Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

by plebgate 28.01.15 10:24

@ ChippyM - I do believe I recently saw a youtube vid where Mr. says something like it is 100 million to one. That's how rare it is.

by ChippyM 28.01.15 10:31

plebgate wrote:@ ChippyM - I do believe I recently saw a youtube vid where Mr. says something like it is 100 million to one. That's how rare it is.

Nice of him to admit it eventually. Personally I can't think of one case where a child that age has been taken from inside their own home.

by woodforthetrees 28.01.15 10:53

Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

Slight change in your description Tony... i believe Madeleine was abused anytime after about 6pm and unfortunately killed in the apartment (not intended) and in a state of panic (due to DNA being left in the cadaver), the body was removed to be disposed of.

No abduction as no struggle, plus enough time to have a clean up.

I do however think that the McCanns are guilty of death by neglect (and possibly sedating their children) and subsequent fraud through the fund (they knew she was deceased very early on, but no body = no proof) and also believe the tapas group are also guilty of neglect and for that, they all should be brought to the stand. However, they are very well protected both by people in power and a minefield of changing stories to ensure that can never be proven.

.....until a body surfaces or the perp speaks about timelines and events

All IMO of course.

by woodforthetrees 28.01.15 11:03

Portia wrote:Why does he/she believe that?
Evidence, the fact that investigations are in-going and that they are not looking at the McCanns and are looking for one of few paedos operating in the area, the fact that only Madeleine was touched/taken and not the twins, i.e targeted by a paedo looking for a specific age and type of child.

Has he/she seen any evidence to support that thesis?
Yes. Not seen, discussed evidence, in great detail, along with my previous theories regarding Gerrys involvement. All i can say is that what little evidence we see and that which has been released as 'case files' are simply the PII (Public Interest Information files, PeterMac, please correct me if i have the exact terminology wrong)scratching the surface. SY have further evidence which supports the paedo theory. We will never see this evidence as it is confidential police records.

Could he/she refer us to its source, then?
Absolutely not i'm afraid, so please don't ask.

Im sure that would me much appreciated by many
I know it would. The fact that i am still open to discussion/persuasion on this is because until it is proven otherwise, it could be perceived to be the parents and based on the wonderful theories and discussions on here, it (still) takes some convincing for me to be 100% persuaded otherwise.
As i have always said, it is about Madeleine. The 100% truth regarding who took her out of the apartment, the true extent of the child neglect going on and the sheer level of cover up going on afterwards to clean up the mess/cover peoples arses will only ever be clear upon capture of the perp, or discovery of the body containing DNA.

Both of these are IMO extremely unlikely to happen, it's all about keeping people in jobs, keeping the media spinning, the lawyers fighting and ulti,ately keeping the cash rolling in for all involved until everyone gets so fed up of it, it simply gets closed off as 'unsolved'

by Joss 28.01.15 11:19

woodforthetrees wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

Slight change in your description Tony... i believe Madeleine was abused anytime after about 6pm and unfortunately killed in the apartment (not intended) and in a state of panic (due to DNA being left in the cadaver), the body was removed to be disposed of.

No abduction as no struggle, plus enough time to have a clean up.

I do however think that the McCanns are guilty of death by neglect (and possibly sedating their children) and subsequent fraud through the fund (they knew she was deceased very early on, but no body = no proof) and also believe the tapas group are also guilty of neglect and for that, they all should be brought to the stand. However, they are very well protected both by people in power and a minefield of changing stories to ensure that can never be proven.

.....until a body surfaces or the perp speaks about timelines and events

All IMO of course.

So how do you think the dogs alerting to the scenic hire car some 25 days after Madeleine's disappearance alerted there when a supposed abductor took Madeleine initially. Do you think he planted evidence there? And the McC's aired the vehicle out because of the awful smell?

by woodforthetrees 28.01.15 11:26

Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

Slight change in your description Tony... i believe Madeleine was abused anytime after about 6pm and unfortunately killed in the apartment (not intended) and in a state of panic (due to DNA being left in the cadaver), the body was removed to be disposed of.

No abduction as no struggle, plus enough time to have a clean up.

I do however think that the McCanns are guilty of death by neglect (and possibly sedating their children) and subsequent fraud through the fund (they knew she was deceased very early on, but no body = no proof) and also believe the tapas group are also guilty of neglect and for that, they all should be brought to the stand. However, they are very well protected both by people in power and a minefield of changing stories to ensure that can never be proven.

.....until a body surfaces or the perp speaks about timelines and events

All IMO of course.
So how do you think the dogs alerting to the scenic hire car some 25 days after Madeleine's disappearance alerted there when a supposed abductor took Madeleine initially. Do you think he planted evidence there? And the McC's aired the vehicle out because of the awful smell?

I don't think anything was deliberately planted. They were under watchful eye by various law enforcement and media people, so anyone suspicious around the car would've rung alarm bells.

The hire car is the 1 thing that keeps swaying me back to the 'unless i see evidence files with my naked eye, i'm still convinced of the parents', however, it's worth pointing out that Cadaver scent can last up to a year and is transferred upon contact...

If the parents and others had been traipsing all over the apartment, which had cadaver scent all over it and then been in the car, it could be transferred.

Rotting meat smell could just be that...rotting meat. If Madeleine's things had been transported about int he boot also, then her DNA would be in there too.

All speculation and thinking out loud though, as i said, this is the part which gets me scratching my head.

by ChippyM 28.01.15 11:38

woodforthetrees wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

We can't say SY don't suspect the McCann's, we don't know what they are doing behind closed doors. In 2010 an email leaked by Wikileaks revealed Leicester police had been working together with the PJ on a case against them, so 2 police forces at one time did suspect them.

The dna in the hire car came back inconclusive and was possibly enough to make a case in Portugal but not the UK. So SY could just as easily be working on getting sufficient evidence for a case against the McCann's this time round as 'someone' else. The main problem has always been the inconclusive to 'moderate' findings from the DNA in my opinion. This was a very lucky abuctor indeed that managed to leave not a shred of evidence at the scene!

by woodforthetrees 28.01.15 11:56

ChippyM wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

We can't say SY don't suspect the McCann's, we don't know what they are doing behind closed doors. They are not looking at the McCanns, they have publicly stated that. If they were suspects, they've had 3 years to nail them...they haven't. If they suspected them but didn't have enough evidence, they would simply close the case...they haven't. They are looking for a paedo operating in the area at the time, which is not the McCanns. In 2010 an email leaked by Wikileaks revealed Leicester police had been working together with the PJ on a case against them, so 2 police forces at one time did suspect them. One person from Leicester police said there wasn't enough evidence to rule them out, not that they were suspects that they were looking to charge. i.e they haven't got the perp, so all options have to be considered, including the theory of the (initial) PJ

The dna in the hire car came back inconclusive and was possibly enough to make a case in Portugal but not the UK. Then why is the case not going ahead in Portugal? The Portuguese police are looking at the case too??...because it was not conclusive. So SY could just as easily be working on getting sufficient evidence for a case against the McCann's this time round as 'someone' else. See above The main problem has always been the inconclusive to 'moderate' findings from the DNA in my opinion. This was a very lucky abuctor indeed that managed to leave not a shred of evidence at the scene!....that we, the general public,know about. The scene was cleaned, very well, but not well enough to stop on-going investigations based on what is available.

Bits above in bold, plus......

I agree, there are mass inconsistencies in the entire case and if you wanted to make the hat fit for any scenario (Gerry, Kate, Burglar, paedo, other) then you could fit the publicly available files to fit, as i have done for the last few years.

However, only very recently has my view changed on who removed the body, based on discussions i have had about the knowns and the unknowns and 'why' the investigations are on-going/not solved.

BUT, i am always open to all possibilities and as i maintain...until the perp is charged and/or the body/DNA gives up the truth, then the FULL truth about her demise, remains open ended.

by Joss 28.01.15 12:49

WHAT THE LABORATORY REPORTS BRING TO LIGHT

The preliminary results from FSS were enlightening in a way, and confirmed the information given by the EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and the CSI dog.
– The CSI dog, Keela, signaled the presence of human blood where Eddie, the EVRD dog, marked the presence of cadaver odour – on the floor tiles behind the sofa in the lounge, on the key and in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was used by the McCanns from May 27th onwards.
– the bodily fluids, according to the FSS, contain markers from Madeleine’s DNA profile.
These elements do not constitute concrete proof but simply clues to be added to those we already possess. In itself, the definition of a DNA profile from LCN is not considered as evidence in a criminal investigation. In his report, the English scientist says that he cannot give answers to the following questions: when was the DNA deposited? In what way? What bodily fluid does the DNA come from? Has a crime been committed?
The scientific evidence is not enough and it has to be accompanied by other types of material, documented and testimonial evidence. It is only in this way that the entire puzzle can be reconstructed and certainties can be achieved, for the material truth to be established.
The FSS has still not provided the result of the technical analysis of the hair found in the boot of the car. Once more, Stuart has to contact the laboratory. Nothing has been done. We want to know two things: if the hair is indeed Madeleine’s, and if it comes from a living or a dead person. The FSS can only answer the first question. English colleagues present at the meeting raise the possibility of the hair being sent to other European laboratories which have the resources to clear up the second point for us: hair from a living or a dead person. But the FSS does not seem to want to part with the hair. They claim that using a colour comparison test they can establish if the hair belongs to Madeleine and in a second stage, identify the DNA profile. None of that will happen. We never find out if the hair was Madeleine’s or her parents’ or her brother’s or her sister’s, even though the laboratory has the DNA profiles of each member of the family.
Let’s remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine’s DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance.

http://truthofthelie.com/the-book/chapter-18/

The FSS lab. dodgy as anything IMO. Didn't they get shut down?

by woodforthetrees 28.01.15 13:16

Joss wrote:
WHAT THE LABORATORY REPORTS BRING TO LIGHT

The preliminary results from FSS were enlightening in a way, and confirmed the information given by the EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and the CSI dog.
– The CSI dog, Keela, signaled the presence of human blood where Eddie, the EVRD dog, marked the presence of cadaver odour – on the floor tiles behind the sofa in the lounge, on the key and in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was used by the McCanns from May 27th onwards.
– the bodily fluids, according to the FSS, contain markers from Madeleine’s DNA profile.
These elements do not constitute concrete proof but simply clues to be added to those we already possess. In itself, the definition of a DNA profile from LCN is not considered as evidence in a criminal investigation. In his report, the English scientist says that he cannot give answers to the following questions: when was the DNA deposited? In what way? What bodily fluid does the DNA come from? Has a crime been committed?
The scientific evidence is not enough and it has to be accompanied by other types of material, documented and testimonial evidence. It is only in this way that the entire puzzle can be reconstructed and certainties can be achieved, for the material truth to be established.
The FSS has still not provided the result of the technical analysis of the hair found in the boot of the car. Once more, Stuart has to contact the laboratory. Nothing has been done. We want to know two things: if the hair is indeed Madeleine’s, and if it comes from a living or a dead person. The FSS can only answer the first question. English colleagues present at the meeting raise the possibility of the hair being sent to other European laboratories which have the resources to clear up the second point for us: hair from a living or a dead person. But the FSS does not seem to want to part with the hair. They claim that using a colour comparison test they can establish if the hair belongs to Madeleine and in a second stage, identify the DNA profile. None of that will happen. We never find out if the hair was Madeleine’s or her parents’ or her brother’s or her sister’s, even though the laboratory has the DNA profiles of each member of the family.
Let’s remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine’s DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance.

http://truthofthelie.com/the-book/chapter-18/

The FSS lab. dodgy as anything IMO. Didn't they get shut down?

Nothing was ever conclusive from FSS, i.e for every finger pointing to what Amaral believes, there is another finger pointing away from that theory.

Not dodgy, i would say more incompetent. There are many rumors/stories about cross contamination and bad testing practices we have all seen snippets of over the years.

One thing i certainly have to keep telling myself is this.... "don't focus on the limited information available, think about the possibilities of the information not available", i.e.... Files have been released, based on one initial theory (Amarals) and are discussed in a way to support blame towards the couple. Whilst i agree, this could be made to be a good fit, it still begs the question "why have they not been dragged in and why are SY pursuing someone else?". The answer is... because they have more on their files than we know of.

As i said earlier though, until either the perp or the body answers any of the timing and DNA queries, it is all open to interpretation by us, the general public.

by Joss 28.01.15 13:53

woodforthetrees wrote:

Nothing was ever conclusive from FSS, i.e for every finger pointing to what Amaral believes, there is another finger pointing away from that theory.

Not dodgy, i would say more incompetent. There are many rumors/stories about cross contamination and bad testing practices we have all seen snippets of over the years.

One thing i certainly have to keep telling myself is this.... "don't focus on the limited information available, think about the possibilities of the information not available", i.e.... Files have been released, based on one initial theory (Amarals) and are discussed in a way to support blame towards the couple. Whilst i agree, this could be made to be a good fit, it still begs the question "why have they not been dragged in and why are SY pursuing someone else?". The answer is... because they have more on their files than we know of.

As i said earlier though, until either the perp or the body answers any of the timing and DNA queries, it is all open to interpretation by us, the general public.

Of course for every theory there will be a counter theory, especially on such a confusing case. But G. McC did say 'confusion is good', wonder why?
I am inclined to give a seasoned investigator being as he, GA, did that job for approx. 30 years. some confidence in knowing what he is doing. I'm sure in his career as an investigator into crime he can detect a lie or lies when confronted with them, through questionings of suspects etc. And remembering the book was not only his opinion but the opinion of other investigators on the case at the time as well, and that was their findings. So it was not just GA's opinions alone.
GA said himself the case will never be solved because of the political interference from the U.K. and i tend to agree with him. So i think if you are waiting for it to be solved, don't hold your breath as the saying goes.
IMO this case was never about finding out what happened to Madeleine, it was to get the McC's off the hook, and that is the huge injustice done to an innocent little girl who deserved much better.

by ScarletLaw 28.01.15 14:27

woodforthetrees wrote:
Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

Slight change in your description Tony... i believe Madeleine was abused anytime after about 6pm and unfortunately killed in the apartment (not intended) and in a state of panic (due to DNA being left in the cadaver), the body was removed to be disposed of.

No abduction as no struggle, plus enough time to have a clean up.

I do however think that the McCanns are guilty of death by neglect (and possibly sedating their children) and subsequent fraud through the fund (they knew she was deceased very early on, but no body = no proof) and also believe the tapas group are also guilty of neglect and for that, they all should be brought to the stand. However, they are very well protected both by people in power and a minefield of changing stories to ensure that can never be proven.

.....until a body surfaces or the perp speaks about timelines and events

All IMO of course.
So how do you think the dogs alerting to the scenic hire car some 25 days after Madeleine's disappearance alerted there when a supposed abductor took Madeleine initially. Do you think he planted evidence there? And the McC's aired the vehicle out because of the awful smell?
I don't think anything was deliberately planted. They were under watchful eye by various law enforcement and media people, so anyone suspicious around the car would've rung alarm bells.

The hire car is the 1 thing that keeps swaying me back to the 'unless i see evidence files with my naked eye, i'm still convinced of the parents', however, it's worth pointing out that Cadaver scent can last up to a year and is transferred upon contact...

If the parents and others had been traipsing all over the apartment, which had cadaver scent all over it and then been in the car, it could be transferred.

Rotting meat smell could just be that...rotting meat. If Madeleine's things had been transported about int he boot also, then her DNA would be in there too.

All speculation and thinking out loud though, as i said, this is the part which gets me scratching my head.

The only thing I will say at this point is that I don't believe in the sedation theory at all and the McCanns were helped.

by woodforthetrees 28.01.15 15:53

ScarletLaw wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

Slight change in your description Tony... i believe Madeleine was abused anytime after about 6pm and unfortunately killed in the apartment (not intended) and in a state of panic (due to DNA being left in the cadaver), the body was removed to be disposed of.

No abduction as no struggle, plus enough time to have a clean up.

I do however think that the McCanns are guilty of death by neglect (and possibly sedating their children) and subsequent fraud through the fund (they knew she was deceased very early on, but no body = no proof) and also believe the tapas group are also guilty of neglect and for that, they all should be brought to the stand. However, they are very well protected both by people in power and a minefield of changing stories to ensure that can never be proven.

.....until a body surfaces or the perp speaks about timelines and events

All IMO of course.
So how do you think the dogs alerting to the scenic hire car some 25 days after Madeleine's disappearance alerted there when a supposed abductor took Madeleine initially. Do you think he planted evidence there? And the McC's aired the vehicle out because of the awful smell?
I don't think anything was deliberately planted. They were under watchful eye by various law enforcement and media people, so anyone suspicious around the car would've rung alarm bells.

The hire car is the 1 thing that keeps swaying me back to the 'unless i see evidence files with my naked eye, i'm still convinced of the parents', however, it's worth pointing out that Cadaver scent can last up to a year and is transferred upon contact...

If the parents and others had been traipsing all over the apartment, which had cadaver scent all over it and then been in the car, it could be transferred.

Rotting meat smell could just be that...rotting meat. If Madeleine's things had been transported about int he boot also, then her DNA would be in there too.

All speculation and thinking out loud though, as i said, this is the part which gets me scratching my head.
The only thing I will say at this point is that I don't believe in the sedation theory at all and the McCanns were helped.

I'm not overly convinced about the sedation theory either tbh as the kids were known to cry on other evenings, however, the police observations about the twins not awakening throughout the commotion do fit with the theory.

The McCanns were certainly helped alright, from all angles. They pulled strings in media, politics and law enforcement due to Gerry's connections. I also believe (IMO) that these connections have assisted in them not being hauled in for various charges of neglect and fraud due to information Gerry has against them. All this is regardless of who took Madeleine.

by ScarletLaw 28.01.15 16:01

Re: In a way I do hope that Scotland Yard come out with Snatched pedo ring theory because British police were told that Madeleine was snatched by an International ring which had photographed her three days before she vanished, (by the McCanns who said that they were being photographed-yet still left their door open and kids alone) official police files can confirm. The Interpol investigation led to nothing and the investigation was closed after two months because there was nothing to back this up. So if they come out with this, we can only prove that the McCanns are liars and Interpol opposed the theory ridiculous.

by woodforthetrees 28.01.15 16:14

ScarletLaw wrote:Re: In a way I do hope that Scotland Yard come out with Snatched pedo ring theory because British police were told that Madeleine was snatched by an International ring which had photographed her three days before she vanished, (by the McCanns who said that they were being photographed-yet still left their door open and kids alone) official police files can confirm. The Interpol investigation led to nothing and the investigation was closed after two months because there was nothing to back this up. So if they come out with this, we can only prove that the McCanns are liars and Interpol opposed the theory ridiculous.

If anything, i really hope that everybody is wrong, she wondered off and has been living with a deaf recluse for the last few years and is perfectly well and sound. Unfortunately, whichever exact truth about 'who' and 'why', the outcome looks the same for the poor girl. Anyway...

The fact the McCanns were told pretty much straight away that the chances of her being alive were very low, agreed on the interpol findings (or lack of) then since then the cadaver dogs identified death scent in the apartment and more recently SY digging for a body, i think it would make SY a laughing stock (even more) if they come out and say that she was abducted alive.

The only people who actively put she 'she was abducted alive' theory are the McCanns..because (IMO) they need to maintain she is alive.

by ScarletLaw 28.01.15 17:05

woodforthetrees wrote:
ScarletLaw wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Joss wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Portia wrote:Which perp?
'woodforthetrees' believes that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile sometime between 9.10pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

Initially i believed it was Gerry, but based on the fact that after 3 investigations (not including private ones), him being there to question if needed and the fact that SY are not suspecting either the McCanns or the tapas group of any involvement....yet carry on investigating, leads me to believe now (IMO of course) that they have sufficient evidence of something/someone, NOT the McCanns, which they are trying to track down.

Slight change in your description Tony... i believe Madeleine was abused anytime after about 6pm and unfortunately killed in the apartment (not intended) and in a state of panic (due to DNA being left in the cadaver), the body was removed to be disposed of.

No abduction as no struggle, plus enough time to have a clean up.

I do however think that the McCanns are guilty of death by neglect (and possibly sedating their children) and subsequent fraud through the fund (they knew she was deceased very early on, but no body = no proof) and also believe the tapas group are also guilty of neglect and for that, they all should be brought to the stand. However, they are very well protected both by people in power and a minefield of changing stories to ensure that can never be proven.

.....until a body surfaces or the perp speaks about timelines and events

All IMO of course.
So how do you think the dogs alerting to the scenic hire car some 25 days after Madeleine's disappearance alerted there when a supposed abductor took Madeleine initially. Do you think he planted evidence there? And the McC's aired the vehicle out because of the awful smell?
I don't think anything was deliberately planted. They were under watchful eye by various law enforcement and media people, so anyone suspicious around the car would've rung alarm bells.

The hire car is the 1 thing that keeps swaying me back to the 'unless i see evidence files with my naked eye, i'm still convinced of the parents', however, it's worth pointing out that Cadaver scent can last up to a year and is transferred upon contact...

If the parents and others had been traipsing all over the apartment, which had cadaver scent all over it and then been in the car, it could be transferred.

Rotting meat smell could just be that...rotting meat. If Madeleine's things had been transported about int he boot also, then her DNA would be in there too.

All speculation and thinking out loud though, as i said, this is the part which gets me scratching my head.
The only thing I will say at this point is that I don't believe in the sedation theory at all and the McCanns were helped.
I'm not overly convinced about the sedation theory either tbh as the kids were known to cry on other evenings, however, the police observations about the twins not awakening throughout the commotion do fit with the theory.

The McCanns were certainly helped alright, from all angles. They pulled strings in media, politics and law enforcement due to Gerry's connections. I also believe (IMO) that these connections have assisted in them not being hauled in for various charges of neglect and fraud due to information Gerry has against them. All this is regardless of who took Madeleine.

I'm not overly convinced about the sedation theory either tbh as the kids were known to cry on other evenings, however, the police observations about the twins not awakening throughout the commotion do fit with the theory.

Or you could say that the dose wasn't enough on the other night, with the crying heard by the lady upstairs, so this time around they gave her too much?? (My theory is based on other things )

All this is regardless of who took Madeleine??????????? Que? -who do you think took her then?

by worriedmum 28.01.15 19:15

woodforthetrees wrote ''If the parents and others had been traipsing all over the apartment, which had cadaver scent all over it and then been in the car, it could be transferred. ''

If cadaver scent is easily transferred, shouldn't it have been detected on all the clothes that were put in the same box? In fact, shouldn't it have been detected everywhere in 5a, since the clothes had been worn and the wearers had moved around? And also on the seats of the hire car where the wearers were sitting?

by ScarletLaw 28.01.15 19:42

That's a really good point worriedmum. It would've been on the front car seats in particular because the back is pressed against the cloth.

by SuspiciousMinds 28.01.15 21:08

EDITED: ***Sorry, this is a response to woodforthetrees - the quoted text didn't come up as part of my post!***

I don't follow this theory at all. How do you reach the conclusion that abuse could have taken place anytime after 6pm? The McCanns claim to have seen Madeleine alive as late as 9.05pm, and even if that is a fabrication on their part for whatever reason, it seems fairly certain that they didn't leave the apartment for dinner until around 8.30pm. So if neither they nor the Tapas 7 were responsible for or aware of Madeleine's death, any abuse can only have taken place after that time.

Which leaves all the usual question marks about leaving the body hanging around long enough for cadaverine to develop, and the 'panicking' stranger casually and coolly taking all that time to clean the apartment, knowing that the parents could pop back at any moment.

If something happened earlier than 8.30pm, the McCanns would have known all about it and would be very heavily implicated. The only possible way out would be for them to claim that they'd left the children a lot earlier in the evening than they previously admitted, and didn't do any checking at all. Maybe they popped round to someone else's apartment for pre-dinner drinks? Funny how no-one else saw them though.

If you're going to go along with the 'McCanns know nothing' story, you either have to accept that their timelines of when they last saw Madeleine are roughly accurate, or you're back to questioning why they repeatedly lied about something so important in their police statements and ever since.

by stumo 29.01.15 0:30

worriedmum wrote:woodforthetrees wrote ''If the parents and others had been traipsing all over the apartment, which had cadaver scent all over it and then been in the car, it could be transferred. ''

If cadaver scent is easily transferred, shouldn't it have been detected on all the clothes that were put in the same box? In fact, shouldn't it have been detected everywhere in 5a, since the clothes had been worn and the wearers had moved around? And also on the seats of the hire car where the wearers were sitting?

And it was only found on Mrs McScammers clothing..... nothing worn by MrMcScammer

by **PeterMac** 29.01.15 7:59

stumo wrote:And it was only found on Mrs McScammers clothing..... nothing worn by MrMcScammer

Were the "button trousers" ever seen again ?
One minute they were on the bed, then they got 'whooshed'.

by ScarletLaw 29.01.15 8:49

PeterMac wrote:
stumo wrote:And it was only found on Mrs McScammers clothing..... nothing worn by MrMcScammer
Were the "button trousers" ever seen again ?
One minute they were on the bed, then they got 'whooshed'.

I read on a post that they were found in a bag at the airport along with some Jeans and a fleece but I don't believe they were. Jane Tanner emphasises not having Jeans in her statement a little to much for me and therefore I think this bag was planted by people trying to help the McCanns and make us think that the abductor had got on a plane. Seems a little odd to leave clothes where they would be found, especially when are abductor was fully CSI'D and left not even a tiny trace of dna in the apartment itself? A bit slapdash in comparison.

by woodforthetrees 29.01.15 10:32

ScarletLaw wrote:

I'm not overly convinced about the sedation theory either tbh as the kids were known to cry on other evenings, however, the police observations about the twins not awakening throughout the commotion do fit with the theory.

Or you could say that the dose wasn't enough on the other night, with the crying heard by the lady upstairs, so this time around they gave her too much?? (My theory is based on other things )

All this is regardless of who took Madeleine??????????? Que? -who do you think took her then?

At this point i am unsure.

I was 100% Gerry up until very recently and after some very interesting conversations which highlighted that SY have ruled the couple and the tapas out entirely and are only looking for a paedo who carried out the act and then took the evidence away, i now question why...or more importantly, what do they have on their files which makes them so certain.

So now i am 50/50. As i said before, you can make theories, PII case files and forensics fit many scenarios, but what we don't have is the FULL files and evidence, therefore until we do (it'll never happen), unfortunately, we can but speculate.

What we do know is that SY do not think it's them.

by woodforthetrees 29.01.15 10:35

worriedmum wrote:woodforthetrees wrote ''If the parents and others had been traipsing all over the apartment, which had cadaver scent all over it and then been in the car, it could be transferred. ''

If cadaver scent is easily transferred, shouldn't it have been detected on all the clothes that were put in the same box? In fact, shouldn't it have been detected everywhere in 5a, since the clothes had been worn and the wearers had moved around? And also on the seats of the hire car where the wearers were sitting?

This is simply a theory, an opinion. Another one to be considered is that there was some form of other cadaver in the hire car, unrelated to the McCanns.

Looking at the cadaver dog videos, cadaver was scented in the boot (where bags of clothes etc would have been), the footwell/lower door sill of the car and on the keys, therefore someone had come into contact with cadaver scent and transferred it.

by woodforthetrees 29.01.15 10:36

PeterMac wrote:
stumo wrote:And it was only found on Mrs McScammers clothing..... nothing worn by MrMcScammer
Were the "button trousers" ever seen again ?
One minute they were on the bed, then they got 'whooshed'.

I agree Peter, some of Gerrys clothes seems to have dissapeared, therefore any subsequent clothing not worn in the apartment on the early days after the event, would/could not have had scent transferred.

WHAT THE LABORATORY REPORTS BRING TO LIGHT

WHAT THE LABORATORY REPORTS BRING TO LIGHT

Log in for more topics