This just gone on to Daily Mail.

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.

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?

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

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'.

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?

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?

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'.

SuspiciousMinds wrote: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? No INDEPENDENT witness varified seeing Madeleine after this time that i am aware of. Only The McCanns/tapas 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. They didn't dine until 8.30pm, do not confuse this with 'they must've been in their apartment' 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. Timeframe is too short for the event/s to take place, the event/clear-up/cadaver scent process/ removal of body cannot a;; be done in less than 1hr

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. Consider another option... the perp was watching the family all week and was aware that they left their kids unattended in an unlocked apartment from say 7pm each night, only to return at say 11pm and that no checking was going on. Also, if you can see the tapas bar from the apartment (as claimed by the McCanns), then the perp can watch for anyone coming back. I don;t think anyone was casually and coolly cleaning up, i think the death was unexpected and panic kicked in (IMO of course)

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. Which is why they discredit the cadaver scent so much, they have to maintain it is an abduction that happened in the 3 minute window, otherwise they are up to their neck in it for neglecting their kids for large periods of time. Also why i believe the Smith sighting has been given more credit, to allow a bit more time, fit the tapas checking bits in and (just) account for some cadaver scent...i.e protect the McCanns from neglect charges (again, IMO only)  Maybe they popped round to someone else's apartment for pre-dinner drinks? Funny how no-one else saw them though. There were a lot of people who saw not a lot the whole evening!

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. See above. They (McCanns and Tapas group lied about the timelines to cover their arses as IMO non of the checking was going on at all. It is only  (again IMO) the cadaver scent that has thrown their checking rota/window of opportunity for it all to take place, out of the window. I believe that this is why the reconstruction hasn't taken place, because the police know that the checking was a load of rubbish.

All IMO of course.

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

ScarletLaw wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

I'm with you on the fact that some of the Portugese files haven't been posted and so we haven't access to all the evidence but for me, with the pedo theory in particular, not only is there no evidence of an outsider gaining access through the doors or window IMO door was open, window was opened from the inside, body passed out, then shutter pulled down. but Interpol who examined the pedo/ or gang from the start found no evidence what-so-ever That we know of, i have reason to believe that SY have since found something to challenge that, thus interviewing known paedos on their contacts activities at the time and as I posted yesterday, felt the McCanns story of being photographed three days before was a lie. Agreed, it does sound suss, but how do we know this sighting hasn't been verified??Also the insistence from the McCanns from the start that "somebody has taken her"-again with the mysterious photographer, smells as if from the start they wanted investigators to go with this theory and a straight forward pointing to a deliberate intention of misleading detectives. It can be viewed that way, yes. Another thing that doesn't make sense with the lone intruder was that if he was watching from the start, then he would've taken Madeleine as soon as she was left alone Who is to say he wanted to take her?? I believe the 'taking' part only came about as the act went wrong and she unforyunately passed away, or the perp realised that there was DNA in/On the cadaver so had to remove it. and if he had come along later then chances are, within the time lines given, he would've been seen. Also, quite obviously a pedo wouldn't kill a child, intentionally then throw her from the settee and then pick her up and place her in a wardrobe, You do not need to move the cadaver to move the scent. Lets say for example that the body was placed next to the bed in the parents room whilst the perp looked through the cupboard for a sheet to wrap her up in. I dare say there aren't too many people who are aware of cadaver scent and the timings behind it making sure to contaminate items of various clothing, then leave her for an amount of time for the scent to fix in both cases. Various people coming in to do the childrens sleeping check. or not, this is only on their say Then remove her when she was dead and take her with him? to remove incriminating DNA evidence And while doing this entire moving around left no trace what-so-ever of DNA? If the perp was a known, predetory paedo, he will know to wear gloves etc, especially if he had time in the week to prepare I think personally if the Yard come out with this theory then they will be a laughing stock because it's at entire odds with the dog evidence. not really, it is in line with the dog evidence, but not in line with the tapas child checking rota/statements...and here lies the problem (IMO) Personally, I disagree with your last statement- Scotland Yard do know it was the McCanns but can't prosecute because the Government won't let them because Gerry has worked for them. and i appreciate your side and up until recently would have agreed with you. Nothing i say could convince you or anyone else otherwise until SY clearly state (as they have done) that they are not suspects. I've come across many posts in researching this case where Leicester police and Scotland Yard officers have complained about the amount of help that the McCanns are getting in resources and want a prosecution as much as the public. Agreed, Gerry has a lot of clout with people at the top so everyone helped out as much as possible
  We only have to look at Scotland Yards track record of Lawrence; Saville and in sending spies to impregnate Hunt Sabatoeurs to realise that this is not an organisation that stands for the public welfare?? Couldn't agree more, it's 'help for mates'

 I respect your opinion though, but I do disagree.

I'm with you on the fact that some of the Portugese files haven't been posted and so we haven't access to all the evidence but for me, with the pedo theory in particular, not only is there no evidence of an outsider gaining access through the doors or window but Interpol who examined the pedo/ or gang from the start found no evidence what-so-ever and as I posted yesterday, felt the McCanns story of being photographed three days before was a lie. Also the insistence from the McCanns from the start that "somebody has taken her"-again with the mysterious photographer, smells as if from the start they wanted investigators to go with this theory and a straight forward pointing to a deliberate intention of misleading detectives.  Another thing that doesn't make sense with the lone intruder was that if he was watching from the start, then he would've taken Madeleine as soon as she was left alone and if he had come along later then chances are, within the time lines given, he would've been seen. Also, quite obviously a pedo wouldn't kill a child, then throw her from the settee and then pick her up and place her in a wardrobe, making sure to contaminate items of various clothing, then leave her for an amount of time for the scent to fix in both cases. Various people coming in to do the childrens sleeping check. Then remove her when she was dead and take her with him? And while doing this entire moving around left no trace what-so-ever of DNA? I think personally if the Yard come out with this theory then they will be a laughing stock because it's at entire odds with the dog evidence. Personally, I disagree with your last statement- Scotland Yard do know it was the McCanns but can't prosecute because the Government won't let them because Gerry has worked for them. I've come across many posts in researching this case where Leicester police and Scotland Yard officers have complained about the amount of help that the McCanns are getting in resources and want a prosecution as much as the public.
  We only have to look at Scotland Yards track record of Lawrence; Saville and in sending spies to impregnate Hunt Sabatoeurs to realise that this is not an organisation that stands for the public welfare??

 I respect your opinion though, but I do disagree.

woodforthetrees wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

I'm with you on the fact that some of the Portugese files haven't been posted and so we haven't access to all the evidence but for me, with the pedo theory in particular, not only is there no evidence of an outsider gaining access through the doors or window IMO door was open, window was opened from the inside, body passed out, then shutter pulled down. but Interpol who examined the pedo/ or gang from the start found no evidence what-so-ever That we know of, i have reason to believe that SY have since found something to challenge that, thus interviewing known paedos on their contacts activities at the time and as I posted yesterday, felt the McCanns story of being photographed three days before was a lie. Agreed, it does sound suss, but how do we know this sighting hasn't been verified??Also the insistence from the McCanns from the start that "somebody has taken her"-again with the mysterious photographer, smells as if from the start they wanted investigators to go with this theory and a straight forward pointing to a deliberate intention of misleading detectives. It can be viewed that way, yes. Another thing that doesn't make sense with the lone intruder was that if he was watching from the start, then he would've taken Madeleine as soon as she was left alone Who is to say he wanted to take her?? I believe the 'taking' part only came about as the act went wrong and she unforyunately passed away, or the perp realised that there was DNA in/On the cadaver so had to remove it. and if he had come along later then chances are, within the time lines given, he would've been seen. Also, quite obviously a pedo wouldn't kill a child, intentionally then throw her from the settee and then pick her up and place her in a wardrobe, You do not need to move the cadaver to move the scent. Lets say for example that the body was placed next to the bed in the parents room whilst the perp looked through the cupboard for a sheet to wrap her up in. I dare say there aren't too many people who are aware of cadaver scent and the timings behind it making sure to contaminate items of various clothing, then leave her for an amount of time for the scent to fix in both cases. Various people coming in to do the childrens sleeping check. or not, this is only on their say Then remove her when she was dead and take her with him? to remove incriminating DNA evidence And while doing this entire moving around left no trace what-so-ever of DNA? If the perp was a known, predetory paedo, he will know to wear gloves etc, especially if he had time in the week to prepare I think personally if the Yard come out with this theory then they will be a laughing stock because it's at entire odds with the dog evidence. not really, it is in line with the dog evidence, but not in line with the tapas child checking rota/statements...and here lies the problem (IMO) Personally, I disagree with your last statement- Scotland Yard do know it was the McCanns but can't prosecute because the Government won't let them because Gerry has worked for them. and i appreciate your side and up until recently would have agreed with you. Nothing i say could convince you or anyone else otherwise until SY clearly state (as they have done) that they are not suspects. I've come across many posts in researching this case where Leicester police and Scotland Yard officers have complained about the amount of help that the McCanns are getting in resources and want a prosecution as much as the public. Agreed, Gerry has a lot of clout with people at the top so everyone helped out as much as possible
  We only have to look at Scotland Yards track record of Lawrence; Saville and in sending spies to impregnate Hunt Sabatoeurs to realise that this is not an organisation that stands for the public welfare?? Couldn't agree more, it's 'help for mates'

 I respect your opinion though, but I do disagree.

Likewise, i respect your opinion and don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying, it does look like it could be the couple as well. Comments above in bold

noseyparker wrote:

I'm with you on the fact that some of the Portugese files haven't been posted and so we haven't access to all the evidence but for me, with the pedo theory in particular, not only is there no evidence of an outsider gaining access through the doors or window but Interpol who examined the pedo/ or gang from the start found no evidence what-so-ever and as I posted yesterday, felt the McCanns story of being photographed three days before was a lie. Also the insistence from the McCanns from the start that "somebody has taken her"-again with the mysterious photographer, smells as if from the start they wanted investigators to go with this theory and a straight forward pointing to a deliberate intention of misleading detectives.  Another thing that doesn't make sense with the lone intruder was that if he was watching from the start, then he would've taken Madeleine as soon as she was left alone and if he had come along later then chances are, within the time lines given, he would've been seen. Also, quite obviously a pedo wouldn't kill a child, then throw her from the settee and then pick her up and place her in a wardrobe, making sure to contaminate items of various clothing, then leave her for an amount of time for the scent to fix in both cases. Various people coming in to do the childrens sleeping check. Then remove her when she was dead and take her with him? And while doing this entire moving around left no trace what-so-ever of DNA? I think personally if the Yard come out with this theory then they will be a laughing stock because it's at entire odds with the dog evidence. Personally, I disagree with your last statement- Scotland Yard do know it was the McCanns but can't prosecute because the Government won't let them because Gerry has worked for them. I've come across many posts in researching this case where Leicester police and Scotland Yard officers have complained about the amount of help that the McCanns are getting in resources and want a prosecution as much as the public.
  We only have to look at Scotland Yards track record of Lawrence; Saville and in sending spies to impregnate Hunt Sabatoeurs to realise that this is not an organisation that stands for the public welfare??

 I respect your opinion though, but I do disagree.

  And their complete reversal of the first statements  because it didn,t fit the evidence front door/patio door,jemmied windows.But what i find most astonishing is the photos of them just days after madeleine vanished is  them laughing and grinning and really enjoying there extension to their holiday

ScarletLaw wrote:

You do not need to move the cadaver to move the scent. Lets say for example that the body was placed next to the bed in the parents room whilst the perp looked through the cupboard for a sheet to wrap her up in. I dare say there aren't too many people who are aware of cadaver scent and the timings behind it ...

The body would have had to lay in these places much longer than a few minutes for the scent to have been picked up all those
 weeks later. Also I know the twins sheets are reported to be missing, blanket of the little girls too, is there something else missing from the wardrobe that you've read?

woodforthetrees wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:

You do not need to move the cadaver to move the scent. Lets say for example that the body was placed next to the bed in the parents room whilst the perp looked through the cupboard for a sheet to wrap her up in. I dare say there aren't too many people who are aware of cadaver scent and the timings behind it ...

The body would have had to lay in these places much longer than a few minutes for the scent to have been picked up all those
 weeks later. Also I know the twins sheets are reported to be missing, blanket of the little girls too, is there something else missing from the wardrobe that you've read?

No, i haven't read of anything additional that is missing from the items you listed, but again, we do now know what is contained within the files. Just because someone looks in a cupboard (and maybe moves a blue bag to look for sheets underneath or inside), doesn't mean they took something from that location.

woodforthetrees wrote:

noseyparker wrote:

I'm with you on the fact that some of the Portugese files haven't been posted and so we haven't access to all the evidence but for me, with the pedo theory in particular, not only is there no evidence of an outsider gaining access through the doors or window but Interpol who examined the pedo/ or gang from the start found no evidence what-so-ever and as I posted yesterday, felt the McCanns story of being photographed three days before was a lie. Also the insistence from the McCanns from the start that "somebody has taken her"-again with the mysterious photographer, smells as if from the start they wanted investigators to go with this theory and a straight forward pointing to a deliberate intention of misleading detectives.  Another thing that doesn't make sense with the lone intruder was that if he was watching from the start, then he would've taken Madeleine as soon as she was left alone and if he had come along later then chances are, within the time lines given, he would've been seen. Also, quite obviously a pedo wouldn't kill a child, then throw her from the settee and then pick her up and place her in a wardrobe, making sure to contaminate items of various clothing, then leave her for an amount of time for the scent to fix in both cases. Various people coming in to do the childrens sleeping check. Then remove her when she was dead and take her with him? And while doing this entire moving around left no trace what-so-ever of DNA? I think personally if the Yard come out with this theory then they will be a laughing stock because it's at entire odds with the dog evidence. Personally, I disagree with your last statement- Scotland Yard do know it was the McCanns but can't prosecute because the Government won't let them because Gerry has worked for them. I've come across many posts in researching this case where Leicester police and Scotland Yard officers have complained about the amount of help that the McCanns are getting in resources and want a prosecution as much as the public.
  We only have to look at Scotland Yards track record of Lawrence; Saville and in sending spies to impregnate Hunt Sabatoeurs to realise that this is not an organisation that stands for the public welfare??

 I respect your opinion though, but I do disagree.

  And their complete reversal of the first statements  because it didn,t fit the evidence front door/patio door,jemmied windows.But what i find most astonishing is the photos of them just days after madeleine vanished is  them laughing and grinning and really enjoying there extension to their holiday

There is no doubt they both display a lot of narcissistic behaviors which has done them zero favours over the years. They appear to be extremely self centered and like to be 'in control of everything' including their time together, i.e regardless of what has been happening, nothing will stop them enjoying themselves. The even ignored advice and help from family liaison officers, law enforcement officers and media on how to behave and what to/not to publish to ensure Madeleine was as safe as could be and to help the situation but did things 'their way'.

Most people in that situation would follow every word of the experienced, qualified experts to the dot. Not the

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

Joss wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

Must of been all those dead people K.McC saw at the hospital before she went on vacation to PDL, and then wore those clothes on her holiday and tranferred it onto Cadaver Cat, a child's (Maddie's?) T-shirt, in the bedroom, behind the sofa. and then about 3 weeks later transferred it into the  various places of the scenic hire car. Yeah right!

Joss wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

Must of been all those dead people K.McC saw at the hospital before she went on vacation to PDL, and then wore those clothes on her holiday and tranferred it onto Cadaver Cat, a child's (Maddie's?) T-shirt, in the bedroom, behind the sofa. and then about 3 weeks later transferred it into the  various places of the scenic hire car. Yeah right!

woodforthetrees wrote:

Joss wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

Must of been all those dead people K.McC saw at the hospital before she went on vacation to PDL, and then wore those clothes on her holiday and tranferred it onto Cadaver Cat, a child's (Maddie's?) T-shirt, in the bedroom, behind the sofa. and then about 3 weeks later transferred it into the  various places of the scenic hire car. Yeah right!

Agreed, that was poor story telling by Kate. Possibly a story made up by their lawyer to put an end to the cadaver 'guilty' stories pointed at the couple and the fact that it was Madeleines cadaver scent in the apartment, not someone elses. 

They will keep coming up with ridiculous stories that both exonerate them from any guilt for the murder/removal of the body and also any story that states Madeleine is no longer alive, as it potentially throws a spanner in the works for their child care actions (or lack of) and the fund donations.

Joss wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

Must of been all those dead people K.McC saw at the hospital before she went on vacation to PDL, and then wore those clothes on her holiday and tranferred it onto Cadaver Cat, a child's (Maddie's?) T-shirt, in the bedroom, behind the sofa. and then about 3 weeks later transferred it into the  various places of the scenic hire car. Yeah right!

ScarletLaw wrote:

Joss wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

Must of been all those dead people K.McC saw at the hospital before she went on vacation to PDL, and then wore those clothes on her holiday and tranferred it onto Cadaver Cat, a child's (Maddie's?) T-shirt, in the bedroom, behind the sofa. and then about 3 weeks later transferred it into the  various places of the scenic hire car. Yeah right!

My favourite Joss is that she took her child's favourite toy to work where it came into contact with a dead body. I would have loved to seen a Judges face with that as a response, let alone a jurys'.

Joss wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

Joss wrote:

woodforthetrees wrote:

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.

Must of been all those dead people K.McC saw at the hospital before she went on vacation to PDL, and then wore those clothes on her holiday and tranferred it onto Cadaver Cat, a child's (Maddie's?) T-shirt, in the bedroom, behind the sofa. and then about 3 weeks later transferred it into the  various places of the scenic hire car. Yeah right!

Agreed, that was poor story telling by Kate. Possibly a story made up by their lawyer to put an end to the cadaver 'guilty' stories pointed at the couple and the fact that it was Madeleines cadaver scent in the apartment, not someone elses. 

They will keep coming up with ridiculous stories that both exonerate them from any guilt for the murder/removal of the body and also any story that states Madeleine is no longer alive, as it potentially throws a spanner in the works for their child care actions (or lack of) and the fund donations.

Their lawyer must of been pretty dumb if he thought that story would wash, IMO.

SuspiciousMinds wrote:But, woodforthetrees, if you genuinely thought your child had been abducted, you would (presumably) want them back. Why would you then help out the person who took your child by pretending you only left them alone for one hour rather than three? Either way the parents would be facing accusations of neglect, but by lying about it they would be seriously jeopardising any chance of getting her back - why would they do that to their child?

And Gerry was definitely outside the apartment at around 9.15pm, because Jez Wilkins confirmed it. Either Gerry genuinely did see Madeleine as claimed (in which case she didn't mysteriously disappear before then) or he didn't (in which case, why lie about it so elaborately with the 'proud father' moment? He could easily have said he popped back to use the toilet and all was quiet, so he assumed everything was OK and didn't look in on the children. That would have opened up the possibility of Madeleine disappearing earlier whilst fitting nicely with the checking story, but his statement ruled it out entirely.)

If the McCanns had been out of the apartment from 7pm - 11pm every other night, the perpetrator was damn unlucky that they happened to go back at 9.05pm and 10pm on the very night he/she chose to act! Plus as Gerry was playing tennis until 7pm and didn't turn up to dinner in sweaty tennis clothes, it can probably be safely assumed that the apartment was occupied by adults for quite some time after 7pm.

And, yes, the timeframe of 9.15pm - 10.00pm is too short for the whole process to have taken place, but that's why the McCanns fell under suspicion in the first place. It's not feasible that your panicking perpetrator, desperate to get away, allowed the dead body to remain in the apartment for so long that it started to produce detectable cadaverine. It's not feasible that a devastated father, desperate to get his child back, would lie pointlessly about the last time he saw his daughter and jeopardise the search for her. The dogs have got them every which way.

You seem to be assuming that the police investigations have found some piece of definitive evidence that rules out the McCanns' involvement once and for all. If that was the case, don't you think the McCanns would have been trumpeting it from the rooftops? Particularly given the weakness of their case in court against Dr. Amaral. I will believe it when I see it - because everything I've seen so far seems to point firmly in the direction of the McCanns.

SuspiciousMinds wrote:But, woodforthetrees, if you genuinely thought your child had been abducted, you would (presumably) want them back. Why would you then help out the person who took your child by pretending you only left them alone for one hour rather than three? To stop yourself from being arrested for neglect Either way the parents would be facing accusations of neglect, not if they can argue that they were checking and there was only a very small window (3 ins) where the 'abductor' took her (allegedly alive) but by lying about it they would be seriously jeopardising any chance of getting her back - why would they do that to their child? Or put another way, the child is gone, whether it be 1hr ago or 3hrs ago, therefore spending time discussing the amount of time she was spent alone would detract from any search

And Gerry was definitely outside the apartment at around 9.15pm, because Jez Wilkins confirmed it. Oh, nice, reliable Jez Wilkins. I have no doubt the tapas group colluded to come up with a whole cycle of meets and checks, to keep each other in the clear. This 'meeting, was the very same meeting that was debated by tanner was it not? Either Gerry genuinely did see Madeleine as claimed (in which case she didn't mysteriously disappear before then) or he didn't (in which case, why lie about it so elaborately with the 'proud father' moment? to cover his arse and show that being a 'proud father' he was checking on the kids (when he was drinking in the bar instead) He could easily have said he popped back to use the toilet and all was quiet, so he assumed everything was OK and didn't look in on the children. That would have opened up the possibility of Madeleine disappearing earlier whilst fitting nicely with the checking story, but his statement ruled it out entirely.) Key point you mention here 'his statement', i.e his version of events.

If the McCanns had been out of the apartment from 7pm - 11pm every other night, the perpetrator was damn unlucky that they happened to go back at 9.05pm and 10pm on the very night he/she chose to act! Those timings were an example, they may have been out 7-9.30, or 6.30-10, or 7-11.30 on any of those nights. The point being, if SY believe a perp was watching, then there mustve been a safe window of opportunity... i.e a chunk of time, not..a 3 minute window as suggested by the McCanns.  Plus as Gerry was playing tennis until 7pm and didn't turn up to dinner in sweaty tennis clothes, it can probably be safely assumed that the apartment was occupied by adults for quite some time after 7pm. Unless he got changed in another apartment

And, yes, the timeframe of 9.15pm - 10.00pm is too short for the whole process to have taken place, but that's why the McCanns fell under suspicion in the first place. If you look at the suggested timeline, sightings and 'rota', the available window is 3 minutes, not 45mins It's not feasible that your panicking perpetrator, desperate to get away, allowed the dead body to remain in the apartment for so long that it started to produce detectable cadaverine. Yes it is, lets say 8pm entry, 9.30 exit. Madeleine died within 30 mins, hour for the tidying up and scent to start It's not feasible that a devastated father, desperate to get his child back, would lie pointlessly about the last time he saw his daughter and jeopardise the search for her. The dogs have got them every which way. ...unless he needed to be seen to have been checking the kids

You seem to be assuming that the police investigations have found some piece of definitive evidence that rules out the McCanns' involvement once and for all. I think that is very clear, not just an assumption of mine, they are NOT looking at the McCanns...which means they are looking for someone else. They must have some reason/evidence/justification to be doing that. If that was the case, don't you think the McCanns would have been trumpeting it from the rooftops? They are and they are suing anybody who says otherwise! Particularly given the weakness of their case in court against Dr. Amaral. This is a defamation case and a case about the book hurting them and making them feel bad about being labelled as moving her body by Amaral. Amaral will win because he has the rights to be able to write that book and it is proven that they were already feeling ruined because of the loss of their daughter I will believe it when I see it - because everything I've seen so far seems to point firmly in the direction of the McCanns. I agree, a lot of the information available on line and discussed in both the media and on forums such as these does point to the McCanns, i don't dispute that and i too have agreed with that for a long time (and until the case is closed will continue to consider it), but, the fact remains.... they are not suspects but yet the investigation continues, which means someone other than them is. Who that person is remains a mystery, but the money is on a lone person committing an act and removing the body

ScarletLaw wrote:

SuspiciousMinds wrote:But, woodforthetrees, if you genuinely thought your child had been abducted, you would (presumably) want them back. Why would you then help out the person who took your child by pretending you only left them alone for one hour rather than three? Either way the parents would be facing accusations of neglect, but by lying about it they would be seriously jeopardising any chance of getting her back - why would they do that to their child?

And Gerry was definitely outside the apartment at around 9.15pm, because Jez Wilkins confirmed it. Either Gerry genuinely did see Madeleine as claimed (in which case she didn't mysteriously disappear before then) or he didn't (in which case, why lie about it so elaborately with the 'proud father' moment? He could easily have said he popped back to use the toilet and all was quiet, so he assumed everything was OK and didn't look in on the children. That would have opened up the possibility of Madeleine disappearing earlier whilst fitting nicely with the checking story, but his statement ruled it out entirely.)

If the McCanns had been out of the apartment from 7pm - 11pm every other night, the perpetrator was damn unlucky that they happened to go back at 9.05pm and 10pm on the very night he/she chose to act! Plus as Gerry was playing tennis until 7pm and didn't turn up to dinner in sweaty tennis clothes, it can probably be safely assumed that the apartment was occupied by adults for quite some time after 7pm.

And, yes, the timeframe of 9.15pm - 10.00pm is too short for the whole process to have taken place, but that's why the McCanns fell under suspicion in the first place. It's not feasible that your panicking perpetrator, desperate to get away, allowed the dead body to remain in the apartment for so long that it started to produce detectable cadaverine. It's not feasible that a devastated father, desperate to get his child back, would lie pointlessly about the last time he saw his daughter and jeopardise the search for her. The dogs have got them every which way.

You seem to be assuming that the police investigations have found some piece of definitive evidence that rules out the McCanns' involvement once and for all. If that was the case, don't you think the McCanns would have been trumpeting it from the rooftops? Particularly given the weakness of their case in court against Dr. Amaral. I will believe it when I see it - because everything I've seen so far seems to point firmly in the direction of the McCanns.

 Very well put. I think the dog evidence is why Scotland Yard haven't closed the case yet and I know they're desperate to find a solution that fits with the theory that doesn't implicate the McCanns. Which is an impossible task because- there just isn't one. Trying "desperately" to find a way of fabricating some evidence is more the remit at this time for our boys in black. Hence Redwoods very iffy Crimewatch appeal of manipulating the timeline and the fabrication of Crecheman.