Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

Can you help?

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Can you help?

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:27 am

Perhaps I am cracking up, but I seem to recall that the first traces of blood, were discovered at the apartment by British Detectives using some sort of specialist light (can't remember if it was ultraviolet or what) which showed blood specks not visible to the human eye. I may have confused this with another case, but somehow it has stuck in my mind.

Can anyone else remember this?

Many thanks in anticipation of any help you can offer.

flower


Last edited by Chinadoll on Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:06 am; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by vee8 on Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:31 am

Yes, I remember reading about it too, but I can't remember if it was before or after the dogs came in?
avatar
vee8
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3113
Location : suffolk
Registration date : 2008-06-24

http://www.madeleine-adestinybegun.co.uk

Back to top Go down

China

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:34 am

I don't remember the details...but I seem to remember it was the British police who found the traces of blood...and they said the traces were so small it was impossible to spot them with the naked eye.
Rosie may remember it in more detail.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:41 am

vee8 wrote:Yes, I remember reading about it too, but I can't remember if it was before or after the dogs came in?

From memory Vee8, I think it was before the dogs came in. I wanted to reply to the current thread about the cadaver dogs, but did not want to rely on my memory and this information, as, if prior to the dogs, could be pertinent.

By the way, thanks for the links on the dogs thread. I could not once access The Sun newspapers video link, but saw the footage on the McCann Files and that was what jogged my memory about these tests. I have a few observations to make about that video, but would really like to get my facts straight about this, prior to doing so.

I have also tried searching the McCann files for this information, but any search with blood, always seems to involve the dogs. I am hoping one of us here might recall more information.

Thanks for the reply

flower

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:45 am

Mum21 wrote:I don't remember the details...but I seem to remember it was the British police who found the traces of blood...and they said the traces were so small it was impossible to spot them with the naked eye.
Rosie may remember it in more detail.

Thanks Mum21,

With two posters responding positively, I am hopeful that I am not confusing this with another case - you know the problems I have been having lately (dreadful when I cannot trust my own memory) I was sincerely worried that I had read this in another case and did not want to wrongly quote that information.

flower

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Rosie on Sun Sep 07, 2008 9:17 am

I think this was the blood that turned out to be that of a Eastern European Male (apparently) it could not be checked against a DNA data base in Portugal because they do not have one.

I have been waiting for mention of this in the files.

No blood found in the flat has ever been found to be conclusive. TH PJ accused the McCanns of cleaning the flat, but they moved out of it the night that Madeleine vanished. It was the cleaners that were allowed into the apartment that probably cleaned it.

Whose fault was this? Amaral's of course for not sealing off the crime scene properly!

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:06 am

Rosiepops wrote:I think this was the blood that turned out to be that of a Eastern European Male (apparently) it could not be checked against a DNA data base in Portugal because they do not have one.

I have been waiting for mention of this in the files.

No blood found in the flat has ever been found to be conclusive. TH PJ accused the McCanns of cleaning the flat, but they moved out of it the night that Madeleine vanished. It was the cleaners that were allowed into the apartment that probably cleaned it.

Whose fault was this? Amaral's of course for not sealing off the crime scene properly!

Cheers Rosiepops,

I have been trying to find a link to this report and would be very grateful if anyone can point me in the right direction. I have a specific train of thought about this, but do not want to post it in the public area without confirming same.

flower

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Blood

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:27 am

Forgive me for breaking off from the line of thought here momentarily, but all this still stinks to me. The whole scenario was so unprofessionally managed by the powers that were at the time.
I still firmly believe that Madeleine was abducted by some 'professional' abductors. I still belive that there was something 'planted' in the flat to try to frame Kate and Gerry. I still think they are innocent. I still think they have some idea of what happened when Madeleine was taken. I fully hasten to add by the way that IMO they are absolutely innocent ao ANY foul play whatsoever. I believe they were watched and targetted. I dont think it was any small time pervert involved who 'abused her, then murdered her, then dumped her little body in the sea'.
I believe she is very much alive, she is healthy, she is with some people who will eventually let her go. Why? I dont know. I dont know why she was taken, who has her and when she will return. I think my/our prayer/s will definately be answered.
Something is very odd about EVERYTHING to do with Madeleines' disappearance. I hope to God I am right and that she will be safely home soon. I do not understand it all though.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Guest on Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:02 am

m from m wrote:Forgive me for breaking off from the line of thought here momentarily, but all this still stinks to me. The whole scenario was so unprofessionally managed by the powers that were at the time.
I still firmly believe that Madeleine was abducted by some 'professional' abductors. I still belive that there was something 'planted' in the flat to try to frame Kate and Gerry. I still think they are innocent. I still think they have some idea of what happened when Madeleine was taken. I fully hasten to add by the way that IMO they are absolutely innocent ao ANY foul play whatsoever. I believe they were watched and targetted. I dont think it was any small time pervert involved who 'abused her, then murdered her, then dumped her little body in the sea'.
I believe she is very much alive, she is healthy, she is with some people who will eventually let her go. Why? I dont know. I dont know why she was taken, who has her and when she will return. I think my/our prayer/s will definately be answered.
Something is very odd about EVERYTHING to do with Madeleines' disappearance. I hope to God I am right and that she will be safely home soon. I do not understand it all though.

Hi there M from M,

I have read your posts here on the forum and they are so compassionate, heartfelt and well presented thankyou

I have not had a chance to search for the information about what I think may be the earlier detection of the blood, as I have had company all day and only managed to sneak in here for two minutes earler on, before hubby caught me on the computer :duh:

Perhaps I will get a chance to look tomorrow or it may ring a bell with one of our fellow posters.


Last edited by Chinadoll on Tue Sep 09, 2008 5:47 am; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Hi China

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:28 am

I dont know if this link helps answer your question, it reads as if the dogs indicated the blood first.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2007/08/07/is-it-maddy-s-blood-89520-19581221/
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Guest on Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:12 am

Tinkerbell43 wrote:I dont know if this link helps answer your question, it reads as if the dogs indicated the blood first.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2007/08/07/is-it-maddy-s-blood-89520-19581221/

Thank you for the link Tinks.

My understanding of crime scenes, is that UV lights are a standard bit of kit used to detect many things that are not visible to the naked eye...............including blood, semen and other bodily fluids. I just googled 'ultra vilolet light used to detect blood' and the first link was this:-

http://www.glogerm.com/Crime_blood.pdf

I cannot seem to copy and paste the article and it is small print, so you need to look at the top of the page and use the magnifier.

I simply cannot believe that the pj did not have access to and use of such a standard piece of kit -especially in light of the crime scene not being sealed and vital potential dna being lost due to the lazy slob of a detective Amaral not getting his arse down there that night and doing his job and inter alia, cancelling the cleaners. Surely they are aware of UV lights and their use and importance in forensics?

Also Tinks, I would have thought that the UV light test should have been conducted prior to the dogs being considered - indeed, any positive result from the UV light, would potentially merit further investigation and forensic testing and justify the funding required to bring in the dogs. It just does not add up somehow, but then again, very little the pj did does affraid affraid affraid and of course, we know they did very little.


Last edited by Chinadoll on Tue Sep 09, 2008 5:50 am; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:47 am

China, I think the most damaging part of this investgation (other than Amaral) was the information lost in the early days. Even the very brief forensics that we saw the PJ take in the early days was allegedly not followed up. As confirmed by the files, forensics for Apartment 5A was only pursued from August. 3 months & 4 families after the event! Did you know the FSS had to give the PJ instructions on how to gather the evidence! If it wasn't so tragic it would be laughable.
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Rosie on Mon Sep 08, 2008 11:43 pm

UV light is used in the detection of blood.
"Many biological fluids, and some narcotics, are fluorescent in nature. This means that when such traces are illuminated with sufficient light of the right wavelength, they fluoresce and therefore are detectable."

Also forensic scientists use a substance called 'Luminol' which further aids detection of blood under under a UV light.

  1. Even where the blood has been washed away, luminol should still be able to render it detectable.

  2. Why did they wait so long before proper forensic tests were carried out on this apartment?....Ask Amaral.

  3. Why was it day 100 before proper forensic teams were brought into this apartment?.....Ask Amaral.

  4. Why was this apartment rented out to other families after Madeleine vanished?.....Ask Amaral.

  5. Why hasn't it been made known that it was NOT Madeleine's blood found?....Ask Amaral.


In fact in my opinion Amaral needs to be brought in and officially questioned about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and the appalling way he conducted this investigation.

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Exactly Rosiepops & Tinkerbelle

Post by Guest on Tue Sep 09, 2008 12:25 am

Rosiepops wrote:UV light is used in the detection of blood.
"Many biological fluids, and some narcotics, are fluorescent in nature. This means that when such traces are illuminated with sufficient light of the right wavelength, they fluoresce and therefore are detectable."

Also forensic scientists use a substance called 'Luminol' which further aids detection of blood under under a UV light.

  1. Even where the blood has been washed away, luminol should still be able to render it detectable.

  2. Why did they wait so long before proper forensic tests were carried out on this apartment?....Ask Amaral.

  3. Why was it day 100 before proper forensic teams were brought into this apartment?.....Ask Amaral.

  4. Why was this apartment rented out to other families after Madeleine vanished?.....Ask Amaral.

  5. Why hasn't it been made known that it was NOT Madeleine's blood found?....Ask Amaral.


In fact in my opinion Amaral needs to be brought in and officially questioned about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and the appalling way he conducted this investigation.

I agree 100%

As I said, this is a very basic piece of kit.

I have managed to cut and paste the link I posted earlier

CRIME – UV AND BLOOD
DETECTING BLOOD STAINS
There are several common ways to detect blood at the
crime scene. One very easy and quick way to detect
blood is to use UV light.
When to use UV light to detect blood:
• Reduce the risk of collecting unnecessary stains
• Detect blood on dark, red or violet surfaces
• Find blood stains that are concealed by paint
Reduce the risk of collecting unnecessary stains
By using ultraviolet light it is possible to do an effective
and quick check for possible bloodstains. A bloodstain
exposed to UV light absorbs all light of that bandwidth
and does not reflect back – that is to say, it does not
fluoresce in any way. Thus the stain will appear black
under UV. Although not a conclusive test for blood, it is
an effective presumptive test and can often eliminate
the unnecessary collection of stains that appear to be
blood are actually from another source.
Dark surfaces
The UV light source is also effective for providing sufficient
contrast of bloodstains that are found on red- or
violet-colored objects. Such stains often fade into the
background so well that it is impossible to photograph
them. Ultraviolet light often provides sufficient contrast
between the background and stain to allow the stains to
be visualized in a photograph.
Blood concealed by paint
It is not uncommon that a perpetrator of a crime tries to
get rid of potentially incriminating evidence. This may
include painting over areas that have been exposed to
blood. To the naked human eye it is next to impossible
to see that a blood stain has been painted over. By
using ultraviolet light however, it is possible to detect
blood stains that have been concealed by paint.
WHAT MAKES THE LABINO® UV LIGHT
UNBEATABLE?
• Its high UV intensity creates new possibilities in the
field of crime investigation.
• Labino® high intensity UV lamps are so powerful that
they can even be used in normal lit areas or outdoors
while still maintaining a high contrast-to-background
while maximizing the probability of detecting valuable
traces.
• Immediate start and restart – full power in approximately
5-15 seconds

.............................................................................................

I also understand that the apartment was redecorated at some point in time when it was not a crime scene - it just beggars belief that the pj could allow this. They really appear clueless, or possibly not - I agree that Amaral may know a lot more than it appears. What are the odds of two little girls disappearing into fresh air within only a few miles of each other and the police officers involved reaching the same conclusion that the respective families are to blame and then going on to write and thereby profit from books they wrote about the little girls?

It stinks to high heaven.

I never thought I would say this, as I think the average Portuguese citizen has suffered enough because of this tragedy and the subsequent media coverage, but I for one would not now like any of my family to holiday in Portugal. God help any holiday maker that finds themselves on the wrong side of that joke of a police force. The more I read and learn about this case, the more I believe that the McCanns have been set up and possibly not from day one, but earlier

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Hi Tinks and China

Post by Rosie on Tue Sep 09, 2008 1:02 am

Chinadoll wrote:
Rosiepops wrote:UV light is used in the detection of blood.
"Many biological fluids, and some narcotics, are fluorescent in nature. This means that when such traces are illuminated with sufficient light of the right wavelength, they fluoresce and therefore are detectable."

Also forensic scientists use a substance called 'Luminol' which further aids detection of blood under under a UV light.

  1. Even where the blood has been washed away, luminol should still be able to render it detectable.

  2. Why did they wait so long before proper forensic tests were carried out on this apartment?....Ask Amaral.

  3. Why was it day 100 before proper forensic teams were brought into this apartment?.....Ask Amaral.

  4. Why was this apartment rented out to other families after Madeleine vanished?.....Ask Amaral.

  5. Why hasn't it been made known that it was NOT Madeleine's blood found?....Ask Amaral.


In fact in my opinion Amaral needs to be brought in and officially questioned about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and the appalling way he conducted this investigation.

I agree 100%

As I said, this is a very basic piece of kit.

I have managed to cut and paste the link I posted earlier

CRIME – UV AND BLOOD
DETECTING BLOOD STAINS
There are several common ways to detect blood at the
crime scene. One very easy and quick way to detect
blood is to use UV light.
When to use UV light to detect blood:
• Reduce the risk of collecting unnecessary stains
• Detect blood on dark, red or violet surfaces
• Find blood stains that are concealed by paint
Reduce the risk of collecting unnecessary stains
By using ultraviolet light it is possible to do an effective
and quick check for possible bloodstains. A bloodstain
exposed to UV light absorbs all light of that bandwidth
and does not reflect back – that is to say, it does not
fluoresce in any way. Thus the stain will appear black
under UV. Although not a conclusive test for blood, it is
an effective presumptive test and can often eliminate
the unnecessary collection of stains that appear to be
blood are actually from another source.
Dark surfaces
The UV light source is also effective for providing sufficient
contrast of bloodstains that are found on red- or
violet-colored objects. Such stains often fade into the
background so well that it is impossible to photograph
them. Ultraviolet light often provides sufficient contrast
between the background and stain to allow the stains to
be visualized in a photograph.
Blood concealed by paint
It is not uncommon that a perpetrator of a crime tries to
get rid of potentially incriminating evidence. This may
include painting over areas that have been exposed to
blood. To the naked human eye it is next to impossible
to see that a blood stain has been painted over. By
using ultraviolet light however, it is possible to detect
blood stains that have been concealed by paint.
WHAT MAKES THE LABINO® UV LIGHT
UNBEATABLE?
• Its high UV intensity creates new possibilities in the
field of crime investigation.
• Labino® high intensity UV lamps are so powerful that
they can even be used in normal lit areas or outdoors
while still maintaining a high contrast-to-background
while maximizing the probability of detecting valuable
traces.
• Immediate start and restart – full power in approximately
5-15 seconds

.............................................................................................

I also understand that the apartment was redecorated at some point in time when it was not a crime scene - it just beggars belief that the pj could allow this. They really appear clueless, or possibly not - I agree that Amaral may know a lot more than it appears. What are the odds of two little girls disappearing into fresh air within only a few miles of each other and the police officers involved reaching the same conclusion that the respective families are to blame and then going on to write and thereby profit from books they wrote about the little girls?

It stinks to high heaven.

I never thought I would say this, as I think the average Portuguese citizen has suffered enough because of this tragedy and the subsequent media coverage, but I for one would not now like any of my family to holiday in Portugal. God help any holiday maker that finds themselves on the wrong side of that joke of a police force. The more I read and learn about this case, the more I believe that the McCanns have been set up and possibly not from day one, but earlier

I agree and there is no way I would want to holiday in Portugal until I knew for certain that a massive root and branch investigation has been carried out of their police force. I do not blame all the Portuguese police, but if I was Portuguese I would want this to happen, it is the only way forward for them now in my opinion.
The fall out and the damage to the Portuguese tourist industry will be massive, this is not going to go away.

It is time for Amaral to start talking.......to the right people!

Take Amaral in for questioning Rebelo. Madeleine's life is depending on it in my opinion.

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Rosie, Tinks, ChinaKate

Post by dianeh on Wed Sep 10, 2008 9:12 am

I havent read back over the whole thread, so forgive me in advance if someone has brought this up already.

Doesnt it strike you as odd, that if according to Amoral's theory that Kate had accidentally overdosed Madeleine on a sedative (and not paracetamol), what is the relevance of any blood in the apartment, and surely if Madeleine had died of a blow that left blood stains, there would be more than a couple of specks.

Either way, Amoral is wrong AGAIN.
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Rosie on Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:30 am

Guest wrote:Perhaps I am cracking up, but I seem to recall that the first traces of blood, were discovered at the apartment by British Detectives using some sort of specialist light (can't remember if it was ultraviolet or what) which showed blood specks not visible to the human eye. I may have confused this with another case, but somehow it has stuck in my mind.

Can anyone else remember this?

Many thanks in anticipation of any help you can offer.

flower

The chemical used for detecting blood is called 'Luminol' and I too remember it being reported as being used, mind you the papers............who knows?

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by dianeh on Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:11 am

THere is no relevance to blood in the apartment. All houses will have traces of blood if Luminal is used. The only way blood would be relevant if it is in large enough amounts to suggest violence and it can be identified as Madeleine's.

Any leak about blood in the apartment is just another smear, to trap the foolhardy, and it appeared to work, many foolhardy anti's thought it showed something.
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Rosie on Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:35 pm

dianeh wrote:THere is no relevance to blood in the apartment. All houses will have traces of blood if Luminal is used. The only way blood would be relevant if it is in large enough amounts to suggest violence and it can be identified as Madeleine's.

Any leak about blood in the apartment is just another smear, to trap the foolhardy, and it appeared to work, many foolhardy anti's thought it showed something.

Spot on Diane! One micro spec of blood proves absolutely nothing, especially when that micro spec of blood turns out to belong to a male who cut himself shaving *AFTER* Goncalo Amaral, allowed the apartment, *a scene of a serious crime* to be let to several other families in the month after Madeleine disappeared and then 3 months later he decided then to make the apartment a crime scene? After allowing it to become contaminated and any evidence ruined and the whole scene compromised.

You have to ask is Amaral just thick and incapable, or is there something else at play here?

How strange is it that all that time later after allowing the world and his brother to walk through that apartment, that Amaral allows the British sniffer dogs in the apartment and miraculously they indicate a positive?

Even stranger when you see on video clip the cadaver dog Eddie,just totally disinterested in cuddle cat and then behold yet another miracle takes place; *after 'someone' removes cuddle cat from where Eddie left it after being totally bored with the toy, he suddenly finds it in a cupboard and indicates a positive some minutes later? How odd is that?

Yes I would say it is all starting to fit together now! (And this is without that ridiculous charade of Eddie being appearing to be forced, or at least heavily encouraged by his handler to indicate a positve at the hire car, a car hired 25 days AFTER Madeleine disappeared.)

Did Martin Grimes ever explain why he seemed to be a bit confused after saying in his statement that he did not know which car was the McCanns, despite the said hire care being left plastered with the McCanns yellow 'Find Madeleine' posters?

Whoops another oddity, everyone else present at the time seemed to know who that car belonged to, all except for Martin Grime?!

How does Goncalo Amaral explain all of this?

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by sadie on Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:20 pm

Rosiepops wrote:
dianeh wrote:THere is no relevance to blood in the apartment. All houses will have traces of blood if Luminal is used. The only way blood would be relevant if it is in large enough amounts to suggest violence and it can be identified as Madeleine's.

Any leak about blood in the apartment is just another smear, to trap the foolhardy, and it appeared to work, many foolhardy anti's thought it showed something.

Spot on Diane! One micro spec of blood proves absolutely nothing, especially when that micro spec of blood turns out to belong to a male who cut himself shaving *AFTER* Goncalo Amaral, allowed the apartment, *a scene of a serious crime* to be let to several other families in the month after Madeleine disappeared and then 3 months later he decided then to make the apartment a crime scene? After allowing it to become contaminated and any evidence ruined and the whole scene compromised.

You have to ask is Amaral just thick and incapable, or is there something else at play here?

How strange is it that all that time later after allowing the world and his brother to walk through that apartment, that Amaral allows the British sniffer dogs in the apartment and miraculously they indicate a positive?

Even stranger when you see on video clip the cadaver dog Eddie,just totally disinterested in cuddle cat and then behold yet another miracle takes place; *after 'someone' removes cuddle cat from where Eddie left it after being totally bored with the toy, he suddenly finds it in a cupboard and indicates a positive some minutes later? How odd is that?

Yes I would say it is all starting to fit together now! (And this is without that ridiculous charade of Eddie being appearing to be forced, or at least heavily encouraged by his handler to indicate a positve at the hire car, a car hired 25 days AFTER Madeleine disappeared.)

Did Martin Grimes ever explain why he seemed to be a bit confused after saying in his statement that he did not know which car was the McCanns, despite the said hire care being left plastered with the McCanns yellow 'Find Madeleine' posters?

Whoops another oddity, everyone else present at the time seemed to know who that car belonged to, all except for Martin Grime?!

How does Goncalo Amaral explain all of this?

Very concise post, Rosie. I am with you all the way on this.
avatar
sadie
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 953
Location : UK
Registration date : 2008-11-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Catkins on Thu Apr 09, 2009 12:42 am

sadie wrote:
Rosiepops wrote:
dianeh wrote:THere is no relevance to blood in the apartment. All houses will have traces of blood if Luminal is used. The only way blood would be relevant if it is in large enough amounts to suggest violence and it can be identified as Madeleine's.

Any leak about blood in the apartment is just another smear, to trap the foolhardy, and it appeared to work, many foolhardy anti's thought it showed something.

Spot on Diane! One micro spec of blood proves absolutely nothing, especially when that micro spec of blood turns out to belong to a male who cut himself shaving *AFTER* Goncalo Amaral, allowed the apartment, *a scene of a serious crime* to be let to several other families in the month after Madeleine disappeared and then 3 months later he decided then to make the apartment a crime scene? After allowing it to become contaminated and any evidence ruined and the whole scene compromised.

You have to ask is Amaral just thick and incapable, or is there something else at play here?

How strange is it that all that time later after allowing the world and his brother to walk through that apartment, that Amaral allows the British sniffer dogs in the apartment and miraculously they indicate a positive?

Even stranger when you see on video clip the cadaver dog Eddie,just totally disinterested in cuddle cat and then behold yet another miracle takes place; *after 'someone' removes cuddle cat from where Eddie left it after being totally bored with the toy, he suddenly finds it in a cupboard and indicates a positive some minutes later? How odd is that?

Yes I would say it is all starting to fit together now! (And this is without that ridiculous charade of Eddie being appearing to be forced, or at least heavily encouraged by his handler to indicate a positve at the hire car, a car hired 25 days AFTER Madeleine disappeared.)

Did Martin Grimes ever explain why he seemed to be a bit confused after saying in his statement that he did not know which car was the McCanns, despite the said hire care being left plastered with the McCanns yellow 'Find Madeleine' posters?

Whoops another oddity, everyone else present at the time seemed to know who that car belonged to, all except for Martin Grime?!

How does Goncalo Amaral explain all of this?

Very concise post, Rosie. I am with you all the way on this.
waiting Sooo many odd things in this case............
avatar
Catkins
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1829
Location : UK
Registration date : 2009-02-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by honestbroker on Sat May 16, 2009 11:39 pm

From what I've learnt from other boards, from reading the files and from other sources, I think there's a number of strands we can tie up, here.

I think we need to go back to the forensic sweep of the apartment immediately after Madeleine's disappearance. There are striking anomalies from that point. The first ties in closely with the sacred anti-mantra, There's no evidence of an abduction. It goes without saying that to find such evidence, you need to look for it. One startlingly obvious place to start might have been Madeleine's bedding. Yet the results from the Portuguese forensic laboratory (where initial tests were carried out) make no mention of any bedding, aside from a duvet cover with a spot, initially thought, I think, to be semen. But there is no mention of sheets. That was a surprising omission. The decision to allow the apartment to be re-let, several times, was another, although context is arguably important, here. I gather steps have recently be taken to establish one, but at the point of Madeleine's disappearance, Portugal had no DNA data base of control profiles against which profiles established from the apartment could be checked. And the decision to allow the British to run their own forensic tests was taken very late. So that, in part, might explain two decisions that, otherwise, appear extraordinary lapses. Still, there was a strong argument for taking up the bedding, as control DNA samples of people (such as Robert Murat and the McCanns' friends) had been taken, and establishing an absence of Robert Murat's DNA from the bedding might have gone, at least a long way, to eliminating him. Still, essentially, it probably never occurred to Amaral that any further tests than those of the initial sweep would be carried out. Against that background, it is perhaps isn't so surprising that he would have released the apartment to be re-let.

Now fast-forward nearly three months to Eddie, Keela et al. hitting town (or at least hitting Praia da Luz). I think we can be confident that blood was found both in the apartment and in the car by Keela, since she did react and doesn't react to anything other than human blood. And the forensic results make sense of two statements, one by Grimes, and one by Lowe. Grimes said that his dogs are actually more sensitive in their reactions than forensic tests carried out on samples found. And Lowe said that results established by LCN would not yield the nature of material from which any profile was extracted. In other words, while Keela could tell you it was blood, the bods in the labs couldn't. That was borne out. Something else, too. When blood is deposited in quantities large enough to be detected with the human eye, you can tell just by looking at it whether it is from the body of someone living or someone dead by the way that it congeals. Blood lost from the body of someone dead will present as flakes; and from the body of someone alive as spots.

All we know about samples recovered from the apartment is that will have contained blood (because Keela reacted) and that one (inconclusive) result had Madeleine's name on it. All other profiles established either had other people's names on them, or no names at all. That is precisely zilch evidence that Madeleine died in the apartment. And from the car, the same. 15 components of Madeleine's 20 components (that presented as 19 because of a coincidence of identical match from either parent in one component) contained elements the same as elements of Lowe himself, and of several of his colleagues at the FSS headquarters. The remaining elements were contributed by at least three and possibly as many as five different people. About all we can say of what was recovered from the boot (not from forensic tests, but from Keela's reaction) is that contained blood. That's it. Again, no evidence of a deceased Madeleine.

Now, here is another startling anomaly: the reaction to Kate's clothes. Kate proferred as a possible explanation that she had attended a number of patient deaths during the course of her duties as a GP just before the holiday; and Grimes (without commenting on Kate's specific claim) confirmed that cross conamination is always possible. Obviously that explanation wouldn't have accounted for Eddie's to the children's clothing, to which Eddie also reacted. But here are two astonishing facts. The search by the dogs (including of the McCanns' personal belongings) consisted of just 27 items in total for a family of 5 presented for Eddie to inspect. How fortunate (for the PJ) that among those items were certain items of Kate's clothing (but not Gerry's) and the children's that carried the scent. There was also CuddleCat (one of the 27 items) that carried the scent. How careless of the McCanns (fully three months on) not to get rid of anything that might incriminate them. But here's the most asonishing thing. None of the items to which Eddie reacted were ever retained for forensic examination. Whyever not?

Planted scent is a possibility, but we can dismiss the manufactured psuedo-scents, because Grimes says in his profile that these have been tested on Eddie and Eddie has not reacted. But what else he says is interesting. Eddie has been trained on swine cadaver scent and (according to Grimes) can't differentiate between the two. This is all contained in Grimes' profile, presented to the PJ before the British team arrived. Perhaps forewarned was forearmed?

honestbroker
Apprentice's Assistant
Apprentice's Assistant

Number of posts : 211
Location : britain
Registration date : 2008-08-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by sadie on Sun May 17, 2009 1:31 am

As ever, Hb, soundly researched and eloquently presented.

Swine cadavar....Hmm? I wonder........?

Seem to remember something about pigs before (And freezers and refrigerators and sexual goings on and mother to blame)........now when was that.....Hmm?


There is just one question, Hb - can you help, please?

Cuddlecat:
was that before the cupboard, or after it?


Now a question for the rest of J4

The childrens clothes:
Eddie reacted to them, am i right?
Did the twins carry Madeleines body to the beach, do you think? affraid



No, no, seriously..........how did they get involved in the manslaughter/murder?


Amarals team has implicated them; THEY MUST be involved if HE says so - HE KNOWS the TRUTH of the LIE...........we all know that dont we? He's written a book to prove it, hasn't he?


......Hmm?
avatar
sadie
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 953
Location : UK
Registration date : 2008-11-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Rosie on Sun May 17, 2009 1:58 am

honestbroker wrote:From what I've learnt from other boards, from reading the files and from other sources, I think there's a number of strands we can tie up, here.

I think we need to go back to the forensic sweep of the apartment immediately after Madeleine's disappearance. There are striking anomalies from that point. The first ties in closely with the sacred anti-mantra, There's no evidence of an abduction. It goes without saying that to find such evidence, you need to look for it. One startlingly obvious place to start might have been Madeleine's bedding. Yet the results from the Portuguese forensic laboratory (where initial tests were carried out) make no mention of any bedding, aside from a duvet cover with a spot, initially thought, I think, to be semen. But there is no mention of sheets. That was a surprising omission. The decision to allow the apartment to be re-let, several times, was another, although context is arguably important, here. I gather steps have recently be taken to establish one, but at the point of Madeleine's disappearance, Portugal had no DNA data base of control profiles against which profiles established from the apartment could be checked. And the decision to allow the British to run their own forensic tests was taken very late. So that, in part, might explain two decisions that, otherwise, appear extraordinary lapses. Still, there was a strong argument for taking up the bedding, as control DNA samples of people (such as Robert Murat and the McCanns' friends) had been taken, and establishing an absence of Robert Murat's DNA from the bedding might have gone, at least a long way, to eliminating him. Still, essentially, it probably never occurred to Amaral that any further tests than those of the initial sweep would be carried out. Against that background, it is perhaps isn't so surprising that he would have released the apartment to be re-let.

Now fast-forward nearly three months to Eddie, Keela et al. hitting town (or at least hitting Praia da Luz). I think we can be confident that blood was found both in the apartment and in the car by Keela, since she did react and doesn't react to anything other than human blood. And the forensic results make sense of two statements, one by Grimes, and one by Lowe. Grimes said that his dogs are actually more sensitive in their reactions than forensic tests carried out on samples found. And Lowe said that results established by LCN would not yield the nature of material from which any profile was extracted. In other words, while Keela could tell you it was blood, the bods in the labs couldn't. That was borne out. Something else, too. When blood is deposited in quantities large enough to be detected with the human eye, you can tell just by looking at it whether it is from the body of someone living or someone dead by the way that it congeals. Blood lost from the body of someone dead will present as flakes; and from the body of someone alive as spots.

All we know about samples recovered from the apartment is that will have contained blood (because Keela reacted) and that one (inconclusive) result had Madeleine's name on it. All other profiles established either had other people's names on them, or no names at all. That is precisely zilch evidence that Madeleine died in the apartment. And from the car, the same. 15 components of Madeleine's 20 components (that presented as 19 because of a coincidence of identical match from either parent in one component) contained elements the same as elements of Lowe himself, and of several of his colleagues at the FSS headquarters. The remaining elements were contributed by at least three and possibly as many as five different people. About all we can say of what was recovered from the boot (not from forensic tests, but from Keela's reaction) is that contained blood. That's it. Again, no evidence of a deceased Madeleine.

Now, here is another startling anomaly: the reaction to Kate's clothes. Kate proferred as a possible explanation that she had attended a number of patient deaths during the course of her duties as a GP just before the holiday; and Grimes (without commenting on Kate's specific claim) confirmed that cross conamination is always possible. Obviously that explanation wouldn't have accounted for Eddie's to the children's clothing, to which Eddie also reacted. But here are two astonishing facts. The search by the dogs (including of the McCanns' personal belongings) consisted of just 27 items in total for a family of 5 presented for Eddie to inspect. How fortunate (for the PJ) that among those items were certain items of Kate's clothing (but not Gerry's) and the children's that carried the scent. There was also CuddleCat (one of the 27 items) that carried the scent. How careless of the McCanns (fully three months on) not to get rid of anything that might incriminate them. But here's the most asonishing thing. None of the items to which Eddie reacted were ever retained for forensic examination. Whyever not?

Planted scent is a possibility, but we can dismiss the manufactured psuedo-scents, because Grimes says in his profile that these have been tested on Eddie and Eddie has not reacted. But what else he says is interesting. Eddie has been trained on swine cadaver scent and (according to Grimes) can't differentiate between the two. This is all contained in Grimes' profile, presented to the PJ before the British team arrived. Perhaps forewarned was forearmed?

I agree HB, I have maintained this belief of mine for a very long time now. I used to call for Amaral to be booted off of this case long before he actually was and I used to get called all kinds of names, for even daring to suggest that perhaps under the circumstances, that Goncalo Amaral was not the best person to have been put in charge of this investigation. Like you I believe this can be separated up to ask the relevant questions.

Have you ever seen anything like this in your life? One man in charge of this investigation for 4 months, made an immeasurable amount of errors which I believe may not have been real errors and has managed to generate a huge number of questions that he alone can only answer? Also another phenomenon is, each question and act by the those investigating this case, seems to lead off at a tangent and present many more questions itself and as yet, they all remain unanswered!


  • Why wasn't the apartment and surrounding areas sealed off immediately?
  • Why did Amaral not send Madeleine's bedding for forensic analysis?
  • Why didn't the forensics team take the initiative and take the bedding for analysis?
  • Why were the resort cleaners allowed to come in and clean the apartment after the abduction?
  • Why was the apartment allowed to be let to other holiday makers in the months after Madeleine's abduction?
  • Why did it take Amaral THREE whole months to seal the apartment off and treat it as a crime scene?
  • Amaral must have been well aware of the FACT that nothing found inside that apartment after such a long space of time, would ever stand up in court as evidence because it would obviously been contaminated and heavily compromised, so why after 3 months did Amaral suddenly act?
  • Why after three months did he accept the offer of the dogs? Apparently he had been offered these before but declined!
  • It is almost as if he *expected* to find incriminating evidence and what better way to present it through animals who cannot talk? It is almost as if Amaral was panicked into doing this, it certainly wasn't well thought out!
  • Why did Eddie flip cuddle cat aside inside the apartment, totally uninterested, yet some time later when a *anonymous person* had picked up cuddle cat and moved it and placed it in the cupboard, Eddie came along and suddenly indicated a positive? This is HIGHLY suspicious, HIGHLY SUSPECT so:
  • a)Who is the person that picked cuddle cat up and placed it in that cupboard? b)Name of person? c) What position does he hold? d) What is the relevance of his position to this investigation? e) Has this person ever been in contact with a dead body or "animal" prior to touching this toy? f) Why did he pick cuddle cat up from where Eddie has disinterestedly tossed it aside earlier and place it in the cupboard? g) Has any back ground checks been carried out on this person?
  • Amaral maintains that Gerry hid Madeleine's body after digging it up from the beach, then WHY was it that only Kate's clothing and some of the children's presented to the dogs to scent? If Gerry did this and he carried a 25 day old decomposing body, the DNA and odour would have been all over him, it would have been all over the car, it would have been on light switches, door handles, the furniture etc, yet all that was ever found was a minute speck of DNA on a 6 inch square of carpet from the boot, which could never be proved came from Madeleine. There is confusion as to what this DNA matter actually was, as I think I read that the FSS said they could not definitely identify it.
  • There was never any DNA evidence other than what you would have expected to find in a place where Madeleine and her family had been staying and by Locards Principle of transference, what you would wholly expect to find in ANY car the McCann family had travelled in!
  • So why did Amaral go ahead and make the McCanns suspects when he knew perfectly well that there was not anything to back his suspicions up? Amaral did know this, he was specifically told this in an email from the head of the FSS in Birmingham - John Lowe.
  • Why wasn't 'SEAN's' little T shirt which Eddie was supposed to have indicated a positive to retained for further forensic examination?
  • Why weren't Kate's clothes which Eddie was supposed to indicate at retained for forensic examination?
  • Why were NO clothes of Gerry McCann used in the experiment?

I find it astonishing that Grime admitted that Eddie was trained using swine cadaver scent, in other words any old Tom, Jose' or Gonc could have got a pork chop and taken it into apartment 5a!
Seems to me a sound reason for suddenly wanting the British dogs in that apartment after THREE months had passed.

I also want to know why Martin Grime was kitted out in the proper scene of crime suit when the car experiment was being carried out, yet when it came to a more enclosed space and a hugely increased chance of cross contamination, did Martin Grime appear in his jeans and T-shirt and NO proper SOC overalls?

  • Why wear overalls at the car park yet not in the apartment?
  • Why allow Eddie a few seconds at each car, yet when it came to the McCann hire car, did he allow 6/7 minutes and repeatedly call Eddie back 6 times when the dog showed no interest in the car at all?
  • Why did Grime say he did not know which was the hire car when it had Find Madeleine stickers covering it and identifying it?
  • Why did Eddie indicate at the outside side of the car and not the boot where Keela indicated?
  • Why did Grime say that "in view of the dog indicating at the rubber seal, he did not intend to put the dog inside the car? Why not?
  • For what reason did Grime not want to put Eddie inside the car?
  • If this cadaver scent from a recently deceased body was so strong that Eddie picked it up inside the apartment some THREE months and several holiday making families later, then why did Eddie NOT react on the beach where Goncalo Amaral maintains Gerry buried the body of his daughter before returning to it and digging it up and interring it elsewhere? (In the full glare of the world's media of course) The traces of it would have been really strong. (That is if it wasn't detected by dogs, wild animals, children digging in the sand other holiday makers first)
  • Did Eddie ever indicate a positive at a policeman or his handler or someone else during this experiment?
  • Why wasn't it made absolutely clear that Martin Grime and the company he has helped formed is a PRIVATE company and he is NOT affiliated to any official police force in the UK?

Very easy to tie your shoe lace and rub a tiny bit of pig meat on the rubber seal of the car isn't it? Especially if that side of the car was not as visible as the other side and the boot, where it was parked!
Very easy to go outside and handle pork meat and then come inside and pick cuddle cat up and put it into the cupboard too!

Why has Amaral written that Grime has said that these dogs have never been wrong in 200 case yet I can think of one where Eddie was wrong.

Eddie was proved wrong in Jersey, where he indicated a false positive at a coconut shell and a lump of old cardboard. NO DNA was found on either sample.

Why has Amaral sought to mislead when he talks about these 200 cases? Eddie is a search and find dog, his job is to find bodies, so his snout scents and leads him to bodies, bodies are recovered from under rubble etc. How do we know Eddie is not just sniffing out the scent of a human being/animal? Truth is we do not and this is why dog evidence is not allowed in court in the UK or Portugal.

I would quite like to know why Martin Grime appeared to allow himself to be in awe of people concerned with this investigation.

If we can literally pull this to pieces think what a solicitor could do!

One last thing, exactly where was Goncalo Amaral during the apartment sniffing exercise and the car park sniffing exercise?

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by clairesy on Sun May 17, 2009 3:16 am

But what else he says is interesting. Eddie has been trained on swine
cadaver scent and (according to Grimes) can't differentiate between the
two.

Laffin Laffin

well whats a swine? back to the poice again then aint we. Laffin Laffin


I read the whole post honestbroker and it is astonishing that they get all this evidence 3 months later aswel.I have always wondered weather it was deliberate because they refused the help of these dogs very early on.I remember reading news reports that brit cops were increasing frustrated that they were not allowed to fly to Portugal immediately when it was clear to see the Portuguese were struggling with the case. Yet they still refused help......then after 3 months they allow them to help????imo if they were doing everything they could to help Madeleine they would have allowed the brits with the dogs to go and help straight away.They were obviously avoiding it for some reason.
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Can you help?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum