp, the police searched the house of her grandmothers boyfriend twice where her body lay before being discovered on the third attempt.

nc6000

The parents did it

retro:electro wrote:

Also even if the dogs did detect blood in the apartment, it still doesn't tell me Gerry and Kate killed her. The abductor could have harmed her in the apartment either accidently or on purpose, panicked and then took her.

Harmed her, panicked and cleaned up any blood before taking her away?

Kidchameleon

I actually give up at this stage. Have fun kids.

retro:electro

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

nc6000 wrote: »

Harmed her, panicked and cleaned up any blood before taking her away?

I know, absurd right?

cnocbui

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

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I never understand people that come from the angle of there's no way they could do that to their own child or cover up the death of their own child.

There's no shortage of people locked up for sexual abuse of their own kids. People have sold their kids to pedos or passed them around child sex rings.

But no way parents could be capable of disposing of their own child's body to cover up their own negligence or worse?

Perhaps in cases involving crimes it's better to come at it from an angle of whats the evidence and what are the hypotheses that would it fit, rather than with emotional bias informed by unrelated cases?

Guy:Incognito

cnocbui wrote: »

Perhaps in cases involving crimes it's better to come at it from an angle of whats the evidence and what are the hypotheses that would it fit, rather than with emotional bias informed by unrelated cases?

Writing off involvement of the parents because "there's no way any mother /parent could do that to their child" isn't emotional bias though?

Charmeleon

bubblypop wrote: »

Dogs!
I've seen explosives dogs walk past explosive hides & not register a thing.
I've seen drug dogs in the same room as drugs & not find a thing.
I wouldn't put too much time into any results from dogs Tbh.

Drug dogs and explosives dogs have a far wider palette of scent to detect, it would be impossible for them to be as accurate and specific as two dogs trained to detect two very, very specific scents. All the examples given of ‘problems’ with the dogs in other investigations has been accurate detection by the dog but the wrong person of interest.

limnam

gozunda wrote: »

It's hillarious watching various deniers of this methodology getting their knickers in an absolute twist about the this tbh.

What did it for me was people using the dogs to prove a point where the dog didn't detect anything and then dismissing the same dog on what they DID detect!


Genuis.

tinpib

Something Else

tinpib wrote: »

It appears to me like you have posted this without watching any of his videos. Saying "eejits" and he has not "come up with a reasonable explanation themselves that does not complete collapse under the most basic scrutiny."

There are 14 hours of videos there, I watched maybe 8 hours of videos well over a year ago. I started watching a recent 3 part 90 minute set where he sets out what he thinks happened to her based on the evidence available.

I find it interesting that you dismiss him without watching them. That doesn't seem like an open-minded rational thing to do.

There are inconsistencies and then there are the sheer volume of inconsistencies in stories here which leads me to only one thing. What witnessses said happened did not happen.

As I say it was over a year ago but my lightbulb moment was when he examined the account of the last independent witness to see Madeleine alive.

This is from memory, he called round to their apartment at 8pm on the night it was claimed she was kidnapped and saw her there with Kate.

One account[either Kate or yer man] was that he remained outside the apartment door and had a quick chat for about 30 seconds, the other account was that he came inside and sat down on the couch and chatted for 5 minutes.

That type of inconsistency points to only one thing to me, it never happened, and they are coming up with a cock and bull story to police.

That's just from memory, watch the 14 hours of videos and make up your own mind before dismissing him.

He seems to have exhaustively researched everything.

I posted this way back, started watching the Richard Hall docs again, here is a screengrab of a summary of the huge inconsistencies between Kate McCann's account and the last independent witness to see Madeleine alive, David Payne.

From about 5 mins in he starts dealing with the statements, so he goes through them in detail. Worth a watch.



edit: I'm laughing away here, Payne couldn't remember what Kate was wearing, which is suspicious. It's especially suspicious considering Kate says she had just had a shower and was only wearing a towel. Believe me that probably all men would have crystal clear recollections of talking to a woman like Kate wearing only a towel. We don't forget things like that. It's seared into our brains.

Deusexmachina

gozunda wrote: »

And the possibility of a child's death caused inadvertently or otherwise by a parent or parents - how does that impact on other members of those families in such a situation?

Nothing which has been said has not already been brought into the open by the original investigation imo. It is sad that much of the bad publicity of this case has been generated by the parents themselves.

The family has my sympathies on the loss of the child - however that does not mean that the facts of the case are irrelevant or prohibited by your belief that the parents are incapable of a cover up or worse.

Dont kid yourself for this discussion. The actual victim of the crime remains the child. Perhaps you wish to start a different discussion on different terms?

No - it's simple. I believe the parents are not culpable based not on some blindspot I have for them but on the cold hard facts. Please tell me any scenario which explains how the parents killed the child (by accident or design) and managed to successfully bury the body under the glare of the media, the police, their friends etc. And then carry on the most elaborate hoax in the history of the world.

Its simply ridiculous. And yet it goes on....

Deusexmachina

limnam wrote: »

What did it for me was people using the dogs to prove a point where the dog didn't detect anything and then dismissing the same dog on what they DID detect!


Genuis.

What did the dogs actually prove?

gozunda

Something Else

Whatever the truth of the McCann case - it has been a virtual graveyard for reputations and dead ends for anyone who became involved in the investigation especially those employed by the mccanns themselves ...

The McCanns hired four different firms of private eyes over four years before Op Grange was launched in May 2011 in the UK

"Firstly they employed Control Risks Group in May 2007. Allegedly  paid for at the expense of an anonymous donor whose identity has never been revealed - the group engaged a private jet and hired a Moroccan tourist guide to accompany them to the mountain village where they believed the missing girl might be. She was not there. This local guide later claimed was to be paid a 'million pounds' The group managed to further alienate the investigation.

They hired Spaniards Metodo 3 in October 2007 but sacked them when M3 boss Francisco boasted: “Madeleine will be home by Christmas."

Next came private investigators Oakley International, an A-team of former British special forces soldiers and US security agents run by Brit Kevin Halligen, from March to September 2008. But they were ditched when Halligen was later exposed as a conman. He is alleged to have fleeced the Madeleine Fund out of £150,000 with bogus invoices and inflated expenses.

A fourth team helping out after Portuguese police shelved their investigation in summer 2008 were Alpha Investigations run by ex-RUC officer David Edgar and former Merseyside detective Arthur Cowley. But they stepped down after nearly three years when the Met Police came on board."

As for the official investigation - not forgetting Chief Inspector Gonçalo Amaral, who had coordinated the investigation from May to October 2007. Amaral was removed from the case in October 2007 after telling a Portuguese newspaper that the British police were pursuing leads helpful only to the McCanns

Just one day after Madeleine's disappearance, Amaral himself was made arguido involving a case where a number of members of the police were involved in an alleged forced confession in a seperate missing child case.

As a superior officer - Amaral was accused of having being involved in a covered up. Those involved directly were eventually acquitted.

Amaral resigned from the police force in June 2008 to write a book alleging that Madeleine had died in an accident in the apartment and that, to cover it up, the McCanns had faked an abduction...

limnam

Deusexmachina wrote: »

What did the dogs actually prove?

I didn't claim they proved anything.


What's that got to do with the point I made?

gozunda

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

No - it's simple. I believe the parents are not culpable based not on some blindspot I have for them but on the cold hard facts. Please tell me any scenario which explains how the parents killed the child (by accident or design) and managed to successfully bury the body under the glare of the media, the police, their friends etc. And then carry on the most elaborate hoax in the history of the world.Its simply ridiculous. And yet it goes on....

"Show me the proof"!

I see very few if any absolute declarations that "the parents killed the child (by accident or design) and managed to successfully bury the body under the glare of the media"

That is your personal mantra and yet you yourself can present no viable scenario "with proof" that exonerates any of the original arguidos from any alleged involvement.

This issue here arises primarily from the refusal or reluctance of various players to engage fully with the investigation of the crime with the result that unfortunately there are no absolute and definitive scenarios which can be proved one way or the other.

What remains is a lot of questions which have not been answered and evidence which has been gathered but which has raised further questions which in turn also remain unanswered.

Hence we are discussing the case as opposed to the parents 'feelings' / ignoring the real issue which is the disappearance of a child under very suspicious circumstances. Even the Portuguese judiciary have declared as recently as 2017 that the archiving of the criminal case did not in fact equate to the McCanns being cleared of criminal responsibility.

That is a cold hard fact.

Deusexmachina

gozunda wrote: »

"Show me the proof"!

I see very few if any absolute declarations that "the parents killed the child (by accident or design) and managed to successfully bury the body under the glare of the media"

That is your personal mantra and yet you yourself can present no viable scenario "with proof" that exonerates any of the original arguidos from any alleged involvement.

This issue here arises primarily from the refusal and reluctance of various players to engage fully with the investigation of the crime with the result that unfortunately there are no absolute and definitive scenarios which can be proved one way or the other.

What remains is a lot of questions which have not been answered and evidence which has been gathered but which has raised further questions which in turn also remain unanswered.

Hence we are discussing the case as opposed to the parents 'feelings' / ignoring the real issue which is the disappearance of a child under very suspicious circumstances. Even the Portuguese judiciary have declared as recently as 2017 that the archiving of the criminal case did not in fact equate to the McCanns being cleared of criminal responsibility.

That is a cold hard fact.

'That is your personal mantra' - how about playing the man, not the ball?

Nobody is ignoring the 'real issue'.

'Unanswered questions' there may be - but they lead nowhere.

They are unanswered because of a bungled and ludicrous investigation by the Portuguese authorities who were embarrassed by their incompetence being exposed and started to increasingly clutch at straws - leading to a mess of accusation and counter accusation tinged with xenophobia.
I wouldn't give these guys my name and address, never mind allow them to twist and turn my every word to fit with their ridiculous narrative.

It comes down to this - a child is left unattended at night time in an apartment with open access and out of sight from the parents. The child goes missing and cannot be found anywhere.

1. Someone abducted the child
2. The parents killed the child either by accident or design and then managed to hide all the evidence of this killing (including the body) in a way that nobody can adequately explain. They have continued to try to keep the case open and have constantly lobbied and urged for continued investigation year after year despite being guilty.
3. Something else happened.

Scenario 1 or 3 seem the most likely. Scenario 2 simply does not fit the facts and timelines that we know are true and are not disputed.

gozunda

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

'That is your personal mantra' - how about playing the man, not the ball?
Nobody is ignoring the 'real issue'.
'Unanswered questions' there may be - but they lead nowhere.
They are unanswered because of a bungled and ludicrous investigation by the Portuguese authorities who were embarrassed by their incompetence being exposed and started to increasingly clutch at straws - leading to a mess of accusation and counter accusation tinged with xenophobia.
I wouldn't give these guys my name and address, never mind allow them to twist and turn my every word to fit with their ridiculous narrative. It comes down to this - a child is left unattended at night time in an apartment with open access and out of sight from the parents. The child goes missing and cannot be found anywhere.
1. Someone abducted the child
2. The parents killed the child either by accident or design and then managed to hide all the evidence of this killing (including the body) in a way that nobody can adequately explain. They have continued to try to keep the case open and have constantly lobbied and urged for continued investigation year after year despite being guilty.
3. Something else happened.
Scenario 1 or 3 seem the most likely. Scenario 2 simply does not fit the facts and timelines that we know are true and are not disputed.

Its remains a mantra - you've have repeated ad nauseum despite few if any posters making any such concrete suggestions.

Yes three children were left unattended and in an insecure building - out of sight of the parents and their friends.

As to the primary investigation - it needs to be remembered that the family and others were either reluctant or refused to fully engage with the official investigation.

On top of that quite incredible behaviour - the family immediatly brought in bungling idiot after bungling idiot in the form of private investigators mountebanks and charlatans - including one famous individual who claimed he could find the child using hair from her hairbrush and satellite imagery! You really couldn't make it up.

Whether from pure stupidity or bad advice - the family themselves managed to destroy some of the best opportunities for discovering what happened. From the belated contacting of the police on the night in question and the trashing of the crime scene by themselves and their friends before the police could even arrive. It became a farce alright- mainly of their own making imo.

You criticise the Portuguese investigators and yet where they covered all potential avenues such as checking locations e.g. the local church etc you decry them as crazy and no - it's not possible to have it both ways.

As for the scenarios you've listed.

Abduction - no evidence has ever been discovered to support this theory and in your words "in a way that nobody can be adequately explained"

Death of the child - the facts are that a child disappeared and has never been seen since. There is a range of circumstantial evidence to point to this being a likley outcome. However reluctance / refusal by various parties to fully engage with the primary investigation has unfortunately left too many questions unanswered for this now to be proved one way or another

Some other explanation - there have been a lot of crazy theories but again little in the way of any indication that any of these are realistic

The likleyhood is that at this remove - what actually happened may never come to light

Boom_Bap

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

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Scenario 1 or 3 seem the most likely. Scenario 2 simply does not fit the facts and timelines that we know are true and are not disputed.

Scenario 2 still cannot be dismissed though. Like you I really hope that it's not the scenario, but there is no concrete evidence to say that they weren't involved.


There are things that make me suspicious:
1) The police I think within 24 hours where treating the mother as a suspect. No matter how bumbling the police are thought to be, they wouldn't go there without reason.


2) As this case is so vague, was there some sort of cover up? As we are dealing with smart people here, did they do such a good job of covering their trails that this is why we are in this position of not knowing.



3) I've defended their actions in the days/weeks/months after as 'this is just how these particular people are dealing with the situation'. Nobody knows how they would react to what happened.
But, are they trying to act 'normal' in front of the press and cameras and coming across as awkward due to this, are they just awkward people, or are they being meticulous about what they are saying or doing to keep their story going.


These things all lead me to not rule out your second scenario as much as I would love to be able to.

iamwhoiam

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

None of us can rule any scenario out . There is no evidence whatsoever for any scenario , and no evidence to rule any out either
All we know is Madeleine is gone since May 3rd 2017 and no one yet has any evidence that led to being any closer to finding her since .
Major question marks hang over this case , not least about the odd behavour of her parents and the strange assumption within minutes that someone had taken Madeleine .
Personally my gut says they didn't harm her but I certainly have no reason to completely rule them out . Then the " perfect storm " scenario is not a myth and strange things happen and are never discovered due to the perfect storm

Babooshka

gozunda wrote: »

Wrong. Dog evidence as detailed is a valuable search-tool, to be used alongside other, more scientific techniques and evidence gathering. And that is exactly what it was used for in the Madeleine McCann investigation. The work of cadaver and blood dogs is not submitted as evidence, 

Sniffer dogs Eddie and Keela had been brought to Praia da Luz in July 2007 at the request of Mark Harrison, a British investigator and national adviser to UK police, who specialises in searching for people missing, abducted or murdered.

It's hillarious watching various deniers of this methodology getting their knickers in an absolute twist about the this tbh.

I don't think there is anything hilarious about any aspect of this at all, and I think that's a bit of a twisted way of winding people up.

Steve F

It's the repeated smirking of Gerry during interviews that unsettles me
Duping delight anyone?

OrangeBadger

1000