Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #28

[Chiatos]

My read is he is saying the match is of low statistical significance. In other words, it's not likely to be the same person.

Based on what could he make that assumption?
Especially with that red flag indicating towards "another crime".
Plenty reason to investigate further instead of dismissing the significance of that match.

And I am still wondering what that other crime has been(!)

 

[Pixie Child]

So, this would be on the balcony of block 6, overlooking block 5 and 5A?
P.J. POLICE FILES: GRAHAM MCKENZIE

Missing link overlooked in the Madeleine McCann case - Olive Press News Spain

 

[C.greek]

Agreed. I couldn't understand how he can make that statement. If I'm reading it correctly, he's saying the samples match but due to the old sample only using 6 markers, chances are that they might not match if the old sample was re-tested using the more modern test. But, that's not to say they wouldn't match either. He seems to be basing his comment on statistical assumption, which seems rather odd.

agreed. it's an odd assumption to make. but I think he was looking specifically for evidence of MM's DNA in the boot of the car and in the blood alerts of the dogs... so perhaps there is also an assumption there that shouldn't be.
I am also interested in the mention of the old SGM (with data from six STR loci) - in the UK it was used from 1995 until 1999 (when the SGM Plus was introduced with 10 STR loci). are we then talking pre-1999 for the crime? sounds strange... unfortunately we don't have a lot of info to go by for that crime spot. Was it the FSS that did the analysis or the Portuguese forensics lab?

Second Generation Multiplex - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

 

[C.greek]

Espacio Exterior: An error by the Portuguese investigators would make Christian Brueckner's conviction for the crime of Madeleine McCann very unlikely

The evidence that was not collected was "cigarette butts".

is the below what you refer to?

After the examination of the inside of the apartment and despite the immediate surroundings of the referred apartment not having been preserved [protected]there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects/traces of forensic value and [nor] of any traces of shoe-prints in the garden area of the apartment.
The recovery of cigarette stubs was not viable due to the existence of a reasonable quantity thereof within the referred perimeter.
[Note: I think the writer meant to say 'due to the non-existence of'.]

P.J. POLICE FILES: FORENSIC COLLECTIONS 4 MAY 2007

 

[Janosch]

okay, so I guess we are also talking here about the cigarette butts mentioned by witnesses from the man that was supposedly observing 5a?

It was across the road from the McCann's apartment and the public balcony overlooked the side of their building and the road. You could actually see the front and back of the building from that view point. I noticed on the balcony that there was a pile of cigarette butts as if there had been someone stood there for some time smoking. I thought that was odd , and it could have been someone watching the McCann's apartment to monitor their comings and goings.

P.J. POLICE FILES: GRAHAM MCKENZIE

No.

 

[Dlk79]

Madeleine: How the police ruined the forensic evidence in her bedroom

It was earlier reported that officers were smoking at the scene so if it's anything to do with that, could be why they weren't collected?

 

[Pixie Child]

So, this would be on the balcony of block 6, overlooking block 5 and 5A?
P.J. POLICE FILES: GRAHAM MCKENZIE

Missing link overlooked in the Madeleine McCann case - Olive Press News Spain

No.

Outside the apartment?

Or the balcony in an adjacent flat where the 2 blonde men were spotted? Is this different to the Graham McKenzie flat?

 

[C.greek]

Espacio Exterior: An error by the Portuguese investigators would make Christian Brueckner's conviction for the crime of Madeleine McCann very unlikely

The evidence that was not collected was "cigarette butts".

is the below what you refer to?

After the examination of the inside of the apartment and despite the immediate surroundings of the referred apartment not having been preserved [protected]there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects/traces of forensic value and [nor] of any traces of shoe-prints in the garden area of the apartment.
The recovery of cigarette stubs was not viable due to the existence of a reasonable quantity thereof within the referred perimeter.
[Note: I think the writer meant to say 'due to the non-existence of'.]

P.J. POLICE FILES: FORENSIC COLLECTIONS 4 MAY 2007

 

[Tekno]

No.

These balconies, then?

 

[C.greek]

is the below what you refer to?

After the examination of the inside of the apartment and despite the immediate surroundings of the referred apartment not having been preserved [protected]there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects/traces of forensic value and [nor] of any traces of shoe-prints in the garden area of the apartment.
The recovery of cigarette stubs was not viable due to the existence of a reasonable quantity thereof within the referred perimeter.
[Note: I think the writer meant to say 'due to the non-existence of'.]

P.J. POLICE FILES: FORENSIC COLLECTIONS 4 MAY 2007

I think if this is what you refer to, the abductor most possibly would not have been so stupid as to smoke a cigarette before entering... of course one never knows the level of stupidity of an individual, but the chances would be that the abductor would have been careful not to leave such obvious forensic traces, right?

 

[Tekno]

I get you Heri.“Now we know that the Portuguese investigators did not collect all the possible sources of nuclear DNA at the scene of the crime, hours after it happened. The traces were there, and it is not understood why they were not collected. We are referring to an unknown number of cigarette butts that were found outside, but very close to, apartment 5A”.
Not the McKenzie statement and block 6’s balconies, then?

 

[C.greek]

I get you Heri.“Now we know that the Portuguese investigators did not collect all the possible sources of nuclear DNA at the scene of the crime, hours after it happened. The traces were there, and it is not understood why they were not collected. We are referring to an unknown number of cigarette butts that were found outside, but very close to, apartment 5A”.
Not the McKenzie statement and block 6’s balconies, then?

most probably refers to that statement about the collection of forensics {?}

After the examination of the inside of the apartment and despite the immediate surroundings of the referred apartment not having been preserved [protected]there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects/traces of forensic value and [nor] of any traces of shoe-prints in the garden area of the apartment.
The recovery of cigarette stubs was not viable due to the existence of a reasonable quantity thereof within the referred perimeter.
[Note: I think the writer meant to say 'due to the non-existence of'.]

P.J. POLICE FILES: FORENSIC COLLECTIONS 4 MAY 2007

Note by C.greek: the note of the translator is most possibly not correct. the original document probably referred to a vast quantity of butts and not the opposite.

 

[Hygge]

[apartment not having been preserved [protected] there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects

I get you Heri.“Now we know that the Portuguese investigators did not collect all the possible sources of nuclear DNA at the scene of the crime, hours after it happened. The traces were there, and it is not understood why they were not collected. We are referring to an unknown number of cigarette butts that were found outside, but very close to, apartment 5A”.
Not the McKenzie statement and block 6’s balconies, then?

according to the files “ immediate surroundings” so I guess near the front door or patio? garden?

 

[Pixie Child]

most probably refers to that statement about the collection of forensics {?}

After the examination of the inside of the apartment and despite the immediate surroundings of the referred apartment not having been preserved [protected]there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects/traces of forensic value and [nor] of any traces of shoe-prints in the garden area of the apartment.
The recovery of cigarette stubs was not viable due to the existence of a reasonable quantity thereof within the referred perimeter.
[Note: I think the writer meant to say 'due to the non-existence of'.]

P.J. POLICE FILES: FORENSIC COLLECTIONS 4 MAY 2007

Note by C.greek: the note of the translator is most possibly not correct. the original document probably referred to a vast quantity of butts and not the opposite.

Agree - this case shows the importance of collecting everything.

Looking at this issue, I noticed that a witness said that the blonde man & his friend used the Habana Internet cafe. I hope they checked their computers.

 

[C.greek]

Agree - this case shows the importance of collecting everything.

Looking at this issue, I noticed that a witness said that the blonde man & his friend used the Habana Internet cafe. I hope they checked their computers.

I doubt it... the original investigation very soon after turned against the parents, so all other sightings, witness statements etc were either ignored or were taken into consideration if they fit their collecting of evidence against the parents.

agreed about the importance of collecting everything!

 

[C.greek]

If this witness is the *star witness* for MWT's documentary who would provide the bombshell alibi, I despair...

A new witness has come forward in the case of missing Madeleine McCann claiming to have been with the prime suspect just before and after she disappeared, it is reported

The new witness reportedly insists CB was calm while she was with him and says they were stopped by police who reported no suspicious activity.

The German witness, who was living in Portugal in 2007, believes Brueckner was miles away from Praia da Luz in Portugal on the day Madeleine went missing from a resort there.

A source told the Sun: "She says she was not with him the day Madeleine disappeared but spoke with him and again said he seemed normal."


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/witness-claims-madeleine-mccann-suspect-26029921

Just a rehash of the Sun rehash. and could she be the week-long fling? if so, wow! I mean getting to know a person so well within a week that could discern changes in their behaviour!

 

[Tekno]

[apartment not having been preserved [protected] there proceeded the detailed observation of the exterior there not having been detected the existence of any objects

according to the files “ immediate surroundings” so I guess near the front door or patio? garden?

Or alleyway between the apartment and Tapas area? Or the lamppost where Madeleine’s scent was picked up by the dogs?

 

[mrjitty]

Based on what could he make that assumption?
Especially with that red flag indicating towards "another crime".
Plenty reason to investigate further instead of dismissing the significance of that match.

And I am still wondering what that other crime has been(!)

Well this is only the DNA analyst guy - so presumably he is seeing low statistical significance on the "match" -

It's up to other people what they investigate.

 

[tedtink]

No.

Wasn't there too many ciggy butts to collect and that's why they didn't bother?
That's how I interpreted it.

 

[SuperdadV8]

How crucial would these ciggy butts be, if not being found in 5A, but in the area, even if they had been contaminated with the perps DNA?

IMO nothing more than another clue, like the phonecall. There isn't a time stamp on them, right?

IMO it's kind of sensationalism to claim, the case could crumble because the cigarette butts from the closer area hadn't been checked for traces.

A big investigational mistake by the way, of course!

 

[C.greek]

Well this is only the DNA analyst guy - so presumably he is seeing low statistical significance on the "match" -

It's up to other people what they investigate.

the below quote from Dlk79 is very apt:

What makes it odder, is that he makes the same comment about another sample (4A&B) which matched 2 other individuals using the old test. In that summary, he recommends that the old samples be re-tested using the more modern technique. But he makes no such recommendation for this other sample even though it's the exact same scenario.

Various matches were obtained with the results of 286A/2007/CRL4A&B; the majority of them were eliminated based on additional information obtained from the result; however, two remain (namely, bar codes 90264515 & 90374723). Those profiles were obtained using the old SGM system which examined only six areas of DNA. For this reason the samples should be upgraded [re-tested] using the new standard system SGMplus. It is likely that those samples would be eliminated after the upgrade.

so, that's the point - why does he suggest to re-test 2 other samples, and dismisses the one with the red flag of its association with a spot related to another crime? this is not just an analyst speaking... this is guided forensics analysis as to what the police are interested in recovering. there is an objective!

taken from the actual report:

Objective
The objective of the laboratory examination was to examine the presented objects with respect to the presence of blood, cellular material and hair that may prove to be [have been] from Madeleine McCann or one or other member of her family, or from any of the Portuguese police who had been active [working/present] at the crime scene.

 

[tedtink]

How crucial would these ciggy butts be, if not being found in 5A, but in the area, even if they had been contaminated with the perps DNA?

IMO nothing more than another clue, like the phonecall. There isn't a time stamp on them, right?

IMO it's kind of sensationalism to claim, the case could crumble because the cigarette butts from the closer area hadn't been checked for traces.

A big investigational mistake by the way, of course!

Agreed.
Finding a couple of butts that CB may have toked on would be just more circumstantial evidence to add to the list, might have placed him closer to 5a but like you say, they don't have a time stamp.