myths debunked

[Donjeta]

I have seen photos that demostrate you can see the flat from where they were sat, one cannot see it well but it was within sight.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/notwviewfrombar.jpg

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/08_01/pool1008_468x351.jpg

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/notwviewfrombar.jpg

The flat is not visible from the tapas bar in any meaningful way in which it actually gives you the slightest clue if something is going on in the apartment.

 

[gord]

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/notwviewfrombar.jpg

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/08_01/pool1008_468x351.jpg

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/notwviewfrombar.jpg

The flat is not visible from the tapas bar in any meaningful way in which it actually gives you the slightest clue if something is going on in the apartment.

Agree I dont thik anyone would argue with that - you can see the building where the flats are based burt wouldn see anything meaningfull especialy at night - that was the problem -

 

[Tink]

So, I've heard the parents say on video that it was "just like sitting your back garden" having a drink while the children are in bed. That's really a very deceptive comment: you'd have to have a VERY large backyard to be that far away from your children's room (with a pool in between and a public roadway to walk past).

I've heard them say they could see the flat - again, minimizing the situation. You couldn't see anyone going in, or anyone coming out.

And why did they leave the door open??

It's just irresponsible parenting. And that says a lot to me about their character.

Tink

 

[SapphireSteel]

Agree I dont thik anyone would argue with that - you can see the building where the flats are based burt wouldn see anything meaningfull especialy at night - that was the problem -

Yet here we are arguing about it.

BTW they did not eat in the bar. They ate in the restaurant which is a different area. They had a habit of going to the bar after the restaurant, apparently 14 bottles of wine between 9 people at dinner was not enough and they all needed nightcaps.

 

[SapphireSteel]

sigh.......... it is been one of your arguments for months here that there was an implicit cover up - then to ssee you alter that view above ...it is just par for the course in the way you debate points

No one bashes DNA - The report clearly states that the DNA traces found in the boot of the car cannot be claimed to belong to Madeleine - it could belong to at least the immediate family - the FSS say you cannot seperate componenents out into 3 individual DNA profiles ie it could be Maddy but it could be Gerry , it could be Kate etc etc - That is the fact here that is one of the key reasons the case fell apart - amongst other things

If you choose to ignore the FSS report and facts and interpret it your way then that is fiine your opinion - but please dont constantly claim to be posting proof and facts when in reality all you are doing is posting your opinion .

*sigh*

And one of the arguments which is continually used is that the McCann DNA is completely irrelevant and not of Madeleine anyway. Look up this thread, someone has stated that the "only DNA found was of Gerry".

Which is clearly incorrect.

The parents claimed they could see the apartment from the Tapas restaurant.

Clearly incorrect.

The parents claimed that the window was forced.

another lie.

Another argument that crops up over and over is that the dogs are "rubbish".

Clearly false, if you read any other thread on WS it becomes clear that the dogs are the best tool we have in finding missing children.

The lie that it was a "family holiday" when their children were jammed into an unfamiliar creche day after day and left alone night after night.

There is involvement by three different Ambassadors, being the Portugese, the British, and the US.

We know this thanks to Gary MacKinnon, who helpfully hacked into the US Governments data base and provided us with this confirmation and a whole raft of new questions...see Wikileaks.

Shortly after these governments became involved, the case against the McCann was shelved.(By the way the US desire to hang draw and quarter Mackinnon has also inexplicably melted away recently...why?)

Cover up or involvement? Semantics. I have never used the word "cover up" merely agreed with a McCann supporter who used the word, as always they go for the most hysterical and emotive language they can find. There is absolutely no doubt that there was unusual political pressure and special treatment for the McCann from Day One. This is proven. Call it cover up if you will, I call it involvement, whatever, it is absolutely inexplicable.

Imagine these governments rushing to involve themselves is Sharon Matthews had've "lost" her daughter in Portugal. It's laughable, as they wouldn't touch her with a barge pole. All we need do is look at the diplomatic assistance doled out to poor Ben Needhams mum (non existent) but then she was a single mother and not a heart surgeon or freemason.

Why is it different for the McCann? Could it be because Gerry has "bonded" with the Scottish PM and Chancellor at the time? Could it be because Gerry, at the absolute top of his game as a Heart Surgeon, knows a few uncomfortable details about certain causes of heart defects in some Establishment figures? (heart problems are often the side effect of abusing amphetamines and other recreational drugs). Theory only and no doubt completely dismissed as fantastical by the McCann supporter, but I'm afraid the world I live in comes complete with human weakness, dirty little secrets, special handshakes and government corruption of differing severity.

You do realise you are blindly defending the reputations and stellar honesty of a bunch of politicians, don't you? I thought that sort of unquestioning reverence went out with the Ark....still alive and well in the UK it seems, despite proof of the recent expenses fraud undertaken by a huge percentage of UK politicians, and covered up by the same.

Incredible naivety, belonging to a long-gone world where the classes knew their place and those in the upper echelons were automatically deferred to by the working classes.

I ask once again, please stop repeating the same misinformation on this thread, please stop dismissing and bashing the solid evidence that exists, it's been done to death.

I am a latecomer to the McCann forums but a simple search will show exactly how many threads this behaviour have shut down over the years.

Please start providing a cogent scenario which explains the events of 3 May 2007 being down to an abductor.

 

[Clutchbag]

the point about the dna results is that the fss could not say that it wasnt madeleines dnA, they merely said, as proven by the links that it couldnt say for definite it was hers and likewise could not be ruled out so to sayher dna was not found is incorrect, it was inconclusive



as for the suggestion that the mccanns could see the apartment in the dark, that is whenever theychose to look there, if they did, and somehow that made it safer, that warrants nothing less than a laugh

Then again gerry mccann said the abductor probably DIDNT go in that way becausd they were LOOKING at it and it was probably from the front entrance by someone who had a key AND that it could have been any holiday maker who had ever rented that flat years and years earlier, well, someone pls make sense of that

source, cnn piers morgan mccanns interview, easily googled

 

[SapphireSteel]

the point about the dna results is that the fss could not say that it wasnt madeleines dnA, they merely said, as proven by the links that it couldnt say for definite it was hers and likewisd could not be ruled out so to sayher dna was not found is incorrect, it was inconclusive

They could not prove definitively that the DNA was hers, as none of it was complete. Low copy DNA. What we do know, is that the DNA is consistent with a female child of Kate and Gerry.

The specific "myth" I was addressing was the claim earlier on this thread that "no other DNA was found apart from Gerrys".

Clearly false. DNA is 50/50 from both parents, therefore it follows that Kates was located as well.

15 out of the 20 alleles identified were consistent with Madeleine.

How this translates into "Gerry's DNA only", from a poster who claims to have superior DNA understanding, is a complete mystery to me.

 

[Clutchbag]

the person who is asserting as a fact that gerrys dna was found is misrepresenting the forensic report vis a vis the key fob

the forensics did nowhere say it was his dna anymore than they said it was madeleines dnA from blood samples takenn from behind the sofa

 

[SapphireSteel]

The real question here is this -

Why was any McCann DNA at all, located at the sites that the Cadaver dog alerted to?

 

[SapphireSteel]

you cut the quote in such a way it missed out the bit where lowe states it cannot be said to be madeleine's

"Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab?"

It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample.

What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine and legitimate; because Madeline has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeline merely appears to match the result by chance. The individual components in Madeline's profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline's profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Bimiingham, myself included. lt's important to stress that 50% of Madeline's profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles.

Therefore, we cannot answer the question: Is the match genuine or is it a chance match.
The same applies to any result that is quoted as being too complex for meaningful inclusion/interpretation

What questions will we never be able to answer with LCN DNA profiling?

When was the DNA deposited?
How was the DNA deposited?
What body fluid(s) does the DIVA originate from?
Was a crime committed?

These, along with all other results, will be formalised in a final report

Please don't hesitate to contact me if you require any further assistance

kind regards
John

John Lowe
Forensic Scientist"

I do not know if you realised, but when you quoted this report, you missed out the part that said it was not possible to claim the material came from madeleine as the alleles were not unique to her, it was a mixed sample, and she shares these alleles with her parents.

So what happened to your statement that "only Gerry's DNA was identified"?

Now you are arguing against yourself...

You in actual fact cut the quote off at the bit where it says it woudl eb simple to say it was madeleines. I realise this was probably an accident on your part, but it could be very misleading for those who did not realise the quote had been cut off before this very important information - people reading just the bit you put up might actually have thought Lowe was saying it was madeleine's!!!!!!!!!!!

Lowe was saying it was CONSISTENT WITH MADELEINE.

Which is the exact opposite of your claim, which was "only Gerry's DNA was identified".

no-one is bashing the forensics as the forensics report does nto implicate the mccanns. It is those claiming it is the mccanns/international cover-up etc, who are trying to mislead witht he forensics report by cutting out the relevant parts (no I am nto accusing you of doing that on purpose I am certain it was an accident on your part, but others have done it repeatedly).
no-one is bashing the dogs, just pointing out what grimes, harrison, and operation rectangle have said about the dogs abilities i.e that they would alert to bodily fluids from living people. The only bashing is coming from those trying to mislead about the dogs abilities, and claiming the evrd only alerted to places where a dead body had been.

No response would be complete without sledging the dogs! *yawn*

Eddie would no sooner have mistaken cadaver for live scent, than you or I would mistake a pumpkin for a pimple.

As for amaral, well it is not bashing, just pointing out facts. Which ever way one slices it the only person against the mccanns who has ever had anything to do with the case is a convicted criminal who worked on the case for just a few months before being removed from it. he is not just a convicted criminal, his conviction relates to fabricating evidence! Not exactly a star witness!

"pointing out facts" hey? You've turned a highly respected senior detective with a previously impeccable 30 year record at solving crimes, into a convicted criminal, based on a charge that didn't even warrant a punishment by the judge who found him guilty!

The man has not spent one second in custody for any "crime" so cannot be classed as a "criminal".

The PJ have stated there is no evidence against the mccanns.

Please link to this. Amaral says there is an entire flotilla of evidence, I agree with him, and his book has been officially recognised as a accurate account of the investigation.

And no-one is bashing other posters, just pointing out when they write things that are untrue - i.e claiming the smiths positively identified gerry mccann, which is untrue.

It is not untrue, as I have posted over and over again.

Martin Smith did indeed identify Gerry McCann.

Why won't you acknowledge this?

But you have not dismissed anything. You have claimed the forensics implicate the mccanns, which it does not, you have claimed in other posts that you have evidence of a cover-up at the highest level, and that the US government put pressure on the authorities to close the case!!!
You have not at any point come up with any facts which implicate the mccanns?

As I said, I never used the word "cover up", that was your word, as usual the most emotive and extreme translation of "involvement" that can possibly be made. It is you have have suggested "illegal acts" on behalf of the government. I believe that Blair, Brown, and Cameron are guilty of nothing more than the same error you have made - a failure to entertain the thought that "nice" people could possibly hide their daughter.

That is not criminal...it is naive, but not criminal.

What facts do you have that implicate the mccans, prove a cover-up etc because so far you have not put up a single shred of evidence anywhere on the forum, and yet repeatedly state you have proven these things?
If you honestly believe you have proven your theories such as US government pressure, than can you please post it here (and really you should contact the police too if you really have this evidence).

You know these have all been posted over and over, so why keep asking?

Once again, I ask instead of posting merely to dissemble and denigrate, how about offering something tangible to the debate? Continually reverting to denouncing the dna/dogs/amaral/pj/other posters as a "response" is repetitive, formulaic, predictable, biased, inaccurate and emotive.

None of your points add a single thing to clarity or furthering the discussion. They are designed to shut it down.

Even a high schooler knows they cannot debate effectively with "because I said so" as a rebuttal.

 

[brit1981]

The only dna that was positively identified as belonging to any person was that of gerry mccann and it was found on the card fobb not the boot. All other dna with the exception of reference samples was found to be inconclusive such as the material found in the boot. Lowe makes a point of saying that it is not possible to claim that the material in the boot was contributed to by madeleine.
I think you are getting confused between the material on the card fobb and the material in the boot, These were two different sets of material therefore it is correct to say one was identified as being gerry's, and the other was inconclusive and found to be from threee to five people and contained alleles found in the dna several mccanns and that it was not possible to ascertain which mccann donated these alleles.

smith never once positively identified gerry, he said several weeks later he could not identify the mans face, but he thought based on body language it coudl have been gerry mccannn, but he was in no way certain and the remainder of his party did not support this.

So far you have claimed there is an international cover-up involving US governments etc at one point you exact phrase was " we have evidence of a cover-up at the highest levels", you also claimed that the US government put pressure on the investigation, that the FSS had no legal right to examine dna etc.

The only place mccann dna was found in a place where the evrd alerted to was the card fobb, this may be because it was from a bodily fluid which the doh alerted to. Unless people are now claiming that grime, harrison, and operation rectangle are all lying and the dog does not alert to bodily fluids from living people. because all three have stated that he does. If anyone has any evidence that this is not true, then i suggest they contact operation gange, or the PJ.

And I have not turned amaral into a convicted criminal, I had nothing to do with his conviction or his actions. His criminal conviction turned him into a convicted criminal, and he received a suspended prison sentance, which in europe is a big deal. These suspended sentances can be given out for nearly all crimes, but murder and manslaughter. It certainly is considered a punishment in the EU. It is untrue that only those who serve prison time are considered criminals. In the EU anyone with a criminal conviction is considered a convicted criminal regardless of whether they went to prison, got community service, or got a suspended prison term.

Also you say Gary McKinnon has uncovered evidence by hacking that the US government helped the mccanns. This is a serious accusation against him, since madeleine disappeared five years after he was first arrested for hacking - are you claiming that he has been hacking into the US government websites since 2007?

But again if anyone has any evidence of a cover-up, any evidence that grime has stated that the dog will only react to a scent from a dead body and confirms that he was incorrect when he and harrison stated that the evrd woudl alert to bodily fluids, any evidence that madeleine's dna was positively identified anywhere other than the reference sample, and evidence that smith said he was 100% certain that the man he saw was gery mccann, and any evidence to support the other people who identified gerry as being at the complex as incorrect, then please post it because so far not one person has actually posted this evidence. All they have done is post somethign and then claim it says something it does not, or post information with relevant information cut out of it to misrepresent it.

also can I suggest people do nto make unfounded accusations against gary mckinnon. Suggesting he has been hacking into the us govrnments sites since madeleine's disappearence is not fair unless anyone has any evidenc eof this. And in fact if people do have evidence of him doing this it really is more appropriate to contact the police rather thna post it online.

Tink,
The distance from the tapas bar was fifty metres directly, and just over seventy to walk. In fairness, if one is sat in the back garden, and the children are in the upstairs of the house, most people in decent size houses will have to cover at least fifty metres to go from the garden to the children's room. And whether we agree with it or not, it is common practice in EU resorts to use a system where children are left asleep in their hotel rooms, and every half an hour a nanny listens outside the door. This was done in nearly all mark warner resorts at the time too. So although it is not somethign I woudl do, I can see why people would be lured into thinking it was safe to leave the children and just check on them every half an hour. Thousands do it, and resorts and hotels often advertise it as a service.

 

[Donjeta]

Tink,
The distance from the tapas bar was fifty metres directly, and just over seventy to walk. In fairness, if one is sat in the back garden, and the children are in the upstairs of the house, most people in decent size houses will have to cover at least fifty metres to go from the garden to the children's room. And whether we agree with it or not, it is common practice in EU resorts to use a system where children are left asleep in their hotel rooms, and every half an hour a nanny listens outside the door. This was done in nearly all mark warner resorts at the time too. So although it is not somethign I woudl do, I can see why people would be lured into thinking it was safe to leave the children and just check on them every half an hour. Thousands do it, and resorts and hotels often advertise it as a service.

These are intelligent, educated people, not some silly twats who perhaps are incapable of realizing that toddlers left alone in an unlocked apartment are not safe by any definition. I don't believe for a moment that they were "lured" into thinking that three sleeping children who re all under four year old would be capable of saving themselves in case of fire, for instance. Surely they were not stupid enough not to realize that a three year old who wanders outside looking for their parents could get hit by a car or drown in a pool or get in other kinds of trouble. Surely they were intelligent enough to realize that children who find themselves alone in a strange apartment may get distressed. Were they "lured" into leaving their wallets and other valuables in the unlocked apartment? I think not.

Doctors should have a fairly good idea, by virtue of their education and work experience, that unattended children get into accidents.

 

[gord]

*sigh*

And one of the arguments which is continually used is that the McCann DNA is completely irrelevant and not of Madeleine anyway. Look up this thread, someone has stated that the "only DNA found was of Gerry".

Which is clearly incorrect.

The parents claimed they could see the apartment from the Tapas restaurant.

Clearly incorrect.

The parents claimed that the window was forced.

another lie.

Another argument that crops up over and over is that the dogs are "rubbish".

Clearly false, if you read any other thread on WS it becomes clear that the dogs are the best tool we have in finding missing children.

The lie that it was a "family holiday" when their children were jammed into an unfamiliar creche day after day and left alone night after night.

There is involvement by three different Ambassadors, being the Portugese, the British, and the US.

We know this thanks to Gary MacKinnon, who helpfully hacked into the US Governments data base and provided us with this confirmation and a whole raft of new questions...see Wikileaks.

Shortly after these governments became involved, the case against the McCann was shelved.(By the way the US desire to hang draw and quarter Mackinnon has also inexplicably melted away recently...why?)

Cover up or involvement? Semantics. I have never used the word "cover up" merely agreed with a McCann supporter who used the word, as always they go for the most hysterical and emotive language they can find. There is absolutely no doubt that there was unusual political pressure and special treatment for the McCann from Day One. This is proven. Call it cover up if you will, I call it involvement, whatever, it is absolutely inexplicable.

Imagine these governments rushing to involve themselves is Sharon Matthews had've "lost" her daughter in Portugal. It's laughable, as they wouldn't touch her with a barge pole. All we need do is look at the diplomatic assistance doled out to poor Ben Needhams mum (non existent) but then she was a single mother and not a heart surgeon or freemason.

Why is it different for the McCann? Could it be because Gerry has "bonded" with the Scottish PM and Chancellor at the time? Could it be because Gerry, at the absolute top of his game as a Heart Surgeon, knows a few uncomfortable details about certain causes of heart defects in some Establishment figures? (heart problems are often the side effect of abusing amphetamines and other recreational drugs). Theory only and no doubt completely dismissed as fantastical by the McCann supporter, but I'm afraid the world I live in comes complete with human weakness, dirty little secrets, special handshakes and government corruption of differing severity.

You do realise you are blindly defending the reputations and stellar honesty of a bunch of politicians, don't you? I thought that sort of unquestioning reverence went out with the Ark....still alive and well in the UK it seems, despite proof of the recent expenses fraud undertaken by a huge percentage of UK politicians, and covered up by the same.

Incredible naivety, belonging to a long-gone world where the classes knew their place and those in the upper echelons were automatically deferred to by the working classes.

I ask once again, please stop repeating the same misinformation on this thread, please stop dismissing and bashing the solid evidence that exists, it's been done to death.

I am a latecomer to the McCann forums but a simple search will show exactly how many threads this behaviour have shut down over the years.

Please start providing a cogent scenario which explains the events of 3 May 2007 being down to an abductor.

this answer is so full of inaccurate statements and false hoods that is is probably not worth getting into a debate - we will never agree

but for what it is worth.........

Gerry was not a heart surgeon never was and still isnt

He wasnt a free mason either

He didnt lie about the windows being jemmied

You can see the flat from where they were just not very well

they didnt drink 14 bottles of wine

Gerrys DNA was the only one that was identified from the car search - on the key fob - no other DNA was 100% identified

Gordon Brown is not a freemason

Tony Blair Is not a freemason

The ambassadors of three countries are not involved in a cover up or anything like that ..........

Gary Mckinnon was arrested years before 2007 how on earth did he find info on the mcanns ????

The US were still pushing for extradition till this year - Teresa May refused it in health grounds as he has aspurgers - he will still serve a sentence in this country

all the other stuff about drugs and corrupt politicians = well I have no idea what you are going about and no idea what this has to do with the case

The DNA reports are all clear no conclusive evidence whatsoever that Maddys DNA wasfound in the car

So please do not accuse other of posting inaccurate statements when you seem to make up information as you go along ,

 

[SapphireSteel]

this answer is so full of inaccurate statements and false hoods that is is probably not worth getting into a debate - we will never agree

but for what it is worth.........

Gerry was not a heart surgeon never was and still isnt

He wasnt a free mason either

He didnt lie about the windows being jemmied

You can see the flat from where they were just not very well

they didnt drink 14 bottles of wine

Gerrys DNA was the only one that was identified from the car search - on the key fob - no other DNA was 100% identified

Gordon Brown is not a freemason

Tony Blair Is not a freemason

The ambassadors of three countries are not involved in a cover up or anything like that ..........

Gary Mckinnon was arrested years before 2007 how on earth did he find info on the mcanns ????

The US were still pushing for extradition till this year - Teresa May refused it in health grounds as he has aspurgers - he will still serve a sentence in this country

all the other stuff about drugs and corrupt politicians = well I have no idea what you are going about and no idea what this has to do with the case

The DNA reports are all clear no conclusive evidence whatsoever that Maddys DNA wasfound in the car

So please do not accuse other of posting inaccurate statements when you seem to make up information as you go along ,

Lol this is what I mean.

Always, always emotive language, focussing on the irrelevant, ignoring the direct questions, taking offence.

These tactics might work in the orderly world of the UK but where I come from, we know diversion when we see it.

You missed the most important part of my post, which was -

I ask once again, please stop repeating the same misinformation on this thread, please stop dismissing and bashing the solid evidence that exists, it's been done to death.

I am a latecomer to the McCann forums but a simple search will show exactly how many threads this behaviour have shut down over the years.

Please start providing a cogent scenario which explains the events of 3 May 2007 being down to an abductor.

Ok so instead of rebutting with minor, irrelevant detail Mackinnons "aspurgers" and Gerry's qualifications, how about giving us some constructive input on the IDI theory?

It's what I keep asking for, over and over again, and in my opinion its time for those who consistently take offence on behalf of the McCanns, to either show some actual supporting evidence of their theories, or just stop with the constant criticism of other posters'.

 

[SapphireSteel]

[

this answer is so full of inaccurate statements and false hoods that is is probably not worth getting into a debate - we will never agree

but for what it is worth.........

Gerry was not a heart surgeon never was and still isnt ,

Gerry is a cardiologist, I have linked the required training before you can even apply to be a cardiologist, in Australia and New Zealand -

In Australia advanced training must be undertaken at sites that are accredited by the SAC. For the training program to be approved, the proposed site must offer significant experience and meet other requirements of the SAC. A list of sites suitable for training is available from the SAC. The category levels relate to the range of cardiac services provided. Trainees will be able to obtain training at level 1 - 4 hospitals as set out below:LEVEL

1 2a 2b 2c 4
Clinical Training
Echocardiography + + + + +
Catheterisation Lab + + + + +
Angioplasty + + + + -
Surgery + + - - -
Electrophysiology Lab + - + - -
Level 1: 2 years of core training
Level 2: 2 years of core training, with the proviso that trainees must spend 6 months of training in a hospital which has cardiac surgery and must fulfil the requirements for EP experience
Level 4: 1 year of non core training will usually be approved

http://www.racp.edu.au/training/adult2003/advanced/vocational/cardiology4.htm

I sincerely doubt the UK Medical Profession allows one to go straight from Uni to being a Cardidologist either, but apparently you know more than me on that...

He wasnt a free mason either How do you know that?

He didnt lie about the windows being jemmied Yes, he did. We have acres of testimony from Auntie Phil and the folks that that is exactly what he said.

You can see the flat from where they were just not very well No, you can't...further, they had their backs to the apartment so unless they had eyes in the back of their heads, the apartment was completely out of view.

they didnt drink 14 bottles of wineHow do you know that?

Gerrys DNA was the only one that was identified from the car search - on the key fob - no other DNA was 100% identified 100% identified? Something's either identified or its not. You cannot speak of margins. DNA consistent with Madeleine (ie, from both parents) was found at several cadaver alert sites, with no logical explanation.

Gordon Brown is not a freemason How do you know that?

Tony Blair Is not a freemason How do you know that?

The ambassadors of three countries are not involved in a cover up or anything like that .......... Define "anything like that"

Gary Mckinnon was arrested years before 2007 how on earth did he find info on the mcanns ???? The US were still pushing for extradition till this year - Teresa May refused it in health grounds as he has aspurgers - he will still serve a sentence in this country


Gary Mckinnon or one of his friends...the fact remains Wikileaks was hacked, and documents released that shouldn't have been. The important thing here is, they are proof of the involvement at top level of the US, British and Portugese Ambassadors...also clear and inescapable proof that it was the British police who first suspected and began investigating the McCanns. You're bickering about the pattern of the crockery on the Titanic.

all the other stuff about drugs and corrupt politicians = well I have no idea what you are going about and no idea what this has to do with the case

About as much as the UK requirements for cardiologists?

The DNA reports are all clear no conclusive evidence whatsoever that Maddys DNA wasfound in the car DNA consistent with Madeleine was found at the cadaver alert sites including the car.

So please do not accuse other of posting inaccurate statements when you seem to make up information as you go along ,

I agree! Let's leave all that behind, and concentrate instead on what I keep asking for....a cogent and intelligent IDI theory!!

 

[Clutchbag]

Gerrys DNA was the only one that was identified from the car search - on the key fob - no other DNA ,

Out of interest, and as a layman, why do you say that only one 100% dna match was identified, and it was gerrys? As opposed to madeleines? When the description in Lowes report for matching components to Gerrys dna is exactly the same as the description for matching components to Madeleines dna in the sample from behind the sofa. is it because in the latter sample it was said it was from two people? As I read it both samples were low level and incomplete profiles, so how is one definitely gerrys dna and the other isnt madeleines?

The two references are swab 3a and swab? From the key fob.

I have asked this before several times but was ignored, not by you btw.

 

[Sabot]

This is all such a waste of time The McCanns have never been charged with anything, and never will be, simply because they are not guilty. And perhaps more to the point, no one has ever come up with any proof to the contrary. No one has ever proved that they are in fact guilty because there is no proof.
I do not have to prove their innocence. It remains the need of any prosecutor to prove otherwise. This will never happen.
It is over and done, beyond a desire to find Madeleine.

I have no need to debate on this subject because there is nothing to debate.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Out of interest, and as a layman, why do you say that only one 100% dna match was identified, and it was gerrys? As opposed to madeleines? When the description in Lowes report for matching components to Gerrys dna is exactly the same as the description for matching components to Madeleines dna in the sample from behind the sofa. is it because in the latter sample it was said it was from two people? As I read it both samples were low level and incomplete profiles, so how is one definitely gerrys dna and the other isnt madeleines?

The two references are swab 3a and swab? From the key fob.

I have asked this before several times but was ignored, not by you btw.

Don't hold your breath.

 

[Clutchbag]

This is all such a waste of time The McCanns have never been charged with anything, and never will be, simply because they are not guilty.

I have no need to debate on this subject because there is nothing to debate.

Goodbye then sabot, as for asserting they are not guilty, unless you are the abductor you cant assert that surely, and yea, no one in any position of any authority has ever stated they are not guilty andneither that they are innocent, that is why the case is SHELVED pending new evidence

People who are not charged does not mean people are innocent, you forget the small matter of sufficient evidence to charge, in this case there wasnt sufficient evidence, that is the fact of the matter, whether they be truly innocent or guilty of involvement, and dont forget the other fact, that in portugal the LE need stronger evidence than in the UK to charge someone of an offence so they were lucky *there*

 

[Clutchbag]

Don't hold your breath.

I was trying to trawl through the FSS Lowe report on my ipad without much luck in searching but if anyone doesnt know the refs Im making will gladly quote tomorrow when I have use of my PC

So basically incomplete profiles and low level dna in both samples, but corresponding components matching the dna in BOTH samples means it wasnt madeleines but it was gerrys 100% , thats what i want explained

ok found it

An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab (286A/2007 CRL 3a). The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive; it is not possible attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.

and

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)).