The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

ALERT! Prout documentary on again

View previous topic View next topic Go down

ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 21.12.11 6:33

The documentary I watched quite a while ago about Adrian Prout is being shown again.........


Crime and Investigation Channel called Murder in Suburbia


Thursday - 7.00 pm - Channel 553 Sky
Thursday - 8.00 pm - Channel 554 Sky (which is the +1 channel)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by PeterMac on 21.12.11 6:52

1 Circumstantial evidence only
2 No confession
3 No body
4 Dogs alerting
5 Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 21.12.11 11:21

Thanks Candyfloss

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Gillyspot on 21.12.11 15:20

Looks like it is a must watch tomorrow night. I have seen it before but that was ages ago.

Candyfloss may I just say that I lurve your avatar roses

____________________
Kate McCann "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances"

Gillyspot

Posts : 1470
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-06-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 21.12.11 15:25

@Gillyspot wrote:Looks like it is a must watch tomorrow night. I have seen it before but that was ages ago.

Candyfloss may I just say that I lurve your avatar roses

Cute isn't he big grin Where's his red nose though big grin

Wonder if the dogs bit will be whooshed

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 21.12.11 15:47

Crime & Investigation Network is owned by the following, which is encouraging.

42.5% A&E Television Networks (Hearst Corporation)

42.5% Disney-ABC Television Group

15% NBCUniversal

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Alert!Prout documentry on again

Post by sijm on 21.12.11 17:27

Sorry all but who is Prout?

sijm

Posts : 126
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2011-11-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 21.12.11 17:29

@sijm wrote:Sorry all but who is Prout?

Have a look at this thread sijm thumbsup

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2189-disappearance-murder-of-kate-prout

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 22.12.11 21:28

So, did anyone watch Eddie doing his job on the Adrian Prout documentary screened earlier. As I said on the older thread in the link, he signalled between the sofa and the window, in the lounge - about a 2 to 3 foot gap. The Police Officer being interviewed called him Eddie, and said at that moment the investigation turned. As we now know, after pleading his innocence since being jailed, Prout finally admitted to the murder of his wife, and showed the police where he had hidden the body. What a brilliant dog!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Me on 23.12.11 7:59

candyfloss wrote:So, did anyone watch Eddie doing his job on the Adrian Prout documentary screened earlier. As I said on the older thread in the link, he signalled between the sofa and the window, in the lounge - about a 2 to 3 foot gap. The Police Officer being interviewed called him Eddie, and said at that moment the investigation turned. As we now know, after pleading his innocence since being jailed, Prout finally admitted to the murder of his wife, and showed the police where he had hidden the body. What a brilliant dog!

And what was interesting was despite not finding any forensic material the Police accepeted the findings of Eddie and concluded she must have been strangled there.

Unlike those "experts" on JATYK who sneer that eddie barks at bacon and carpets. They must know more than Gloucestershire Police then becuase they took it seriously.

____________________
What is certain is that since the start of the investigation there were  incongruent and even contradictory situations concerning the witness statements; the telephone records of calls that were made and received on mobile phones that belonged to the couple and to the group of friends that were on holidays with them; the movements of people right after the disappearance of the little girl was noticed, concerning the state in which the bedroom from where the child disappeared from was found (closed window? open window? partially open window?) etc., and the mystery would only become even thicker due to the clues that were left by the already mentioned sniffer dogs. - The Words of a JUDGE in relation to the McCanns

Me

Posts : 683
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by aiyoyo on 23.12.11 8:35

There is definitely something about dead body and sofa?

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by happychick on 23.12.11 9:01

@Me wrote:
candyfloss wrote:So, did anyone watch Eddie doing his job on the Adrian Prout documentary screened earlier. As I said on the older thread in the link, he signalled between the sofa and the window, in the lounge - about a 2 to 3 foot gap. The Police Officer being interviewed called him Eddie, and said at that moment the investigation turned. As we now know, after pleading his innocence since being jailed, Prout finally admitted to the murder of his wife, and showed the police where he had hidden the body. What a brilliant dog!

And what was interesting was despite not finding any forensic material the Police accepeted the findings of Eddie and concluded she must have been strangled there.

Unlike those "experts" on JATYK who sneer that eddie barks at bacon and carpets. They must know more than Gloucestershire Police then becuase they took it seriously.

And coconut shell. Don't forget the coconut shell.

Martin Grime said "People aren't right 100 per cent of the time. ... If they bark and nothing is found then the dogs are still right".

Eddie barked and a person dug up coconut shell and the pro's sneer at Eddie because of what the person did, not what Eddie did.

The McCann's and their supporters make me sick to my stomach that they make excuses for child neglect and child abuse. What sort of people are they?

Whenever there is ANY doubt about what happened to a child or children then questions MUST be asked, and an investigation MUST be concluded and NOT excuses made FFS.

Who can protect these children or speak up for them when adults let them down? Certainly NOT the McCanns or their low-life supporters (or well-wishers as Carter Ruck call them)!


happychick

Posts : 394
Reputation : 34
Join date : 2011-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by PeterMac on 23.12.11 9:58

Has there been any more from the "Free Prout - Prout is innocent" brigade, or have they crawled away to wash the egg off their faces ?

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by pennylane on 23.12.11 10:32

@PeterMac wrote:Has there been any more from the "Free Prout - Prout is innocent" brigade, or have they crawled away to wash the egg off their faces ?

It's a good job Adrian Prout led the police to Kate Prout's body, because I expect the 'innocent brigade' would be saying the confession was tortured out of him, or something equally ridiculous. It never fails to amaze me how obtuse some people are. I just don't get it at all. The unquestioning McCann believers equally astonish me!

How pathetic of those who believed Mrs Prout ran off, and left her greedy hubby with the £800,000 farm - even though the woman had clearly shown she wasn't about to let him get his mitts on one red cent of her inheritance/wealth.

Wonder how the victim's accusers felt, including Prout's daughter, when Prout finally confessed?

pennylane

Posts : 2529
Reputation : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Me on 23.12.11 10:35

@happychick wrote:
@Me wrote:
candyfloss wrote:So, did anyone watch Eddie doing his job on the Adrian Prout documentary screened earlier. As I said on the older thread in the link, he signalled between the sofa and the window, in the lounge - about a 2 to 3 foot gap. The Police Officer being interviewed called him Eddie, and said at that moment the investigation turned. As we now know, after pleading his innocence since being jailed, Prout finally admitted to the murder of his wife, and showed the police where he had hidden the body. What a brilliant dog!

And what was interesting was despite not finding any forensic material the Police accepeted the findings of Eddie and concluded she must have been strangled there.

Unlike those "experts" on JATYK who sneer that eddie barks at bacon and carpets. They must know more than Gloucestershire Police then becuase they took it seriously.

And coconut shell. Don't forget the coconut shell.

Martin Grime said "People aren't right 100 per cent of the time. ... If they bark and nothing is found then the dogs are still right".

Eddie barked and a person dug up coconut shell and the pro's sneer at Eddie because of what the person did, not what Eddie did.

The McCann's and their supporters make me sick to my stomach that they make excuses for child neglect and child abuse. What sort of people are they?

Whenever there is ANY doubt about what happened to a child or children then questions MUST be asked, and an investigation MUST be concluded and NOT excuses made FFS.

Who can protect these children or speak up for them when adults let them down? Certainly NOT the McCanns or their low-life supporters (or well-wishers as Carter Ruck call them)!


Taken from this blog:

http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2011/07/skull-evidence-and-media.html

This scenario has some merit because a couple of days later the good old JEP, who can't seem to mention Mr. Harper's name without mentioning the "Coconut" mentioned Mr. Harper's name and the Coconut. But if you, the viewer, listen to Mr. Harper's evidence (which the JEP clearly didn't) then you will hear him say that there is no scientific data to show it is coconut. There is however scientific "evidence" to show that this item contained 1.6% collagen which is only found in mammals. Not one of the "accredited" media had a single question to ask about the "fresh and fleshed" bones that had been burnt before burial. After one and a half hours of Mr. Harper giving evidence the "professional, paid, accredited "journalists" could not think of a single question to ask him?

____________________
What is certain is that since the start of the investigation there were  incongruent and even contradictory situations concerning the witness statements; the telephone records of calls that were made and received on mobile phones that belonged to the couple and to the group of friends that were on holidays with them; the movements of people right after the disappearance of the little girl was noticed, concerning the state in which the bedroom from where the child disappeared from was found (closed window? open window? partially open window?) etc., and the mystery would only become even thicker due to the clues that were left by the already mentioned sniffer dogs. - The Words of a JUDGE in relation to the McCanns

Me

Posts : 683
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Me on 23.12.11 10:40

And have a look at this post:

http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2011/02/no-body-remains.html

Here's some relevant parts:

The bone material shows features that are diagnostically human and most likely represent the remains of a juvenile person. The state of preservation of the remains indicates that they had been exposed to heat but this had been insufficient to cause much biomolecular damage (indeed, by sterilising the material the heating may have had the effect of reducing the opportunity for subsequent microbial damage to occur). The material is sufficiently well preserved to enable further chemical analysis including extraction of collagen for radiocarbon dating and dietary isotopic analysis, and the state of preservation of the material may render it suitable for the extraction and characterisation of biomarkers such as DNA.

The EVRD alert indications were confirmed by intrusive archaeological excavation and sieving. A significant number of bone fragments and teeth have been recovered which have been corroborated as human.

Predominantly the human remains have been recovered from cellars 3, 4 and 5 which historically were one large classroom.

Enquiries at this time are suggestive that the human remains were deposited in this area and covered with top soil in a deliberate act of concealment. The deposition could only have taken place during a period of time when the floor had been removed. Research into the historical renovation of the property suggests that the floor above cellars 3, 4 &5 was taken up in the late 60’s early 70’s.

Karl Harrison’s archaeological theory of the burnt debris including human bone fragments and teeth being deposited in the east wing cellars from the west wing is contained within this report. This theory is suggestive that the solid fuel furnace in operation in the west wing around the time of 1960 – 1970 may have been used to dispose of human remains.

Enquiries to date are showing that the original solid fuel central heating and hot water supply furnace in the west wing was replaced in the late 60’s early 70’s with oil fired furnaces. This may have coincided with the floor in cellars 3, 4 & 5 being removed. This would explain the deposition of the bone fragments and teeth with ash deposits as being the waste from the furnace upon decommissioning. It would also suggest some element of ‘guilty knowledge’.

The tests clearly indicated the presence of human remains decomposition scent.

Remains identified by the resident forensic anthropologist Miss Julie Roberts as human, and items of interest to the enquiry, have been submitted for forensic analysis.

Forty eight human deciduous teeth have been recovered to date. Twenty six of which are presently in the UK being examined to identify the number of individuals from whom they originate.

Numerous bone fragments are being examined at Sheffield University for histology purposes.

The meticulous search of Haut De La Garenne has now been completed and the building handed over to Property Services. Evidence has been obtained to support the abuse enquiry and suggestive evidence that the remains of at least one child were present within the structure of the building.

A significant amount of human remains have been recovered that is suggestive of foul play in relation to the cause of death and guilty knowledge during deposition.

65 Human deciduous teeth

Numerous human bone fragments

It would appear at this stage that the remains were deposited into the area of cellars 3,4 &5 having been removed from a secondary deposition site in the west wing. They were then distributed evenly over the ground and covered with a layer of top soil so as to conceal the deposition from all but the most meticulous scrutiny. (End)

And particuarly relevent:

The local Mainstream Media seem to be falling over themselves to mention, as often as they can, the “Coconut” every time they mention Lenny Harper - so just what “evidence” are they working on when they say it is Coconut? Well it appears there “evidence” is based on “a throw away comment.” All the scientific data, or “evidence”, suggests that it is a piece of child’s skull, but a “throw away comment”, in the world of our mainstream media overrides scientific evidence.

____________________
What is certain is that since the start of the investigation there were  incongruent and even contradictory situations concerning the witness statements; the telephone records of calls that were made and received on mobile phones that belonged to the couple and to the group of friends that were on holidays with them; the movements of people right after the disappearance of the little girl was noticed, concerning the state in which the bedroom from where the child disappeared from was found (closed window? open window? partially open window?) etc., and the mystery would only become even thicker due to the clues that were left by the already mentioned sniffer dogs. - The Words of a JUDGE in relation to the McCanns

Me

Posts : 683
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Gillyspot on 23.12.11 10:51

But of course the media saw it as bungling by Martin Grimes

"The evidence of lavish expenses claims and extraordinary financial waste includes paying £93,000 to Martin Grime, the handler of the sniffer dog Eddie, who was charged with the grim task of finding children’s bodies that were supposedly entombed in concrete in the institution, known as ‘the Jersey House of Horrors’, which closed in 1986.

To date the ‘human remains’ that triggered the storm surrounding the case have turned out to be a piece of coconut shell."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html#ixzz1hLzppG2x

____________________
Kate McCann "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances"

Gillyspot

Posts : 1470
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-06-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Me on 23.12.11 10:53

Extracts from Operation Rectangle Summary

"Among the victims were a few who said that children had been dragged from their beds at night screaming and had then disappeared. Two others said they had knowledge of human remains at the location but were not specific. A local advocate also came to police and said he had a client who knew there were human remains buried at the home.”

“Information exists of the previous finding of buried bones co mingled with a pair of children’s shoes and fragments of cloth.”

“Anecdotal witness evidence suggested that bones found by builders completing renovations near to the north west stairwell may have been of human origin. An alert indication by the EVRD in this area resulted in the excavation of the site by forensic archaeologists. During this intrusive procedure a 2 inch X 2 inch piece of what appeared to be bone was recovered. This was preliminarily identified ‘in the field’ as possibly being juvenile human skull by the forensic anthropologist and was submitted for confirmation including species carbon dating and DNA.”

“The teeth recovered from cellars 3-4 were identified as juvenile human deciduous teeth and have been conveyed to the UK for further analysis.”

“Anecdotal witness evidence was suggestive of juvenile human bones being recovered from the area of the north-western stairwell during recent building renovations in 2003.”

“Human remains deposited within the ground in that area would contaminate the ground, and any porous material within it. The dog’s reactions were therefore consistent with this scenario.”

“A significant number of bone fragments and teeth have been recovered which have been corroborated as human. The remains are at the present time undergoing forensic testing including carbon dating procedures.”

“Control testing of the EVRD would suggest that although the dog alerted to specific areas where human remains were situated the entire top two inches of soil within this area is contaminated with human cadaver odour. Enquiries at this time are suggestive that the human remains were deposited in this area and covered with top soil in a deliberate act of concealment. The deposition could only have taken place during a period of time when the floor had been removed. Research into the historical renovation of the property suggests that the floor above cellars 3, 4 &5 was taken up in the late 60’s early 70’s.”

“Karl Harrison’s archaeological theory of the burnt debris including human bone fragments and teeth being deposited in the east wing cellars from the west wing is contained within this report. This theory is suggestive that the solid fuel furnace in operation in the west wing around the time of 1960 – 1970 may have been used to dispose of human remains.”

"Enquiries to date are showing that the original solid fuel central heating and hot water supply furnace in the west wing was replaced in the late 60’s early 70’s with oil fired furnaces. This may have coincided with the floor in cellars 3, 4 & 5 being removed. This would explain the deposition of the bone fragments and teeth with ash deposits as being the waste from the furnace upon decommissioning. It would also suggest some element of ‘guilty knowledge’.

“The series of tests involved the use of samples of soot and debris from the chimney situated in the plant room that was in use at the time the solid fuel furnace was in operation. The tests were completed in such a way as to isolate the samples from containers, human ‘live’ scent and other distracters."

"The tests clearly indicated the presence of human remains decomposition scent.” (END)

____________________
What is certain is that since the start of the investigation there were  incongruent and even contradictory situations concerning the witness statements; the telephone records of calls that were made and received on mobile phones that belonged to the couple and to the group of friends that were on holidays with them; the movements of people right after the disappearance of the little girl was noticed, concerning the state in which the bedroom from where the child disappeared from was found (closed window? open window? partially open window?) etc., and the mystery would only become even thicker due to the clues that were left by the already mentioned sniffer dogs. - The Words of a JUDGE in relation to the McCanns

Me

Posts : 683
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Me on 23.12.11 11:18

And the final piece on this now, so we can hopefully nail once and for all the Eddie likes coconut nonesense:

http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.com/2010/03/jar6.html

I have posted some information concerning jar/6 the fragment of child's scull. This is for our local media also who are still having problems with it

rs



“23 February 2008
09.10 hrs
Examined JAR/6. Recovered from Context 011 Trench 3. Degraded fragment of bone thought to be human skull, probably from a child (see full inventory for details). Associated with mixed debris including animal bone, buttons and a leather “thong”. Discussed findings with SIO Lenny HARPER and Forensic Manager Vicky COUPLAND. It was decided that the bone should be sent for C14 dating*.”

Diane Simon, Mick Gradwell, and David Warcup have all said that I was told the next day that the context of the area I found pre-dated the enquiry. This is simply not true. The fragment was found under the stairs in Trench 3. Anyone who thinks that the inch by inch, painstaking, search conducted on their knees by the Archaeologists and Anthropologists took only one day knows nothing about this sort of work. Page 2 of the Anthropologists worksheet shows that they were still working on Trench 3 on 6th March and were still working under the stairs on 20th March. It was sometime around then that the work on this context was completed and we were told that the context meant the fragment was probably too old to be important to the enquiry. We then immediately ruled it out of our enquiry. Further confirmation of this is given on Page 16 of the Worksheet when the Anthropologist Julie Roberts made the entry reproduced below. This entry was made on 9th April and refers to the 8th April. Note what she says in the entry because it totally contradicts what Gradwell, Warcup, and Simon say. For instance, where she says “now that the phasing of the area under the stairs has been completed,”. This would certainly seem to contradict the information given to the media by Gradwell and Warcup that it had been completed as early as the 24 February.

“9 April 2008
On 8 April 2008 I read the C14 dating results relating to JAR/6. The report stated that the fragment was too degraded to obtain a date. The fragment can however be dated by archaeological context now that the phasing of the area under the stairs has been completed. JAR/6 was found in Context 003, Trench 3. This Context is thought to belong to the earliest phase of the building, phase 1, which has been dated to the Victorian period. It certainly predates the 1940’s aggregate 008.

On 8 and 9 April 2008 I re-examined JAR/6. Since I initially examined the fragment it had dried out considerably and changed in colour, texture and weight. These changes caused me to reconsider my initial observation that the fragment was human bone, although I cannot reach a definite conclusion without conducting further chemical analysis. I reported my findings to Forensic Manager Vicky COUPLAND and SIO Lenny HARPER and we discussed a number of options regarding how to proceed with the fragment. Our conclusion was that as the fragment had been found in the pre 1940’s phase of the building, no further work would be conducted on it.”


So on the 9th of April 2008 Anthropologist Julie Roberts made the above entry.

Right, now David Rose in his article reproduced by Rooney says

On February 24, a day after Mr Harper made Haut de la Garenne an international byword for infamy by announcing his team had found the 'partial remains of a child' who might have been murdered, forensic scientists warned him that the so-called remains - allegedly a fragment of a child's skull - were so old as to be 'beyond the parameters of the investigation'


So we have email evidence to counter the above

Now there is this email exchange that could answer the question

On 28th March we received an e-mail from a Ms Brock at the Laboratory in relation to the fragment. Here are some excerpts from the e-mail.

“Hi Vicky. Here are the details of the Jersey skull as discussed on the phone earlier. As I said, the chemistry of this bone is extremely unusual – nothing I am familiar with.”

“During the first acid washes we often get a lot of fizzing as the mineral dissolves. The Jersey skull didn’t fizz at all, which suggested that preservation was poor, and which led me to test the nitrogen content of the bone.”

“The Jersey skull had 0.60 nitrogen, which suggested that it contained virtually no collagen. Once we had this result, Tom phoned you and told you it would be unlikely that we could date the sample, but that we would continue with the pre-treatment just in case.”

“Very surprisingly, the sample yielded 1.6% collagen (our cut off for dating is 1%).”

“As there is no nitrogen it cannot contain collagen unless it is highly degraded. The chances are it is highly contaminated and any date we get for it might not be accurate. I have e-mailed the director and asked if we should proceed with a date.”



SO NOW FOR THE COCNUT

Now, if you look at that e-mail, it makes clear a number of things. Firstly, they, the experts on dating, are not sure they can date it. Secondly, they make it clear they have found more than enough collagen (only found in mammals) to date the fragment, but then change their mind again and say it is too badly degraded. Also, note the use of the terms ‘skull’ and ‘bone.’ If the experts cannot be sure on 28th March, how can anyone say that I knew on 24th February? On 31st March, Ms Brock e-mailed again. In this e-mail, headed, “Re: Jersey Skull for C14 Dating,” she said that ‘the Director had now expressed concern about what the fragment was. The Technician (who is not an Anthropologist) who was carrying out the process commented that it ‘looked like a coconut husk.’ She went on to say “If it isn’t bone I am really sorry,” but then finishes with “although it could well have been poorly preserved bone as I described it.”

So has a Whole historic Child Abuse investigation been trashed because "The Technician said it looked liked a COCONUT HUSK" just crazy

I would like to say a very big thanks to Spartacus & Rooney for bringing this up. I never new where the term came from now im SHOCKED

This is from Lenny Harper


The above is only part of the information that I was given by the Anthropologists. It gives a vastly different picture to that supplied by Mr. Gradwell and Mr. Warcup and so enthusiastically promoted by Ms. Simon. These entries, made at the time by the Anthropologists, make it clear, that not only did they believe that they were finding human bones, but that the bones had been deposited there fairly recently, in some cases as recently as the 1960’s onwards. Reading the above, could anyone say that the dig at HDLG was a waste of time and money? Where do they get the conclusion that only one human bone was found? More puzzling perhaps, how can Mr. Gradwell or Mr. Warcup claim that I should not have authorised the search at HDLG? The problem was not identifying the bones as human – the expert Anthropologists did that very well. The problem was the contradictions in the carbon dating process which is not that reliable. When we questioned the company who pioneered the process we used they told us that they had taken a live fish out of the sea and carbon dated it several days later. The process told them the fish was thousands of years old. Our Anthropologist told us a similar story about a baby found dead in a house. Although they knew the baby had only been dead since the 1970s, the carbon dating gave a vastly different date. The carbon dating was at odds with the respected expert in the UK who said the bones were only a few decades old. Who was correct? More importantly, why did Mr. Gradwell and Mr. Warcup make no mention of all of this and why quote only selectively from the above document. The document is not being revealed here for the first time. Messrs Gradwell and Warcup quoted from it, albeit selectively, and the Sunday Times also referred to it. What it does do is completely and utterly destroy the suggestion that I exaggerated or lied about what I was told. It will make you wonder though why Mr. Gradwell should say that the dig was a waste of time and money.



Now for Mick Gradwell he says

Now, a bluff, straightforward and extremely experienced Lancashire detective, Det Supt Mick Gradwell, who had taken over the investigation after Mr Harper retired in August, was telling them that most of what they had been told about Haut de la Garenne and Mr Harper's £4.5million inquiry was nonsense.
'There are no credible allegations of murder, there are no suspects for murder,' Mr Gradwell said, and neither was there a scrap of evidence that there had ever been any victims.

____________________
What is certain is that since the start of the investigation there were  incongruent and even contradictory situations concerning the witness statements; the telephone records of calls that were made and received on mobile phones that belonged to the couple and to the group of friends that were on holidays with them; the movements of people right after the disappearance of the little girl was noticed, concerning the state in which the bedroom from where the child disappeared from was found (closed window? open window? partially open window?) etc., and the mystery would only become even thicker due to the clues that were left by the already mentioned sniffer dogs. - The Words of a JUDGE in relation to the McCanns

Me

Posts : 683
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-05-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 23.12.11 12:55

I've just got round to watching it.

I have no doubts about which dog was used to confirm Kate's body had been in the living room. Martin Grime is the only British cadaver dog trainer we have in the country and they definitely referred to the dog being used in that instance as Eddie. Martin Grime would not have two dogs with the same name.

This is the same Eddie who signalled a dead body in the McCann's apartment and their car.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by pennylane on 23.12.11 14:27

Stella wrote:I've just got round to watching it.

I have no doubts about which dog was used to confirm Kate's body had been in the living room. Martin Grime is the only British cadaver dog trainer we have in the country and they definitely referred to the dog being used in that instance as Eddie. Martin Grime would not have two dogs with the same name.

This is the same Eddie who signalled a dead body in the McCann's apartment and their car.



It's no wonder the gruesome twosome are forced to keep hustling the masses and protesting their innocence at every opportunity. Those expert blood and cadaver dogs have proven themselves time and time again. How frustrating that must be for those who have spent enormous amounts of other peoples money protecting their image and attempting to rewrite history.

Watch 'em and weep McCanns!

pennylane

Posts : 2529
Reputation : 1189
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by PeterMac on 23.12.11 17:00

@pennylane wrote:Wonder how the victim's accusers felt, including Prout's daughter, when Prout finally confessed?
I do actually feel very sorry for her. Close family are usually in denial, and rarely look at the evidence objectively. I imagine that her world has been turned upside down, since she probably feels she can no longer trust anyone.

Similar I suspect to what Philomena must be feeling, knowing that the guff she was told and then herself fed to the media about the jemmied shutters was a simple lie, emanating from her own brother. She is not an totally stupid person, and must have had some thoughts about it since, and asked herself and perhaps her brother, why they did that to her; why they put her in that position; why they didn't tell the truth to the police about the door they used right from the start. And so on.
The family can remain in denial, but there must be those doubts pouring vinegar into the Christmas pudding.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 24.12.11 14:46

Let's weigh this all up.

No DNA evidence

No body

No sign of a struggle indoors

No witnesses

All they had was, a cadaver dog signalling a dead body was in the lounge, behind the sofa. A diary detailing a troubled marriage and friends/relatives who could confirm that. On top of this they noticed Prout's body language was all wrong. Is that right? and they managed to get a conviction.

This is nothing compared to what they have on Madeleine's disappearence.

I wonder if Gerry would still like us to ask the dogs?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: ALERT! Prout documentary on again

Post by Guest on 24.12.11 14:53

I'm going to ask everyone over Christmas if they know about this case, if not I will educate them.

Then I'm going to tell them that the same cadaver dog Eddie, also pointed the finger at the McCann's.

That will give them all something to think about for the new year.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum