Re: "Incompetent and unco-operative Portuguese held up Scotland Yard for a year by refusing to supply forensic evidence" - Sunday Mirror 21 Dec 2014

by **Tony Bennett** 26.12.14 8:47

Khaleesi wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:Tanner man was good for supporting a theory where an abductor broke in and stole a live Madeleine. Now SY are of the belief she was dead, it means the cadaver is being seen as supporting evidence. With this in mind, it wipes out the '3 minute abduction' theory and puts focus on the falsified child checking rota.

Smithman fits the right timeframe for allowing enough time to commit the act, kill Madeleine, for cadaver to develop and cover Gerry et al on any suspect neglect charges.

Basically, Smithman fits a picture, painted by SY, which fulfils their 'lone paedo patsy' and keeps everyone else in the clear.

Exactly how? Explain, please. Because, you know, if this theoretical lone patsy killed Maddie after the last Gerry's check and then left with her body shortly before Kate's check, then it makes an ass out of Matt who did not notice a man, hiding in the apartment, and out of the rest of the Tapas crew, who were doing their checks, walking repeatedly past the McCanns apartment, unable to hear the lone paedo patsy raping and murdering the child.

'woodforthetrees' analysis is exactly right. IMO. and khaleesi falls into the common traps of seeing (a) Matthew Oldfield's evidence as true, but (b) much more importantly, the Scotland Yard enquiry as genuine.

With the mainstream media onside, if Nicola Wall and Grange conclude e.g. that Madeleine's disappearance was the result of a burglary gone wrong, with Madeleine having been murdered in the process, then that verdict on the case will be re-inforced by all the mainstream media. Who will object to that judgment? A few hundred voices on forums like this, maybe? And will those voices be heard? No.

Basically, Grange can get away with anything, even if - as we know from discussions here on CMOMM - the 'burglary gone wrong' or 'the lone paedo' theories make no sense against the known facts of the case.

Take the issue of the cadaver dogs for example. When has Grange, or the mainstream media, even mentioned the dogs during the last three-and-a-half years of Grange.

How might they explain the dogs' findings when they conclude the case? Probably something like this:

"If Madeleine was killed in the apartment, her body may have left traces of cadaver odour later detected by the British dogs".

Again, that wouldn't satisfy many members here, but might be enough for many people to think: 'Ah, so that explains the dogs' alerts, then'.

There has been a mesmeric, brainwashing exercise perpetrated by the mainstream media for 7 years to instill in us the view that Madeleine was abducted and that anyone who questions it is a 'hater'. I very much suspect that Brenda Leyland's inquest in March will be used to re-inforce that view.

khaleesi wrote:

"...makes an ass out of Matt who did not notice a man, hiding in the apartment, and out of the rest of the Tapas crew, who were doing their checks, walking repeatedly past the McCanns apartment, unable to hear the lone paedo patsy raping and murdering the child".

REPLY:

1. I part company with 'woodforthetrees' on one point, namely that I think the working assumption of Grange is now 'burglary gone wrong' rather than 'lone paedo'

2. khaleesi's objections would be valid if Grange was a search for the truth. But since it has had IMO all the hallmarks of a cover-up and charade from the day Rebekah Brooks of News International bludgeoned the British Prime Minister into ordering it to be set up, all Nicola Wall will have to say is something like:

"...after our careful and critical analysis of the new timeframe for the abduction, we have established that there was a window of opportunity for the burglar to kill Madeleine and walk off with her body without being seen by anyone except the Smith family".

Again, who is going to publicly query that conclusion? - and if they do, which of the mainstream media is going to give such views any publicity?

by aiyoyo 26.12.14 9:04

The British Home Office withheld medical records and credit cards records for over 7 years. Why the unjust, unfair, judgmental, misinformative and discriminative labelling of the Portuguese when the assortment of British authorities had been "obstructive" to the Portuguese did not get labelled in the same way?

by Joss 26.12.14 9:48

Wasn't the latest theory OG are working with the abduction of Madeleine by a "childless couple"? I'm sure i remember posting in that thread here just recently? Old news that theory i know, but what the heck do any of us really know what way they are going to skew this case next? I really shudder to think what nonsense will be thrown at us next. Think they just keep throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks.

by Joss 26.12.14 9:58

aiyoyo wrote:The British Home Office withheld medical records and credit cards records for over 7 years. Why the unjust, unfair, judgmental, misinformative and discriminative labelling of the Portuguese when the assortment of British authorities had been "obstructive" to the Portuguese did not get labelled in the same way?

I agree, and wish Portugal would tell SY to get out of their country and they will no longer cooperate with them as the crime happened in their country and they have juristiction over the case, and that they will continue with their own investigation, and extradite the McC's & their Tapas crew for further questioning if necessary, which they should of done in the first place IMO, and not put up with the nonsense.
Politics & politicians got in the way though, and that is why we will never see any justice for Madeleine, also IMO.

by Joss 26.12.14 10:05

And then there is stuff like this, not exactly boosting people's confidence in anything:

Exclusive: Scotland Yard’s rotten core: Police failed to address Met's ‘endemic corruption’

Organised criminals were able to infiltrate Scotland Yard “at will” by bribing corrupt officers, according to an explosive report leaked to The Independent. The Metropolitan Police file, written in 2002, found Britain’s biggest force suffered “endemic corruption” at the time.

Operation Tiberius concluded that syndicates such as the notorious Adams family and the gang led by David Hunt had bribed scores of former and then-serving detectives to access confidential databases; obtain live intelligence on criminal investigations; provide specialist knowledge of surveillance, technical deployment and undercover techniques to help evade prosecution; and even take part in criminal acts such as mass drug importation and money laundering.
The strategic intelligence scoping exercise – “ratified by the most senior management” at Scotland Yard – found murder investigations had been infiltrated and sensitive intelligence regarding other organised crime investigations had been leaked, allowing the offenders to escape justice.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-scotland-yards-rotten-core-police-failed-to-address-endemic-corruption-9050224.html

by **PeterMac** 26.12.14 11:20

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:PeterMac, you have been in contact with a number of people connected to this case, and have handed in evidence to Operation Grange, and I wonder if you have been in contact with Martin Grime?

No. He has not been on my list. I tried tp put myself into his position, and concluded that I would not comment, and that it was therefore unfair to ask him to.
His findings speak for themselves, see the d'Andre Lane case
He does not need to comment, explain, enhance, add weight . .

The dogs alerted to human blood and human cadaverine in those places associated with the McCanns, and to no other places.
Lane is serving life imprisonment on the strength of evidence like that.
As are many others whom we have listed before but I am very willing to list again.
Zapata, St Katherine's favourite case, among them.

by aiyoyo 26.12.14 11:56

PeterMac wrote:
Joss wrote:Forgot to mention it was Martin Grime that gave evidence in the D'Andre Lane Trial.
It was indeed, and the same dog, and the technique they used was EXACTLY the same as in the Madeleine/ case
http://archive.freep.com/article/20121004/NEWS01/310040204/Expert-testifies-that-cadaver-dog-gave-signals-about-toddler-in-defendant-s-car-house
A cadaver dog with what handlers call near-perfect accuracy passed 30 cars in an impound lot before alerting on a silver Mercury Grand Marquis driven by a Detroit father charged with killing his 2-year-old daughter.

But defense attorneys for D'Andre Lane, 32, questioned whether the dog's response was authentic because the body of Lane's daughter, Bianca Jones, has not been found.
Prosecutors said Lane, who is on trial in Wayne County County Circuit Court, killed Bianca after a potty-training accident and tried to cover it up by calling police on Dec. 2 to report she was taken in a carjacking.
Police found Lane's car running several blocks away from the alleged carjacking site, but the toddler was missing. Prosecutors say the child is presumed dead.
Dog handler and FBI contractor Martin Grime testified during Lane's trial Wednesday that he and his two English springer spaniels -- Morse and Keela --flew from England to Washington, D.C., then drove to Detroit on Dec. 4 to search for Bianca.
Local investigators took Grime and Morse, who is trained to detect decomposing human remains, to an enclosed garage at the Detroit Police Department's impound lot. Inside, he released Morse, leading him through a maze of 31 parked cars, including Lane's silver Mercury.
"He went underneath Mr. Lane's car then came out and barked ... like woof-woof-woof-woof-woof-woof-woof," Grime said, adding that he wasn't told that the silver Mercury was Lane's until after the search was complete.

"What was the response what you opened the door and the trunk, sir?" Assistant Prosecutor Carin Goldfarb asked.
"There was a positive response -- the dog barked continuously," he said, adding that the dog didn't bark at any other cars.

He said they then went to a Detroit Police Department evidence room, where investigators wrapped Bianca's car seat in brown paper and hid it in an office within a number of rooms.
Grime said there was no response during the first search, when the car seat was sealed inside the brown paper. He then asked officers to put a slit in the paper and move the car seat to another room.
"The second time, when the dog got close to the package, he put his nose in the package and gave a positive response," Grime said.
Investigators then set up a search in another warehouse using Bianca's blanket that had been in the car seat. Grime said the dog barked when it came across a brown paper bag on the floor with the blanket inside.
"Were you aware of where any of these items were going to be when Morse signaled on them?" Goldfarb asked,
"No," Grime said, adding that he can't force the dog to bark continuously and he never saw the actual car seat or blanket.
Grime said he then took Morse to Lane's house, where Morse sat and barked in Bianca's bedroom, close to the opening of a door-less closet.
"Have the results you've come up with ever been contradicted?" Judge Vonda Evans asked. He said no.
But Lane's attorney, Terry Johnson, raised questions about the dog's ability to detect decomposition during his cross-examination.
"You have no way of telling what Morse responded to at any location?" Johnson asked Grime.
"He gave us a positive response," Grime said. "The corroboration would normally be to find a cadaver or bone or blood that you can see."
"The dog did not give a positive response to the clothing worn by Mr. Lane, correct?" Johnson asked.
"No," Grime said.

He was found Guilty and sentenced to Life.
No body has ever been found.

From the above narrative, it is clear that if first approach to the object elicits no response from the dogs, different approach to the same object can/will be used; an indication that - that is typical trainer's working method on every case without except. Yet the McCanns want people to believe that the trainer manipulates the dogs in their case.

MG says he can't force the dogs to bark; that results that came up had never been contradicted, that the positive response means the dogs detected cadaver or bone or blood and "the corroboration would normally be to find a cadaver or bone or blood that you can see." No cadaver or bone or blood was found in Bianca Jones' case, thus no corresponding corroboration to the dogs positive response was had, yet the dogs response was sufficent as evidence to convict her killer.

Morse, the dog did not give a positive response to clothings worn by D'Andre Lane, but the rest of the dogs positive responses were sufficient for the conviction of him. In Madeleine's case the dogs gave positive response on her mum's pants and her sibling's T-shirt, yet her parents are yet to be arrested.
I'd love to see MG called to the stand when the McCanns are put in the dock.

by plebgate 26.12.14 13:27

whatsupdoc wrote:Had to smile reading that, jeanmonroe.

The papers will never print that the Home Office dragged their feet and never sent the PJ the McCann bank / medical details.

I agree, that raised a smile here also JM.

I loved the "wow tote amazballs". SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Funny, I can just picture her saying something like that.

by Guest 26.12.14 14:03

PeterMac wrote:
Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:PeterMac, you have been in contact with a number of people connected to this case, and have handed in evidence to Operation Grange, and I wonder if you have been in contact with Martin Grime?

No. He has not been on my list. I tried tp put myself into his position, and concluded that I would not comment, and that it was therefore unfair to ask him to.
His findings speak for themselves, see the d'Andre Lane case
He does not need to comment, explain, enhance, add weight . .

The dogs alerted to human blood and human cadaverine in those places associated with the McCanns, and to no other places.
Lane is serving life imprisonment on the strength of evidence like that.
As are many others whom we have listed before but I am very willing to list again.
Zapata, St Katherine's favourite case, among them.

Will he ever be allowed to comment on the case?

Is it a forum myth that Grime was met at Faro airport on the way home by MI5? I don't believe he has ever commented on the case since and, in fact, moved to the US.

If that 'approach' did take place, I doubt he'll ever be allowed to talk. Anyone got evidence it did?

by Khaleesi 26.12.14 14:19

Tony Bennett wrote:
Khaleesi wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:Tanner man was good for supporting a theory where an abductor broke in and stole a live Madeleine. Now SY are of the belief she was dead, it means the cadaver is being seen as supporting evidence. With this in mind, it wipes out the '3 minute abduction' theory and puts focus on the falsified child checking rota.

Smithman fits the right timeframe for allowing enough time to commit the act, kill Madeleine, for cadaver to develop and cover Gerry et al on any suspect neglect charges.

Basically, Smithman fits a picture, painted by SY, which fulfils their 'lone paedo patsy' and keeps everyone else in the clear.

Exactly how? Explain, please. Because, you know, if this theoretical lone patsy killed Maddie after the last Gerry's check and then left with her body shortly before Kate's check, then it makes an ass out of Matt who did not notice a man, hiding in the apartment, and out of the rest of the Tapas crew, who were doing their checks, walking repeatedly past the McCanns apartment, unable to hear the lone paedo patsy raping and murdering the child.
'woodforthetrees' analysis is exactly right. IMO. and khaleesi falls into the common traps of seeing (a) Matthew Oldfield's evidence as true, but (b) much more importantly, the Scotland Yard enquiry as genuine.

I've never said I think Matt's statement is a truth. NEVER. I don't trust any member of the Tapas Group and you assume too much. And I don't see the reason to think that your assumptions are somehow more worthy than anyone else's.

See, you missed my point. Like totally. The McTeam created their own abduction tale and the Tannerman was the main pillar of it. What good does for them removing that pilar and inventing a whole new story that puts THEIR OWN STATEMENTS under a huge question mark?

That was my question you carefully avoided answering to. How exactly removing the Tannerman from the story, widening the timeframe and entering the Smithman, that looks nothing like a swarthy foreigner, described by Tanner (apart from some similarities in clothing) helps to clear the McCanns? How creating a story about the McCanns doing so crappy job with their checkups that the lone paedo patsy had almost full hour to do his deed helps to clear the McCanns from the neglect accusations?

by **PeterMac** 26.12.14 14:27

Dee Coy wrote:
Will he ever be allowed to comment on the case?
Is it a forum myth that Grime was met at Faro airport on the way home by MI5? I don't believe he has ever commented on the case since and, in fact, moved to the US.
If that 'approach' did take place, I doubt he'll ever be allowed to talk. Anyone got evidence it did?

I doubt he is not "allowed" to, except by his own professionalism.
The dogs alerted, he wrote his report, viewed the video, and from that point the information / evidence belonged to the SIO.
Yo don't then talk to journalists about it. - until after a court case has ben concluded, and normally not even then.

And in court, as we have seen in the D'Andre Lane case he simply replies Yes, or No to questions about how he carried out the search, including confirming that the dog did not mark on Lane's clothing.
The dogs' "evidence" speaks for itself.
Of course the defence are going to raise all sorts of objections. That is what they are paid to do. That is their job.
And of course the McCanns are going to complain about the dogs' alerts. They can do nothing else, given the route they have decided to go down.

They are trapped in a cage of their own making.

by aiyoyo 26.12.14 15:06

Dee Coy wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:PeterMac, you have been in contact with a number of people connected to this case, and have handed in evidence to Operation Grange, and I wonder if you have been in contact with Martin Grime?

No. He has not been on my list. I tried tp put myself into his position, and concluded that I would not comment, and that it was therefore unfair to ask him to.
His findings speak for themselves, see the d'Andre Lane case
He does not need to comment, explain, enhance, add weight . .

The dogs alerted to human blood and human cadaverine in those places associated with the McCanns, and to no other places.
Lane is serving life imprisonment on the strength of evidence like that.
As are many others whom we have listed before but I am very willing to list again.
Zapata, St Katherine's favourite case, among them.

Will he ever be allowed to comment on the case?

Is it a forum myth that Grime was met at Faro airport on the way home by MI5? I don't believe he has ever commented on the case since and, in fact, moved to the US.

If that 'approach' did take place, I doubt he'll ever be allowed to talk. Anyone got evidence it did?

If he's very professional he won't comment even if not asked to refrain, knowing very well if no body is found the case can still go to trial on basis of circumstantial evidence including that of his dogs positive response.

by joyce1938 26.12.14 15:15

I saw a post long time ago that stated mr grimes was told not to speak to anyone about his results joyce1938

by Guest 26.12.14 15:21

I realise that he wouldn't comment anyway in case the case ever came to trial. But why the meeting at the airport - did it happen?

If it is true, and we know the PJ arranged via Harrison to get Martin and the dogs out there, I can only assume the UK hierarchy were unaware of his presence there but knew what it would inevitably yield. When they found out they panicked and sent a man out there. To say what?

by Guest 26.12.14 15:31

joyce1938 wrote:I saw a post long time ago that stated mr grimes was told not to speak to anyone about his results joyce1938

Me too, Joyce, but I simply can't find evidence of it or the alleged airport meeting.

by joyce1938 26.12.14 15:39

thanks decoy for your reply . I feel we have read so much over the years ,just cant put a finger on a lot ,but we do know we have heard things but cant track it all ,take too much energy.I often hear new folk asking questions that we have gone over ages ago ,and often somethingpops into mind of what we spoke of .No harm in taking another look see I guess. joyce1938

by aiyoyo 26.12.14 16:07

Dee Coy wrote:I realise that he wouldn't comment anyway in case the case ever came to trial. But why the meeting at the airport - did it happen?

If it is true, and we know the PJ arranged via Harrison to get Martin and the dogs out there, I can only assume the UK hierarchy were unaware of his presence there but knew what it would inevitably yield. When they found out they panicked and sent a man out there. To say what?

IIRC, it was Dr Amaral who said that.
How Dr Amaral knew the man approaching MG at the airport was a secret service agent is $64M question.
If his source or deduction was correct, it can still be purely a chance meeting but that would be too much of a coincidence but one can't exclude that.

If MI5 or MI6 want to put a word to MG, you'd think it would be done discretely and in a private venue and not at the airport. Especially when Grime was seen accompanied by a member of the PJ, you'd think the secret service agent would avoid contact with Grime at all cost in that kind of circumstance.

To say what exactly ? If there is a conspiracy why involve MG into it?
A conspiracy is typically kept within the conspirators, avoiding involving outsiders. What can they use to threaten MG to buy his silence?

by Sceptic 26.12.14 17:13

Dee Coy wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:I saw a post long time ago that stated mr grimes was told not to speak to anyone about his results joyce1938

Me too, Joyce, but I simply can't find evidence of it or the alleged airport meeting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1385336/Kate-McCann-Madeleine-guilt-meant-I-make-love-Gerry.html

Mr Grime is now a director of a forensic science company, GSS International, and is employed as a sniffer dog expert. He owns both his former police dogs and they continue to work with him.

Yesterday he was in the U.S. on business and a spokesman for the Hampshire-based company said he had been asked by police in the UK not to comment on the McCann case.

Mr Grime and his dog Eddie were involved in the search for remains at the Haut de la Garenne children’s home in Jersey.

The massive investigation in 2008 ended with the conclusion that nothing suspicious was found at the scene and there was no evidence of murder.

by Realist 29.12.14 17:21

woodforthetrees wrote:Dear oh dear, Realist still not getting it.

---and what pray, am I not getting?? As previously stated on many occasions, this is a very simple case, but difficult to prove because of a lack of evidence which is mainly due to the PJ failing to make the McCanns their prime suspects from the inception.

The wild and preposterous conspiracy theories merely serve to benefit the McCann's cause and prevent others from seeing the wood for the trees. As for the negligence angle, there was no negligence other than that propagated by the McCanns, because without an element of the aforementioned, there couldn't possibly have been a kidnapping. Literally thousands are blinded by this patent red herring.

The most likely scenario is that Madeleine was whacked by one of the McCanns in a rage and either died as a direct result of the blow, or as a consequence of hitting her head on a hard surface. This event took place long before 8.30 pm on the 3rd. May and may have even transpired before that date. Madeleine's body was then stored in the apt. whilst the McCanns cleaned up and decided what course of action to take, hence the dogs scentings of cadaver odour. In the event they decided to dispose of her body and concoct a phoney kidnapping story to be enacted at a later stage.

In the interim period the McCanns disposed of Madeleine's body in the surrounding terrain which has been described as being a wilderness with thousands of disused shafts, ravines etc. where a body would never be discovered. Kate McCann would have been familiar with the surrounding terrain because every day whilst on vacation in Priara de Luz, she had embarked on long jogging trips around the aforementioned. It really is as simple as that and all these ridiculous stories of bodies hidden at sea by secret service agents, Smith sightings, child neglect, swingers, paedophile rings etc. etc. may make interesting reading for the tabloid's intellectually challenged subscribers, but they do nothing whatsoever to help establish tangible evidence with which to convict the McCanns of anything, let alone murder/manslaughter, fraud etc.

by scrants 29.12.14 17:56

Realist wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:Dear oh dear, Realist still not getting it.

---and what pray, am I not getting?? As previously stated on many occasions, this is a very simple case, but difficult to prove because of a lack of evidence which is mainly due to the PJ failing to make the McCanns their prime suspects from the inception.

The wild and preposterous conspiracy theories merely serve to benefit the McCann's cause and prevent others from seeing the wood for the trees. As for the negligence angle, there was no negligence other than that propagated by the McCanns, because without an element of the aforementioned, there couldn't possibly have been a kidnapping. Literally thousands are blinded by this patent red herring.

The most likely scenario is that Madeleine was whacked by one of the McCanns in a rage and either died as a direct result of the blow, or as a consequence of hitting her head on a hard surface. This event took place long before 8.30 pm on the 3rd. May and may have even transpired before that date. Madeleine's body was then stored in the apt. whilst the McCanns cleaned up and decided what course of action to take, hence the dogs scentings of cadaver odour. In the event they decided to dispose of her body and concoct a phoney kidnapping story to be enacted at a later stage.

In the interim period the McCanns disposed of Madeleine's body in the surrounding terrain which has been described as being a wilderness with thousands of disused shafts, ravines etc. where a body would never be discovered. Kate McCann would have been familiar with the surrounding terrain because every day whilst on vacation in Priara de Luz, she had embarked on long jogging trips around the aforementioned. It really is as simple as that and all these ridiculous stories of bodies hidden at sea by secret service agents, Smith sightings, child neglect, swingers, paedophile rings etc. etc. may make interesting reading for the tabloid's intellectually challenged subscribers, but they do nothing whatsoever to help discover tangible evidence with which to convict the McCanns of anything, let alone murder/manslaughter, fraud etc.

Realist, I entirely agree with you, this case is essentially simple. The difficulty of proof is how and when was it
done. All in my opinion only, of course.

by Realist 29.12.14 18:54

scrants wrote:
.
Realist, I entirely agree with you, this case is essentially simple. The difficulty of proof is how and when was it
done. All in my opinion only, of course.

The supreme irony being, Scrants, there are thousands, if not millions, some of whom subscribe to this forum, who are of the belief that at the end of the day, the McCanns are to to blame for the disappearance of their daughter because they left her alone and unattended in their apt.

This of course is not true and had it really been a case of Madeleine McCann merely being left alone and unattended in their apt. she would have been alive and well today, as are her brother and sister.

by Joss 30.12.14 5:02

Realist wrote:
scrants wrote:
.
Realist, I entirely agree with you, this case is essentially simple. The difficulty of proof is how and when was it
done. All in my opinion only, of course.

The supreme irony being, Scrants, there are thousands, if not millions, some of whom subscribe to this forum, who are of the belief that at the end of the day, the McCanns are to to blame for the disappearance of their daughter because they left her alone and unattended in their apt.

This of course is not true and had it really been a case of Madeleine McCann merely being left alone and unattended in their apt. she would have been alive and well today, as are her brother and sister.

If what you are purporting in your theory happened, then that means one of the McC's killed Maddie through a violent action that may or may not have been intentional, and what then? They proceeded to lie to all the Tapas crew about how she died, so they would all be in on a cover up for the McC's? To the point the tapas crew lied to police about leaving their kids in their apartments, did checks on them etc? possible help with disposal of a child's body?, and whatever else they lied about to support their good friends the McC's? That is not keeping things simple IMO.

by Joss 30.12.14 5:22

If one of the McC's did unintentionally kill their daughter, then they would of had to lie to their friends about what happened. And i can't see the tapas lot lying for them and implicating themselves in a crime, if it was a case of Maddie dying because of abuse by one of her parents. For the lie to have worked i think maybe the leaving of the children in apartments while they went out to wine & dine, and probably sedating children was more likely. We have read about the twins being most likely sedated from all the noise going on after the alarm was raised that Maddie was gone, and how K.McC had to keep checking they were still breathing. Unless that is a lie too?
Who were the independent witnesses to notice that scenario? The police?, if we assume the McC's and tapas friends were all lying.
And wouldn't there have been evidence of the McC's and tapas friends receipts from the restaurant that evening that they actually were all there having a meal and numerous bottles of wine? What about the waiters or waitresses, wouldn't they have seen the children there too if the McC's & friends hadn't left them alone in their apartments? Not just on the night Maddie went missing, but on previous nights as well?

by columbostogeys 30.12.14 6:01

These dogs are highly trained and rarely get it wrong. See they went in and found that young girl who went missing 17th month old Zia Turner. Whats so disgusting is if they hadnt she would have probably lain there dead a long time in that mess....poor baby.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2167126/Tragedy-missing-1-year-old-Zyia-Turner-buried-beneath-toppled-laundry-grandmothers-closet.html

by scrants 30.12.14 14:47

Joss wrote:If one of the McC's did unintentionally kill their daughter, then they would of had to lie to their friends about what happened. And i can't see the tapas lot lying for them and implicating themselves in a crime, if it was a case of Maddie dying because of abuse by one of her parents. For the lie to have worked i think maybe the leaving of the children in apartments while they went out to wine & dine, and probably sedating children was more likely. We have read about the twins being most likely sedated from all the noise going on after the alarm was raised that Maddie was gone, and how K.McC had to keep checking they were still breathing. Unless that is a lie too?
Who were the independent witnesses to notice that scenario? The police?, if we assume the McC's and tapas friends were all lying.
And wouldn't there have been evidence of the McC's and tapas friends receipts from the restaurant that evening that they actually were all there having a meal and numerous bottles of wine? What about the waiters or waitresses, wouldn't they have seen the children there too if the McC's & friends hadn't left them alone in their apartments? Not just on the night Maddie went missing, but on previous nights as well?

The only close friends of the Mccanns were the Paynes. They only knew the others through the Paynes and then only on occasional social get togethers.

In my opinion, if the Mccanns confided in anyone, it would have been David Payne as they may have needed his help and probably Fiona later on. I don't think the others were "in the know" at all.

I've often wondered if, on the 3 May, when the Mccanns went back to the apartment, Madeleine might have thrown a tantrum when she realised she wasn't going back to the pool to see the other children as usual. Kate or Gerry "over-reacted" and Madeleine was fatally injured.

I assume that they would then try to resuscitate her and she would have remained on the spot long enough for cadaverine to develop. They then moved her to their bedroom to get her out of sight of the twins, perhaps telling them Maddie wasn't feeling well.

This may have been when the Blue Bag came into play. Either she was taken away and disposed of before dinner or (big risk) when the twins were moved out of the apartment, the bag may have gone too, supposedly containing clothing or whatever for the twins. However, this second possibility doesn't explain how the bag got back into the wardrobe to be photographed by the PJ after the apartment was vacated later that night. Nor can I explain where the bag was put after it left the apartment. If it had entered the Payne's apartment, it would have left cadaverine and the dogs didn't react to the Payne's apartment.

It has often puzzled me why, if they were trying to keep everything under wraps, Kate raised the alarm at all.
Why not just wait until morning and say she had disappeared in the night and they had forgotten to lock the patio doors.

I'm sorry if this is a bit rambling but this case is endlessly fascinating and my mind goes racing off in all sorts of directions trying to work out what happened.

All this, is of course, in my opinion only!

"Incompetent and unco-operative Portuguese held up Scotland Yard for a year by refusing to supply forensic evidence" - Sunday Mirror 21 Dec 2014