Madeleine McCann general discussion thread #28

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I figured that's because the video has been edited. It would be a pretty dull video to watch the dog run around 17 cars without alerting. Cutting to the one he does (the McCann's) makes for a more sensible length of video.

I'm sure gog handlers/psychologists would be trained to avoid signalling to the dog to do something, as it is a fairly well-known phenomenon. Martin is extremely experienced, as I understand it.

I don't think finding the scent on the car is a sure fire sign the McCanns are guilty - maybe they moved something from the flat that carried the 'death scent' unwittingly, like towels, for example. But it seems pretty clear to me that the dog did successfully pick that car out.

To me it looks like the dog left the car and was moving on and the handler called him back. The odds the something DNA found in the belongings of the MCcanns is pretty good. I just don't like this.

 

[Captain_Khan]

To me it looks like the dog left the car and was moving on and the handler called him back. The odds the something DNA found in the belongings of the MCcanns is pretty good. I just don't like this.

I'm not an expert on how to manage a sniffer dog, so I can't really comment on whether what Grime did was usual - but I assume that by making the video public he wasn't concerned about any lack of professionalism, and I haven't seen any negative criticism from others in the industry. (Please feel free to correct me here - I have not been studying this case long).

I would have assumed that his technique would have drawn heavy criticism from within the industry if he had done anything usual.

 

[haden]

To me it looks like the dog left the car and was moving on and the handler called him back. The odds the something DNA found in the belongings of the MCcanns is pretty good. I just don't like this.

That is what the PJ officer asked, why did he call him back? Why doesn't the dog pick up on the things when he reaches them the first time.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Yet again we reach a point where experts reports are being ignored. It just seems pointless in having access to police files and emails which state facts . everyone has an opinion in this case but on the DNA found in the car the FSS scientist are pretty clear .

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

The "facts" are thus -

British forensic scientist John Lowe, of the major incidents team of the Forensic Science Service (FSS), said the car sample contained 15 out of 19 components of Madeleine's DNA but they were not "unique to her".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7543064.stm

How anyone says this excludes the DNA being Madeleine's, is beyond me. He has never said any such thing.

 

[Pisces Cloud]

To me it looks like the dog left the car and was moving on and the handler called him back. The odds the something DNA found in the belongings of the MCcanns is pretty good. I just don't like this.

I agree. It looked like the dog moved away from the car a few times and was directed back by the handler.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I'm not an expert on how to manage a sniffer dog, so I can't really comment on whether what Grime did was usual - but I assume that by making the video public he wasn't concerned about any lack of professionalism, and I haven't seen any negative criticism from others in the industry. (Please feel free to correct me here - I have not been studying this case long).

I would have assumed that his technique would have drawn heavy criticism from within the industry if he had done anything usual.

I don't think he thought he was going to be in the video as much. He is trying to stay out of frame in a lot of it. But then the dog leaves, And moves on and he calls the dog back to the obviously marked car.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I'm not an expert on how to manage a sniffer dog, so I can't really comment on whether what Grime did was usual - but I assume that by making the video public he wasn't concerned about any lack of professionalism, and I haven't seen any negative criticism from others in the industry. (Please feel free to correct me here - I have not been studying this case long).

I would have assumed that his technique would have drawn heavy criticism from within the industry if he had done anything usual.

Poor Grime, yet another innocent person whose reputation has been smeared.

Grime was actually PC Grime, dog handler for the British Police. Eddie and Keela were specially trained by PC Grime and the British, including trips to Quantico.

They were the most reliable dogs arguably, in the world.

Yet PC Grime is now also part of some dire plot to frame the innocent McCanns, as were the entire PJ, the British police (initially) and their own paid private detectives.

I honestly feel like I've gone down the rabbit hole on this thread sometimes.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The "facts" are thus -

British forensic scientist John Lowe, of the major incidents team of the Forensic Science Service (FSS), said the car sample contained 15 out of 19 components of Madeleine's DNA but they were not "unique to her".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7543064.stm

How anyone says this excludes the DNA being Madeleine's, is beyond me. He has never said any such thing.

If it is not unique to Madeleine it excludes her. If it was her it would have all 19 markers. That it has only 15 means to me it is someone else.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Poor Grime, yet another innocent person whose reputation has been smeared.

Grime was actually PC Grime, dog handler for the British Police. Eddie and Keela were specially trained by PC Grime and the British, including trips to Quantico and FBI input.

They were the most reliable dogs arguably, in the world.

Yet PC Grime is now also part of some dire plot to frame the innocent McCanns, as were the entire PJ, the British police (initially) and their own paid private detectives.

I honestly feel like I've gone down the rabbit hole on this thread sometimes.

Poor nothing. These are supposed to all be professionals searching for the unbias truth.. That they are smudged is of their own doing.

 

[SapphireSteel]

If it is not unique to Madeleine it excludes her. If it was her it would have all 19 markers. That it has only 15 means to me it is someone else.

That is not accurate.

The official word was "inconclusive".

The DNA found was consistent with Madeleine. That is why Lowe said "the simple answer is YES".

If it excluded her, he would've stated "the simple answer is NO".

 

[SapphireSteel]

Poor nothing. These are supposed to all be professionals searching for the unbias truth.. That they are smudged is of their own doing.

Do you have proof of wrongdoing by any investigating agency?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

That is not accurate.

The official word was "inconclusive".

The DNA found was consistent with Madeleine. That is why Lowe said "the simple answer is YES".

If it excluded her, he would've stated "the simple answer is NO".

I disagree but of course I am a layman and not a DNA guru..

TO me if it was Madeleine it would have all the markers. That it does not mean there is someone else it could be. That is not inconclusive to me. that is definite. It does not have all her markers.

 

[haden]

The "facts" are thus -

British forensic scientist John Lowe, of the major incidents team of the Forensic Science Service (FSS), said the car sample contained 15 out of 19 components of Madeleine's DNA but they were not "unique to her".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7543064.stm

How anyone says this excludes the DNA being Madeleine's, is beyond me. He has never said any such thing.

Yes, that could have been her mums, her dads, her brothers, or her sisters parts of the DNA, who actually were in the car..

 

[Donjeta]

What are the chances of some random person sharing both Kate and Gerry's DNA and depositing it in the exact spot as a cadaver alert?

At first you would have to know the odds of finding someone's DNA at any random spot you sampled. We shed a lot of that stuff daily.


Since they're saying that the DNA sample came from three to five people it seems like it can't be so astronomical. Even if it was Madeleine's DNA at least two other people happened to deposit DNA there as well. So if it could happen twice, it's not so very uncommon.


Not sure why you want a random person that shares Kate and Gerry's DNA.
Kate and Gerry share Kate and Gerry's DNA, so anything that looks like it came from Kate and Gerry's offspring could have come from Kate and Gerry... And it apparently can't even be verified that it was even Kate and Gerry's DNA. If it could have been from up to five people there must have been alleles there that don't match the family members. So, some random person just happened to deposit their DNA there whether you believe some of it was Madeleine's or not.

Seriously, the odds would have to be astronomical especially when you're talking about the underlay in a car boot and cuddle cat.

Someone's calculated it somewhere, I'm sure.

I haven't got the faintest idea why you think that it would be astronomical odds to find Madeleine's DNA in her favorite toy.

We know the DNA found it is consistent with Madeleines by which I mean, it has 15/19 alleles that she shares.

Therefore while it is true to say "there is not a 100% DNA match to Madeleine" it is also true to say that Madeleine cannot be excluded as a contributor.

You say tomato, I say tomato.

Let's say that Kate and/or Gerry and one, two or three or four random people deposited their DNA in the car boot. Let's further say that the scientists can't tell which alleles came from which person. Which they can't, apparently.

This means that there is no possible way that science could exclude a biological child of Kate and Gerry's as a contributor. About half of what Kate and Gerry contributed in the DNA soup is going to match Madeleine. Whatever doesn't match could have come from the unknown other people.
Even a lot of the stuff that matches could have come from the unknown other people.


Some alleles are shared by a large percentage of a population and rather than calculating the odds that you are going to find alleles that match Madeleine's if we sample five random people perhaps we should calculate the odds that we won't.

The only way you can exclude someone as a contributor in a bag of DNA that contains DNA material from several different people is if none of your alleles match any of what's in the bag.

If any of her biological relatives contributed DNA in the car boot, it is only to be expected that some of it matches Madeleine.

Another question - did they have Madeleine's actual DNA for comparison? I don't know if it was provided. Perhaps they gave them Amelie's toothbrush. Nothing would surprise me with this crew. :dunno:

If it wasn't, then of course they can't match it completely.

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

The first letter says that they obtained DNA from a pillow case that matches a natural child of the McCanns.

The third letter says that the DNA from the pillow case did not match the twins.

Unless there is a fourth child we don't know about it seems like it couldn't be anyone but Madeleine.

 

[Captain_Khan]

I don't think he thought he was going to be in the video as much. He is trying to stay out of frame in a lot of it. But then the dog leaves, And moves on and he calls the dog back to the obviously marked car.

A few posts ago, you mentioned that he was standing too close to the car, but now he's standing out of shot (away from the car) too?

For all we know, he might have been calling the dog back to the car to demonstrate his findings AGAIN - that is, the dog alerted, but the shot for the camera wasn't great, so they decided to get it to alert again, this time while they filmed from a different angle. That would explain the cut between the front of the car and the back, in my opinion.

I really don't see any reason why a professional would risk his reputation and the case he was assigned deliberately (and then publish a video for international scrutiny to boot). So do you think he is mistaken?

 

[SapphireSteel]

Yes, that could have been her mums, her dads, her brothers, or her sisters parts of the DNA, who actually were in the car..

It could have been.

But they all made it out of Portugal alive.

The DNA was found in the cadaver sites.

 

[gord]

That is not accurate.

The official word was "inconclusive".

The DNA found was consistent with Madeleine. That is why Lowe said "the simple answer is YES".

If it excluded her, he would've stated "the simple answer is NO".

No sorry you are misrepresenting the reports conclusion. Haden posted Lowes email. The DNA sample came from an mixture of more than three people maybe up to five. They included both parents and siblings. Of course there would be some consistent alleles. To extrapolate this to being her DNA match is just wrong

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Little Jedi]

I don't know that. I just have issues with the car being obviously marked as the MCcann's and then the handler going with the dogs there. It would have been another thing if the car was not so marked but it was obvious.

What was obvious ??
How was it marked ?
Where did the handler go with the dogs ?
Have you watched the footage ?

Eddie smells *CADAVER* odour around the McCanns' Renault Scenic hire car

" The vehicles, of which I did not know the owner details " M.Grimes

'Ten cars are parked in an underground parking garage. 'Eddie' and 'Keela', dogs that are trained to detect cadaver odour and human blood'

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

A few posts ago, you mentioned that he was standing too close to the car, but now he's standing out of shot (away from the car) too?

For all we know, he might have been calling the dog back to the car to demonstrate his findings AGAIN - that is, the dog alerted, but the shot for the camera wasn't great, so they decided to get it to alert again, this time while they filmed from a different angle. That would explain the cut between the front of the car and the back, in my opinion.

I really don't see any reason why a professional would risk his reputation and the case he was assigned deliberately (and then publish a video for international scrutiny to boot). So do you think he is mistaken?

The shot is close to the car. He actually almost touches the car. It bothers me. If it does not bother others, That is fine, But It bothers me because it is different behavior than I see with the other cars in which it seems he is almost directing the dog to be quick to move on, on some of the other cars.

 

[haden]

I am not sure what is trying to be proven here.
These dogs, although they are called cadaver dogs alert to dry blood of live humans.
They did alert on several places but there is absolutely no way to prove they alerted on cadaver in any of these cases.
The DNA reasearch of any places where they alerted did not prove to be Madeleines DNA.
The DNA that was found on alerted places where the DNA profiles were recognisable were from the 3-4 living humans and these were PJ officers and Gerry McCann
The most interesting find was in the car ( the dogs alerted on the car key and the luggage department) The DNA on the cars key was from Gerry McCann ( still alive) and the luggage department findings DNA could have been Madeleines but could also be from any member of her family.