Re: LAST DAY OF LIBEL TRIAL 8th July 2014 DISCUSSION AND NEWS

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 12:35

Portia wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But did forensics find anything that shows a stranger was in that apartment?

Correction:

Allegedly some hairs of MOB were found, and sperm traces of a very young child, a boy; but excuse and correct me immediately if I'm wrong

Hairs from MOB is understandable I would think, but I've never heard of the sperm traces from a young boy, is it recorded somewhere? I remember from a pillow case of either sperm or saliva been found although not sure if that was from the apartment or Rothley. Better do more homework here eh? Lol

by j.rob 10.07.14 12:38

Portia wrote:
stillsloppingout wrote:
Miraflores wrote:
I think we do actually KNOW why the McShysters get so much protection, but it would be potentially libellous to state it outright. The trail of crumbs is leading almost certainly to a word beginning with P. When a pair of former PMs get hauled into this latest crackdown on Westminster child abuse, as undoubtedly they will in due course, then it'll all become clear IMO.

So Gerry was right when he said that his daughter had been abducted by Ps?
Then again, there is no evidence that she has come to harm, so Ps can't be involved.
IMO an excuse in case she was found in the early days with visible signs of sexual abuse .

Indeed.

The very early -almost immediate- emphasis on abduction by Ps may just suggest that at that precise moment the little child was still findable, and damage control was put in place just in case

I think this is possible too. Bringing up the P word in the first instance was a damage limitation exercise. And I thin that in the early hours/days after whatever *disaster* it was happened, it is possible that Madeleine was still alive and potentially could have been 'saved'.

But, by ignoring Portuguese police advice and by heavily publicising
Madeleine's photo (albeit one that was ridiculously out of date and doctored - a person or people panicked and Madeleine's fate became effectively sealed.

There are many indications,IMO, that in the early days Kate, at least, was not sure whether Madeleine was alive or dead.

All so sad. And so unforgivable, IMO.

by ChippyM 10.07.14 12:42

Justformaddie wrote:
Portia wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But did forensics find anything that shows a stranger was in that apartment?

Correction:

Allegedly some hairs of MOB were found, and sperm traces of a very young child, a boy; but excuse and correct me immediately if I'm wrong
Hairs from MOB is understandable I would think, but I've never heard of the sperm traces from a young boy, is it recorded somewhere? I remember from a pillow case of either sperm or saliva been found although not sure if that was from the apartment or Rothley. Better do more homework here eh? Lol

The possible semen stain turned out not to be according to the lab.

"On one of the beds in the room of the McCann couple, a residue was collected that initially was thought to be of semen. It turned out to be saliva and matched another child that had been in the apartment before."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id129.html

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 12:42

But does Eddie and Keela not rule that one out?

by ChippyM 10.07.14 12:46

Justformaddie wrote:But does Eddie and Keela not rule that one out?

I think the forensics people would have found that one by examining the scene . Eddie and Keela searched for blood and cadaver not other bodily fluids.

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 12:48

ChippyM wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:
Portia wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But did forensics find anything that shows a stranger was in that apartment?

Correction:

Allegedly some hairs of MOB were found, and sperm traces of a very young child, a boy; but excuse and correct me immediately if I'm wrong
Hairs from MOB is understandable I would think, but I've never heard of the sperm traces from a young boy, is it recorded somewhere? I remember from a pillow case of either sperm or saliva been found although not sure if that was from the apartment or Rothley. Better do more homework here eh? Lol

The possible semen stain [color:79a3=000000], turned out not to be according to the lab.
[color:79a3=000000]
"On one of the beds in the room of the McCann couple, a residue was collected that initially was thought to be of semen. It turned out to be saliva and matched another child that had been in the apartment before."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id129.html

Ah thanks chippyM, then raises the possibility of other children having actually slept in the mcs apartment too yes

Most drule when sleeping IMO

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 12:50

ChippyM wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But does Eddie and Keela not rule that one out?

I think the forensics people would have found that one by examining the scene . Eddie and Keela searched for blood and cadaver not other bodily fluids.

Sorry chippyM that was supposed to be for jrob, my fault!

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 12:52

j.rob wrote:
Portia wrote:
stillsloppingout wrote:
Miraflores wrote:
I think we do actually KNOW why the McShysters get so much protection, but it would be potentially libellous to state it outright. The trail of crumbs is leading almost certainly to a word beginning with P. When a pair of former PMs get hauled into this latest crackdown on Westminster child abuse, as undoubtedly they will in due course, then it'll all become clear IMO.

So Gerry was right when he said that his daughter had been abducted by Ps?
Then again, there is no evidence that she has come to harm, so Ps can't be involved.
IMO an excuse in case she was found in the early days with visible signs of sexual abuse .

Indeed.

The very early -almost immediate- emphasis on abduction by Ps may just suggest that at that precise moment the little child was still findable, and damage control was put in place just in case
I think this is possible too. Bringing up the P word in the first instance was a damage limitation exercise. And I thin that in the early hours/days after whatever *disaster* it was happened, it is possible that Madeleine was still alive and potentially could have been 'saved'.

But, by ignoring Portuguese police advice and by heavily publicising
Madeleine's photo (albeit one that was ridiculously out of date and doctored - a person or people panicked and Madeleine's fate became effectively sealed.

There are many indications,IMO, that in the early days Kate, at least, was not sure whether Madeleine was alive or dead.

All so sad. And so unforgivable, IMO.

But does that not rule Eddie and Keela out?

by Google.Gaspar.Statements 10.07.14 12:54

ChippyM wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:
Portia wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But did forensics find anything that shows a stranger was in that apartment?

Correction:

Allegedly some hairs of MOB were found, and sperm traces of a very young child, a boy; but excuse and correct me immediately if I'm wrong
Hairs from MOB is understandable I would think, but I've never heard of the sperm traces from a young boy, is it recorded somewhere? I remember from a pillow case of either sperm or saliva been found although not sure if that was from the apartment or Rothley. Better do more homework here eh? Lol

The possible semen stain turned out not to be according to the lab.

"On one of the beds in the room of the McCann couple, a residue was collected that initially was thought to be of semen. It turned out to be saliva and matched another child that had been in the apartment before."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id129.html

Weren't those samples done at the FSS? The same place that lost/contaminated some of Madeleine's DNA samples?

How do we know they really were saliva samples?

by ChippyM 10.07.14 12:55

Justformaddie wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But does Eddie and Keela not rule that one out?

I think the forensics people would have found that one by examining the scene . Eddie and Keela searched for blood and cadaver not other bodily fluids.
Sorry chippyM that was supposed to be for jrob, my fault!

Ok I see

sorry !.

On the subject of other children in the apartment. The forensics had the name of the boy that the sample belonged to, so they must have taken samples from previous occupants. So this was a child that had been in 5a on a different holiday.

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 12:58

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:
Portia wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But did forensics find anything that shows a stranger was in that apartment?

Correction:

Allegedly some hairs of MOB were found, and sperm traces of a very young child, a boy; but excuse and correct me immediately if I'm wrong
Hairs from MOB is understandable I would think, but I've never heard of the sperm traces from a young boy, is it recorded somewhere? I remember from a pillow case of either sperm or saliva been found although not sure if that was from the apartment or Rothley. Better do more homework here eh? Lol

The possible semen stain turned out not to be according to the lab.

"On one of the beds in the room of the McCann couple, a residue was collected that initially was thought to be of semen. It turned out to be saliva and matched another child that had been in the apartment before."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id129.html

Weren't those samples done at the FSS? The same place that lost/contaminated some of Madeleine's DNA samples?

How do we know they really were saliva samples?

Saliva samples that weren't from the mcs too! Who else was sleeping in that apartment? Something's not quiet right to say the least IMO

by ChippyM 10.07.14 12:59

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Weren't those samples done at the FSS? The same place that lost/contaminated some of Madeleine's DNA samples?

How do we know they really were saliva samples?

I don't know about the reliability of the FSS but they named the boy it belonged to http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm

and their reasoning was he was only 2, so it was physically impossible to be anything but saliva. I suppose they would have to be corrupt/fraudulent to make results up and how could that be proven?

by ChippyM 10.07.14 13:00

Justformaddie wrote:Saliva samples that weren't from the mcs too! Who else was sleeping in that apartment? Something's not quiet right to say the least IMO

It was someone who had been on holiday previously. (apparently)

by uppatoffee 10.07.14 13:01

aquila wrote:
Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:
Miraflores wrote:
The Judge questions her about her name. Kate replies that it is "Kate Healy". The Judge wonders why she doesn't have the name McCann as her last name, she states that she still uses her maiden name

The simple truth would have been so much easier: she used her maiden name professionally as many women do. She got her passport when she was still able to practice as a doctor.
I wonder why she used the name Kate McCann then on her bewk 'madeleine'?
In terms of marketing it was a good ploy!

As Kate McCann she is instantly recognisable as Madeleine's mother. As Kate Healy people would not necessarily make the connection and just think someone has written a book about the disappearance of a young girl. A distraught mother's version of events would sell far more copies.

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 13:01

ChippyM wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But does Eddie and Keela not rule that one out?

I think the forensics people would have found that one by examining the scene . Eddie and Keela searched for blood and cadaver not other bodily fluids.
Sorry chippyM that was supposed to be for jrob, my fault!

Ok I see sorry !.

On the subject of other children in the apartment. The forensics had the name of the boy that the sample belonged to, so they must have taken samples from previous occupants. So this was a child that had been in 5a on a different holiday.

Was the sample from the pillow? Cleaners change bedding regularly and deffo would've changed for new occupants, well I hope so lol!

by Guest 10.07.14 13:02

More information on the previous family in 5A.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3044-cops-crack-madeleine-mccann-codes

by jeanmonroe 10.07.14 13:03

From the excellent Joana M.

Court 'report'

Judge - In the thesis presented on (in?) the book it is claimed that you hid the body, do you think people thought that you were cowards?

Kate Healy - It was worst than that.

Judge - Do you suffer from insomnia?

Kate Healy - No, not as much as I did in 2008, 2009, because then the efforts that we did were boycotted by Mr. Amaral's book. We were desperate to find Madeleine. I felt that he destroyed our hypothesis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I felt that he destroyed OUR HYPOTHESIS"

'HYPOTHESIS', Kate?

YOU have told the WORLD, ad infinitum, that your daughter, Madeleine, had, incontrovertibly, been 'abducted' from your apartment, and you knew straight away that is what happened because you were there and knew more than anyone, that was the case, because of what you found.

HAS KM, under oath, NOW admitted that an 'abduction' may NOT have happened at all, but this is just a HYPOTHESIS the McCanns have, of what MAY have 'happened' to Madeleine?

And, if true, KH said THAT in a courtroom, under oath, it opens the McCanns up, totally, to examination of what OTHER hypothesis there could be about what 'happened' to Madeleine.

Even to the extent of 'hypothesis, thesis, theories' put forward by ex-detectives or ANYONE.

Why would the McCann 'hypothesis' be considered any more 'credible' than any other 'hypothesis' presented/suggested by anyone else?

by j.rob 10.07.14 13:16

Justformaddie wrote:But does Eddie and Keela not rule that one out?

Not necessarily. Madeleine 'was taken' out out of the apartment (or where-ever else she had been) some period prior to the arrival of the police. This was obviously a necessity if the abduction story was to carry weight and a Fund be set up to 'find' her. If police arrive and find an injured/ molested/dead or dying Madeleine - irrespective of who is responsible - then there is no need for a Fund to pay for endless worldwide searches for Madeleine.
It would be a child neglect/abuse/murder enquiry.

And one in which family/friends/acquaintances would have to be ruled out as key suspects. The McCanns and their friends wanted to avoid this at all costs, IMO.

Once 'they had taken' Madeleine away from the immediate environs, then the abduction story can be sprung upon the world media. The fund can be set up and the media full of stories of sightings of bogey-men around the world. With the media and police focus far, far away from where it should be, IMO (and Portuguese police were sceptical of the abduction story from the start) Madeleine (in whatever sad state she is in) is then probably moved into different places. Several of which, if the sniffer dog evidence is of Madeleine's corpse - are the apartment and the hire car.

It is possible that she died outside the apartment but her body was brought back into the apartment whileit was decided what to do.

People who engage in criminal activity are not always going to get things right, however hard they try to conceal the evidence of their crime.

And don't forget: 'We have let her down.'

Just some thoughts about potential scenarios.

Just read the last post - kate saying that Amaral's book destroyed their hypothesis!?

WHAT???

Oh well, out of the horse's mouth, as always. Surely Kate means that the worst thing was that Amaral's book destroyed their hope of finding their daughter alive?

But perhaps the worSt thing was the destruction of a hypothesis?

Now why would that be so bad?

Oh, of course - all those £££££s that were donated to 'support a hypothesis'.

I suppose Empires have crumbled on less.

by Justformaddie 10.07.14 13:29

j.rob wrote:
Justformaddie wrote:But does Eddie and Keela not rule that one out?
Not necessarily. Madeleine 'was taken' out out of the apartment (or where-ever else she had been) some period prior to the arrival of the police. This was obviously a necessity if the abduction story was to carry weight and a Fund be set up to 'find' her. If police arrive and find an injured/ molested/dead or dying Madeleine - irrespective of who is responsible - then there is no need for a Fund to pay for endless worldwide searches for Madeleine.
It would be a child neglect/abuse/murder enquiry.

And one in which family/friends/acquaintances would have to be ruled out as key suspects. The McCanns and their friends wanted to avoid this at all costs, IMO.

Once 'they had taken' Madeleine away from the immediate environs, then the abduction story can be sprung upon the world media. The fund can be set up and the media full of stories of sightings of bogey-men around the world. With the media and police focus far, far away from where it should be, IMO (and Portuguese police were sceptical of the abduction story from the start) Madeleine (in whatever sad state she is in) is then probably moved into different places. Several of which, if the sniffer dog evidence is of Madeleine's corpse - are the apartment and the hire car.

It is possible that she died outside the apartment but her body was brought back into the apartment whileit was decided what to do.

People who engage in criminal activity are not always going to get things right, however hard they try to conceal the evidence of their crime.

And don't forget: 'We have let her down.'

Just some thoughts about potential scenarios.

Just read the last post - kate saying that Amaral's book destroyed their hypothesis!?

WHAT???

Oh well, out of the horse's mouth, as always. Surely Kate means that the worst thing was that Amaral's book destroyed their hope of finding their daughter alive?

But perhaps the worSt thing was the destruction of a hypothesis?

Now why would that be so bad?

Oh, of course - all those £££££s that were donated to 'support a hypothesis'.

I suppose Empires have crumbled on less.

This is all so sad, what parent could leave their child almost #gone# no matter how it happened and all for money it makes me feel sick. They should be studied for the future IMO

by jozi 10.07.14 14:19

jeanmonroe wrote:From the excellent Joana M.

Court 'report'

Judge - In the thesis presented on (in?) the book it is claimed that you hid the body, do you think people thought that you were cowards?

Kate Healy - It was worst than that.

Judge - Do you suffer from insomnia?

Kate Healy - No, not as much as I did in 2008, 2009, because then the efforts that we did were boycotted by Mr. Amaral's book. We were desperate to find Madeleine. I felt that he destroyed our hypothesis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I felt that he destroyed OUR HYPOTHESIS"

'HYPOTHESIS', Kate?

YOU have told the WORLD, ad infinitum, that your daughter, Madeleine, had, incontrovertibly, been 'abducted' from your apartment, and you knew straight away that is what happened because you were there and knew more than anyone, that was the case, because of what you found.

HAS KM, under oath, NOW admitted that an 'abduction' may NOT have happened at all, but this is just a HYPOTHESIS the McCanns have, of what MAY have 'happened' to Madeleine?

And, if true, KH said THAT in a courtroom, under oath, it opens the McCanns up, totally, to examination of what OTHER hypothesis there could be about what 'happened' to Madeleine.

Even to the extent of 'hypothesis, thesis, theories' put forward by ex-detectives or ANYONE.

Why would the McCann 'hypothesis' be considered anypothesy more 'credible' than any other 'hypothesis' presented/suggested by anyone else?

So now its an ' Hypothesis " NOT AN ABDUCTION.......Deary deary me Kate you chop, we can all destroy your Hypothesis and GA and the Portuguese Police certainly did. So why are you taking him to court for libel if it was only your " Hypothesis ". wft

by j.rob 10.07.14 14:29

And don't forget what one of the tapas said about their being plenty of medics there who would know how to resuscitate a child.

Knowing how to resuscitate a child? Why say that if the true scenario is a random stranger abduction? Why would there be a need to resuscitate a child? This begs the question that someone or several people either knew but chose not to or knew and tried but failed.

Oh dear, what a *disaster* you might say, whatever the truth of what happened to this poor child.

by Newintown 10.07.14 14:39

jozi wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:From the excellent Joana M.

Court 'report'

Judge - In the thesis presented on (in?) the book it is claimed that you hid the body, do you think people thought that you were cowards?

Kate Healy - It was worst than that.

Judge - Do you suffer from insomnia?

Kate Healy - No, not as much as I did in 2008, 2009, because then the efforts that we did were boycotted by Mr. Amaral's book. We were desperate to find Madeleine. I felt that he destroyed our hypothesis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I felt that he destroyed OUR HYPOTHESIS"

'HYPOTHESIS', Kate?

YOU have told the WORLD, ad infinitum, that your daughter, Madeleine, had, incontrovertibly, been 'abducted' from your apartment, and you knew straight away that is what happened because you were there and knew more than anyone, that was the case, because of what you found.

HAS KM, under oath, NOW admitted that an 'abduction' may NOT have happened at all, but this is just a HYPOTHESIS the McCanns have, of what MAY have 'happened' to Madeleine?

And, if true, KH said THAT in a courtroom, under oath, it opens the McCanns up, totally, to examination of what OTHER hypothesis there could be about what 'happened' to Madeleine.

Even to the extent of 'hypothesis, thesis, theories' put forward by ex-detectives or ANYONE.

Why would the McCann 'hypothesis' be considered anypothesy more 'credible' than any other 'hypothesis' presented/suggested by anyone else?

So now its an ' Hypothesis " NOT AN ABDUCTION.......Deary deary me Kate you chop, we can all destroy your Hypothesis and GA and the Portuguese Police certainly did. So why are you taking him to court for libel if it was only your " Hypothesis ".

And morally was it right to start a multi £million search fund (or Ltd Co "support the McCann family" fund) on donations given mostly by the public on a "hypothesis".

Hypothesis - from Encarta dictionary -
theory
premise
suggestion
supposition
proposition
guess
assumption

Oh dear Kate, you really have put the cat amongst the pigeons with that statement. Why have your been brainwashing the entire World with the word "abduction" for the past 7 years (not 6 by the way, please keep GM up to date with the number of years your daughter has been missing) smilie

ETA: I'm waiting for the UK press (and Worldwide press) to repeat KM's words from the libel hearing i.e. her mentioning "hypothesis" and not the word "ABDUCTION". It will be interesting to see who will be the first to have some balls and print the truth for once.

by sallypelt 10.07.14 14:52

Newintown wrote:
jozi wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:From the excellent Joana M.

Court 'report'

Judge - In the thesis presented on (in?) the book it is claimed that you hid the body, do you think people thought that you were cowards?

Kate Healy - It was worst than that.

Judge - Do you suffer from insomnia?

Kate Healy - No, not as much as I did in 2008, 2009, because then the efforts that we did were boycotted by Mr. Amaral's book. We were desperate to find Madeleine. I felt that he destroyed our hypothesis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I felt that he destroyed OUR HYPOTHESIS"

'HYPOTHESIS', Kate?

YOU have told the WORLD, ad infinitum, that your daughter, Madeleine, had, incontrovertibly, been 'abducted' from your apartment, and you knew straight away that is what happened because you were there and knew more than anyone, that was the case, because of what you found.

HAS KM, under oath, NOW admitted that an 'abduction' may NOT have happened at all, but this is just a HYPOTHESIS the McCanns have, of what MAY have 'happened' to Madeleine?

And, if true, KH said THAT in a courtroom, under oath, it opens the McCanns up, totally, to examination of what OTHER hypothesis there could be about what 'happened' to Madeleine.

Even to the extent of 'hypothesis, thesis, theories' put forward by ex-detectives or ANYONE.

Why would the McCann 'hypothesis' be considered anypothesy more 'credible' than any other 'hypothesis' presented/suggested by anyone else?

So now its an ' Hypothesis " NOT AN ABDUCTION.......Deary deary me Kate you chop, we can all destroy your Hypothesis and GA and the Portuguese Police certainly did. So why are you taking him to court for libel if it was only your " Hypothesis ".

And morally was it right to start a multi £million search fund (or Ltd Co "support the McCann family" fund) on donations given mostly by the public on a "hypothesis".

Hypothesis - from Encarta dictionary -
theory
premise
suggestion
supposition
proposition
guess
assumption

Oh dear Kate, you really have put the cat amongst the pigeons with that statement.

From the recent photographs of Kate McCann, she looks as if she's in turmoil. The body language between her and her husband is glaring.

by canada12 10.07.14 14:58

Kate Healy - No, not as much as I did in 2008, 2009, because then the efforts that we did were boycotted by Mr. Amaral's book. We were desperate to find Madeleine. I felt that he destroyed our hypothesis.

Kate: "I knew immediately that Madeleine had been hypothesized!"

by View-from-Ireland 10.07.14 14:58

The use of the word hypothesis was a big mistake!

Read another way, you coud argue her sub-conscious mind was speaking when she said 'destroyed our hypothesis'

Read it again? GA destroyed our bullshit story?

All imo.

Log in for more topics