'Portugal Resident' comments on that Summers and Swan book - and suggest it's just 'propaganda'

Seriously? You think that all this debating on here is a good use of time? It just carries on, and the McCanns just carry on and there is never any conclusion to the case. We're all wasting our time.

In my opinion.

And I stand by the point I am making - noone knows for sure what happened in that apartment, or in any of the apartments, before the McCanns got there, however unlikely.

Brian Griffin wrote:Seriously? You think that all this debating on here is a good use of time? It just carries on, and the McCanns just carry on and there is never any conclusion to the case. We're all wasting our time.

In my opinion.

And I stand by the point I am making - noone knows for sure what happened in that apartment, or in any of the apartments, before the McCanns got there, however unlikely.

You may be giving up if you've run out of excuses for the McCanns but the rest of us won't be giving up until we find some justice for Madeleine, no matter how long that takes.

Brian Griffin wrote:Seriously? You think that all this debating on here is a good use of time? It just carries on, and the McCanns just carry on and there is never any conclusion to the case. We're all wasting our time.

In my opinion.

And I stand by the point I am making - noone knows for sure what happened in that apartment, or in any of the apartments, before the McCanns got there, however unlikely.

Sorry but the situation you're describing is statistically impossible.  You appear to be saying that, let's say for example in 2001 someone was murdered in apartment 5a. It has to be murder/unlawful disposal of a corpse because otherwise it would have been reported. Then, several years later a child disappears from the self same flat (I'm assuming you're arguing here that potentially Maddie never died in 5a). Then, by an amazing coincidence,  the mother of the missing child has cadaver odour (from several other, different cadavers) on her clothes because she took work clothes which she didn't wash on holiday.  Then, by an even greater coincidence,  the missing child's favourite toy has cadaver odour on it (presumably from a seventh or eight cadaver). But it gets better. A hire car rented by the parents several weeks later also has cadaver odour on it!! Logically it would have to be a different cadaver again because Maddie has already gone missing by this point, so it can't be related to the cuddle cat cadaver odour (or can it?)
Sorry but as Gerrie Nel would say, 'it didn't happen. It's not plausible'.

PeterMac wrote:And according to Kate it would have to have been in the previous 30 days anyway  ! !
Touchée.

Exactly! Devil's advocate slipped up there - I so love the excuses of the McCanns..DNA in the car could only have been possible if they'd dug up the body and contaminated the car...

 nglfi Today at 5:45 pm
I think if the case ever went to court the onus would be on Kate to explain why she made up an excuse of having attended 6 dead bodies,  and why she then inexplicably decided to wear those clothes on holiday without washing them. This was information she volunteered to explain cadaver odour and the prosecution would pounce on it in seconds, given how implaus it is as an explanation.


YES  IS THIS SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT NEEDED TO BE SORTED OUT

  The golden hours as you collect evidence you can then rule them in or out. Did not go far enough in that part of the investigation imo.

Opps, wrong thread.

Markus 2 wrote: nglfi Today at 5:45 pm
I think if the case ever went to court the onus would be on Kate to explain why she made up an excuse of having attended 6 dead bodies,  and why she then inexplicably decided to wear those clothes on holiday without washing them. This was information she volunteered to explain cadaver odour and the prosecution would pounce on it in seconds, given how implaus it is as an explanation.


YES  IS THIS SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT NEEDED TO BE SORTED OUT

   The golden hours as you collect evidence you can then rule them in or out. Did not go far enough in that part of the investigation imo.

Evening people,I'm a newbie but have been reading and digesting for some time,the reason I've quoted this particular post is because of what Mrs McCann is supposed to have said in relation to the cadaver odour on her cloths,I can't find any where a statement or indeed a video where she said about her work cloths,is it actually out there?

tigger wrote:

Newintown wrote:

Brian Griffin wrote:But it still *might* have happened. Just playing Devil's Advocate here.

(I'm referring to the post above the one above this)

If you're referring to my post it is highly unlikely that any death would have been over looked or hidden by anyone owning the apartment or renting it out.  There would have been in depth investigations into the ownership/renting of the apartment so nothing was missed.  There may be a million in one chance that that someone died in the apartment and was taken out in the middle of the night never to be seen again, but would their cadaver odour be detected behind the sofa, in the wardrobe, on cuddle cat, on KM's clothes, but not on GM's clothes or the twins or any otherr items in the apartment?

Attaboy!  i get a bit tired of these putative corpses occupying 5a..

Yeap! I'd love to see Mccanns' lawyer use that argument to explain away the cadaverine in 5A?
Any lawyer worth his salt would never go near or touch on the cadaverine evidence if he can help it, let alone use a pathetically stupid excuse such as the one put forward by BG, unless the lawyer possesses expiring grey cells at par with that of Baldrick's.

Brian Griffin wrote:

tigger wrote:
Since those flats were built, it appears nobody died in 5a, the PJ checked. 

Then again, you're assuming that any crime or accident would have been reported to the hotel or the authorities. Is it entirely impossible that someone could have died in the apartment, the body removed unseen and the apartment cleaned to disguise the fact before the McCanns got there? As unlikely as it seems, it isn't impossible, however improbable, so it could be argued that it is circumstantial I would imagine. Not all crimes are reported, especially those people want covered up.

In an earlier post you stated that Kate McCann explained the "cadaver" odour without any explanation of how & now someone else unconnected to them removed a body?? IMO you re pushing "circumstantial" evidence too far.

Just IMO

WMD wrote:

Markus 2 wrote: nglfi Today at 5:45 pm
I think if the case ever went to court the onus would be on Kate to explain why she made up an excuse of having attended 6 dead bodies,  and why she then inexplicably decided to wear those clothes on holiday without washing them. This was information she volunteered to explain cadaver odour and the prosecution would pounce on it in seconds, given how implaus it is as an explanation.


YES  IS THIS SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT NEEDED TO BE SORTED OUT

   The golden hours as you collect evidence you can then rule them in or out. Did not go far enough in that part of the investigation imo.

Evening people,I'm a newbie but have been reading and digesting for some time,the reason I've quoted this particular post is because of what Mrs McCann is supposed to have said in relation to the cadaver odour on her cloths,I can't find any where a statement or indeed a video where she said about her work cloths,is it actually out there?

I have heard this put forward many times, so yes I assume it is true but will see what I can find on this . ANYONE ELSE KNOW for sure..
FOUND THIS http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078050/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2030 BUT I BET YOU KNEW IT WAS OUT THERE.

reporMarkus 2 wrote:

WMD wrote:

Markus 2 wrote: nglfi Today at 5:45 pm
I think if the case ever went to court the onus would be on Kate to explain why she made up an excuse of having attended 6 dead bodies,  and why she then inexplicably decided to wear those clothes on holiday without washing them. This was information she volunteered to explain cadaver odour and the prosecution would pounce on it in seconds, given how implaus it is as an explanation.


YES  IS THIS SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT NEEDED TO BE SORTED OUT

   The golden hours as you collect evidence you can then rule them in or out. Did not go far enough in that part of the investigation imo.

Evening people,I'm a newbie but have been reading and digesting for some time,the reason I've quoted this particular post is because of what Mrs McCann is supposed to have said in relation to the cadaver odour on her cloths,I can't find any where a statement or indeed a video where she said about her work cloths,is it actually out there?

I have heard this put forward many times, so yes I assume it is true but will see what I can find on this . ANYONE ELSE KNOW for sure..

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2007/09/kate-mccann-explains-smell-of-cadaver.html?m=1

I have found this link online which suggests it was originally reported in Correiro de Manha, but I will keep looking for the original statement in interviews.

nglfi wrote:

reporMarkus 2 wrote:

WMD wrote:

Markus 2 wrote: nglfi Today at 5:45 pm
I think if the case ever went to court the onus would be on Kate to explain why she made up an excuse of having attended 6 dead bodies,  and why she then inexplicably decided to wear those clothes on holiday without washing them. This was information she volunteered to explain cadaver odour and the prosecution would pounce on it in seconds, given how implaus it is as an explanation.


YES  IS THIS SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT NEEDED TO BE SORTED OUT

   The golden hours as you collect evidence you can then rule them in or out. Did not go far enough in that part of the investigation imo.

Evening people,I'm a newbie but have been reading and digesting for some time,the reason I've quoted this particular post is because of what Mrs McCann is supposed to have said in relation to the cadaver odour on her cloths,I can't find any where a statement or indeed a video where she said about her work cloths,is it actually out there?

I have heard this put forward many times, so yes I assume it is true but will see what I can find on this . ANYONE ELSE KNOW for sure..

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2007/09/kate-mccann-explains-smell-of-cadaver.html?m=1

I have found this link online which suggests it was originally reported in Correiro de Manha, but I will keep looking for the original statement in interviews.

JUST FOUND THIS REFUTING IT[url=http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078050/Rebuttal of "Fact" 30]http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078050/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2030 DO YOU THINK THEY ARE GOING TO COME UP WITH THIS IN THE BOOK [/url]
If this information is true then there is no need for them not to put it in the book, it could only do them good but if omitted ?

Markus 2 wrote:
JUST FOUND THIS REFUTING IT[url=http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078050/Rebuttal of "Fact" 30]http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078050/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2030
[/url]

That site rebuts night follows day.

The  Times reported on it in 2007 and it did originally come from Correia de Manha (sorry about the spelling). I think if there is any truth to it, it will be in the interviews published on the mccannfiles website, either in the PJ released files or the actual transcripts. I will keep looking for it but it may take a while! Hopefully a more knowledgable member could point us in the right direction :)

nglfi wrote:The  Times reported on it in 2007 and it did originally come from Correia de Manha (sorry about the spelling). I think if there is any truth to it, it will be in the interviews published on the mccannfiles website, either in the PJ released files or the actual transcripts. I will keep looking for it but it may take a while! Hopefully a more knowledgable member could point us in the right direction :)

Thanks for looking,point me towards any thing and I'll have a gander,I just hope that rebuttal site is wrong.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1563381/Madeleine-McCanns-parents-look-to-US-sniffer-dog-case.html the Telegraph here describes it as coming from 'a source close to the McCanns solicitors' so it could be a classic Clarence Mitchell blooper!

nglfi wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1563381/Madeleine-McCanns-parents-look-to-US-sniffer-dog-case.html the Telegraph here describes it as coming from 'a source close to the McCanns solicitors' so it could be a classic Clarence Mitchell blooper!

So it could be just a case of hearsay,I believe in the Hall DVD's it said the words were attributed to Mrs McCanns mother,I'll have another look.
Just looked again,in the Hall DVD "dogs don't lie",at 71 minutes it says that Susan Healy came up with the work cloths excuse.

Popcorn wrote:

nglfi wrote:Sadly I think this book is going to concentrate quite heavily around the dogs and make every effort to discredit them, in fact I think this is where any 'research' may have been done. The massive thorn in the side of the McCann defence is the dogs. Without their evidence,  most other things are circumstancial and could be argued around. They could argue that the inconsistencies in the t9 accounts came from the fact that they were all drunk (or distressed,  whatever) and people will believe it.
All they have to do is destroy the dogs evidence and most people will be swayed I think.  Having said that, destroying the dog evidence is no small task as it is so compelling,  and I have a feeling they will outright lie to make the cadaver abd blood scent seem coincidental.  I sincerely hope nobody is swayed by this tripe.

I would think that anyone setting out to trash the dogs would need to go about it fairly carefully. The McCanns aren't the only ones who have (or have had at one time) deep pockets. Martin Grime's trained dogs are extremely valuable and get work based on their reputation. According to one report, Keela alone was earning £530 a day plus expenses back in 2005. The FBI and British police use them and have criminals under lock and key as a result of their findings. Trashing such a successful and highly regarded individual would not be a very smart move IMO, unless they have some extremely detailed new technical evidence proving him to be unreliable. Looking at their past writings, I think that seems unlikely, myself.

I'm no law expert, but surely a good legal team could blow a hole in the "unreliable dogs" claim?  After all, Kate admitted that she had been handling corpses prior to her holiday, and wore the very same clothes on holiday, which explained why the dogs detected cadaverine on them. She sometimes took Madeleine's soft toy to work with her, which, as she explained, was why the dogs detected traces of cadaverine on it.  So she has contradicted Gerry's "unreliable dogs" statement, and confirmed their reliability in detecting cadaverine.  Surely?

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078050/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2030 Have they ever personally  been on video or in the media  refuting these facts  . Perhaps they think they dont need to ,or it is all true. Hmm........or in this new book

The more books , apologists ex / current police officers, MP's ,heads of media, spin doctors etc who continue to totally ignore all the clear evidence that points to the couple deeply upsets me ... Then I see the smug face of that Police commissioner in Rotherham who refuses to go .
my point it truly is a network .and more and more ,even though I have Imo I have always been in no doubt ,something very dark is the glue that binds .We live in a truly sick country as GA said it a very British desease. ( need quote ).

Naz_Nomad wrote:
I'm no law expert, but surely a good legal team could blow a hole in the "unreliable dogs" claim?  After all, Kate admitted that she had been handling corpses prior to her holiday, and wore the very same clothes on holiday, which explained why the dogs detected cadaverine on them. She sometimes took Madeleine's soft toy to work with her, which, as she explained, was why the dogs detected traces of cadaverine on it.  So she has contradicted Gerry's "unreliable dogs" statement, and confirmed their reliability in detecting cadaverine.  Surely?

Well maybe yes,but where is the supposed admission about the cadaver being from Kates work,as I pointed out above it was said in the Hall DVD that her mother said it,can't find any info on that either.I know the DVD's aren't definitive but he must have got the info from some where surely?

stillsloppingout wrote:The more books , apologists ex / current police officers, MP's ,heads of media, spin doctors etc who continue to totally ignore all the clear evidence that points to the couple deeply upsets me ... Then I see the smug face of that Police commissioner in Rotherham who refuses to go .
my point it truly is a network .and more and more ,even though I have Imo I have always been in no doubt ,something very dark is the glue that binds .We live in a truly sick country as GA said it a very British desease. ( need quote ).

Know what you mean ,can't win ,will it ever be any different.

Markus 2 wrote:

stillsloppingout wrote:The more books , apologists ex / current police officers, MP's ,heads of media, spin doctors etc who continue to totally ignore all the clear evidence that points to the couple deeply upsets me ... Then I see the smug face of that Police commissioner in Rotherham who refuses to go .
my point it truly is a network .and more and more ,even though I have Imo I have always been in no doubt ,something very dark is the glue that binds .We live in a truly sick country as GA said it a very British desease. ( need quote ).

Know what you mean ,can't win ,will it ever be any different.

Churchill said of the Russians "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma".it very much sums up this mystery.

WMD wrote:

Naz_Nomad wrote:
I'm no law expert, but surely a good legal team could blow a hole in the "unreliable dogs" claim?  After all, Kate admitted that she had been handling corpses prior to her holiday, and wore the very same clothes on holiday, which explained why the dogs detected cadaverine on them. She sometimes took Madeleine's soft toy to work with her, which, as she explained, was why the dogs detected traces of cadaverine on it.  So she has contradicted Gerry's "unreliable dogs" statement, and confirmed their reliability in detecting cadaverine.  Surely?

Well maybe yes,but where is the supposed admission about the cadaver being from Kates work,as I pointed out above it was said in the Hall DVD that her mother said it,can't find any info on that either.I know the DVD's aren't definitive but he must have got the info from some where surely?

There is no primary source for this claim. no video and no direct quote from Kate. The 6 corpse claim comes from a tabloid and it is Granny Healy who supposedly made this claim.

IF, as has been 'suggested' there's something in this book, to completely 'diss' the EVRD Dogs  'alerts' will DCI Mahogany be the first one around to the MET's 'specialist' dog unit demanding ALL the 'useless, unreliable' cadavar and blood dogs be 'put down' immediately and the money used to 'fund' them, be immediately transferred to his investigation team?

I wonder WHY DCI Mahogany even 'bothered' taking TWO 'useless, unreliable', though apparently BETTER than Eddie and Keela, 'search' dogs with the OG team, for days, to PDL in June 2014?

Gerry McCann TRIED to 'diss' the EVRD dogs in court, (the ONE and ONLY thing DCI Mahogany had 'tasked' him with?( to CCP?) and ended up with a flea in his ear, and egg on his face, from the astute judge, who brought his, er, utterances, declarations, about the dogs, to a swift end, by asking him if HE was an 'expert' on EVRD dogs!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In scenes reminiscent of an episode from Perry Mason, Gerry McCann yesterday attempted to persuade a libel trial that he was an expert in blood detection dogs.

The intervention by Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro came following the reading of a personal statement to the court by Gerry McCann wherein he attempted to interject the subject of the dog alerts. Thus began one of the most bizarre episodes of the trial to date and a wonderment to watch.

Gerry McCann claimed that the dogs hadn't found any blood and despite the judge telling him to be quiet he carried on regardless, desperately trying to put across his point of view. As McCann continued, the Judge was having none of it however, and with a wry smile waved a backhand at the witness and told him to be quiet. She thereafter interrupted his every utterance, before asking him if he was a specialist on the dogs and finally reminding him that he was not there to state opinion, rather he was there at her invitation to answer her questions in her court...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ooopppss!

Perhaps Summers and Swan will have better 'luck' at 'dissing' the EVRD dogs or other MET Police 'specialist' dogs! (in their book)

That's if DCI Mahogany hasn't had them all 'put down'!

The same Summers and Swan that would, presumeably, NOT 'react' to a specialist MET Police 'explosives' sniffer dog if it 'alerted' to 'something' on a plane they were aboard, about to take off, dismissing the dogs 'alerts' as unreliable and "there's nothing to worry about folks, with that useless dog's 'alert'".

EVERYONE STAY IN YOUR SEATS!



Just to add :would S&S 'complain' IF a family member of their's went 'missing' and the police turned up, without search dogs, saying "we ain't brought dogs with us, cause we were told they were notoriously unreliable, by a doctor, of all people, who'd have thought, eh?"

Summers:"GET SOME OF THOSE EFFING UNRELIABLE, USELESS, SNIFFER SEARCH DOGS HERE TO FIND XXXX.............................RIGHT NOW, YOU EFFING TO*SER!"

Swan: "COULD YOU PLEASE, PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE, GET THOSE UNRELIABLE, USELESS, SNIFFER SEARCH DOGS TO HELP FIND XXXX, PLEASE?"