The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Page 7 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by mike7777 on 24.11.15 20:11

posters talk of an initial report from the FSS..does anyone have a link to this

mike7777

Posts : 60
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-11-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by Verdi on 24.11.15 20:12

@HiDeHo wrote:
@Verdi wrote:

ETA:  *I will excuse your error, have to admit I couldn't make out who was saying what, when or why in HiDeHo's post.  Maybe I further confused by my posting style !?!


Thanks for pointing that out Verdi.

It's important to be correct so I managed to find the original version of the interview in French
http://web.archive.org/web/20080805112830/http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html

The translation by Anna Esse is here..
http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2008/08/enfants-kidnapps-50808-parents-are-less.html

The commentary on the interview (anonymous) is here
http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t12417-more-about-dna-from-an-expert

Here is the page with all the added/corrected info.
http://forum4.aimoo.com/madeleinemccanncontroversy/WELCOME-to-HDH-Controversy-Info/Enfants-Kidnappes-Madame-S-Adamis-Expert-on-Judicial-Unit-Expertise-Genetics-at-the-Catholic-Uni-1-2222045.html

I have also adjusted the original post on previous page.
I thankee, that's very helpful.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8955
Reputation : 3952
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by mike7777 on 24.11.15 20:13

@Verdi wrote:
@Nina wrote:
@willowthewisp wrote:Hi Verdi, thanks for your postings along with Hideho.
The points you highlighted in red, in the destruction of the DNA material,"If you fail to contact within 21 days".
So the UK police have destroyed the available DNA legally by following "Official guidelines,Home Office"by failing to inform the defendants that they should have informed the UK Police "Not to Destroy" the DNA profiles from the Renault Scenic, within the time frame, a bit like the "Gasper statements" UK Police did you send them within 21 Days, thought not?
As I have previously stated,The UK Police Officially Destroyed the DNA,held on behalf of FSS in an incomplete missing person case,Why did they do this,on Health Grounds to destruction of DNA, is this a first?
What was such a risk to health from these samples that they had to  be destroyed?
Search me!  Such substances as blood, saliva, vomit, turds, urine etc are routinely deposited in public places every day of every week of every year, I should imagine - where is the health issue there?

Hazardous substances to be destroyed because of potential health risk..

- Blood samples.
- Saliva samples.
- Swabs from body orifices.
- Other swabs bearing potentially hazardous material.
- Vomit, faeces, urine, etc

Wonder what the etc is - my mind boggleth..

Those things deposited in public places are a serious health risk

mike7777

Posts : 60
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-11-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by Verdi on 24.11.15 20:17

@mike7777 wrote:posters talk of an initial report from the FSS..does anyone have a link to this
Please could you be more specific - to put matters in context?

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8955
Reputation : 3952
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by Verdi on 24.11.15 20:19

@mike7777 wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Nina wrote:
@willowthewisp wrote:Hi Verdi, thanks for your postings along with Hideho.
The points you highlighted in red, in the destruction of the DNA material,"If you fail to contact within 21 days".
So the UK police have destroyed the available DNA legally by following "Official guidelines,Home Office"by failing to inform the defendants that they should have informed the UK Police "Not to Destroy" the DNA profiles from the Renault Scenic, within the time frame, a bit like the "Gasper statements" UK Police did you send them within 21 Days, thought not?
As I have previously stated,The UK Police Officially Destroyed the DNA,held on behalf of FSS in an incomplete missing person case,Why did they do this,on Health Grounds to destruction of DNA, is this a first?
What was such a risk to health from these samples that they had to  be destroyed?
Search me!  Such substances as blood, saliva, vomit, turds, urine etc are routinely deposited in public places every day of every week of every year, I should imagine - where is the health issue there?

Hazardous substances to be destroyed because of potential health risk..

- Blood samples.
- Saliva samples.
- Swabs from body orifices.
- Other swabs bearing potentially hazardous material.
- Vomit, faeces, urine, etc

Wonder what the etc is - my mind boggleth..

Those things deposited in public places are a serious health risk
Be that as it may, it's something that's been going on since time immemorial but the human race continues to thrive.  I don't think we need worry unduly.

ETA:  Best not deviate too far from the topic under discussion, that's how important subjects are so easily derailed - isn't it?

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8955
Reputation : 3952
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by mike7777 on 24.11.15 20:24

@Verdi wrote:
@mike7777 wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Nina wrote:
@willowthewisp wrote:Hi Verdi, thanks for your postings along with Hideho.
The points you highlighted in red, in the destruction of the DNA material,"If you fail to contact within 21 days".
So the UK police have destroyed the available DNA legally by following "Official guidelines,Home Office"by failing to inform the defendants that they should have informed the UK Police "Not to Destroy" the DNA profiles from the Renault Scenic, within the time frame, a bit like the "Gasper statements" UK Police did you send them within 21 Days, thought not?
As I have previously stated,The UK Police Officially Destroyed the DNA,held on behalf of FSS in an incomplete missing person case,Why did they do this,on Health Grounds to destruction of DNA, is this a first?
What was such a risk to health from these samples that they had to  be destroyed?
Search me!  Such substances as blood, saliva, vomit, turds, urine etc are routinely deposited in public places every day of every week of every year, I should imagine - where is the health issue there?

Hazardous substances to be destroyed because of potential health risk..

- Blood samples.
- Saliva samples.
- Swabs from body orifices.
- Other swabs bearing potentially hazardous material.
- Vomit, faeces, urine, etc

Wonder what the etc is - my mind boggleth..

Those things deposited in public places are a serious health risk
Be that as it may, it's something that's been going on since time immemorial but the human race continues to thrive.  I don't think we need worry unduly.


the human race thrives due to decent public health standards.......before decent public health disease was rife

mike7777

Posts : 60
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-11-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by HiDeHo on 24.11.15 20:50

This thread was about John Lowe's report indicating that there was a match to Madeleine and it was possible that she could have been in the car.

With that established there are still many questions surrounding the DNA and dog alerts so I would like to throw this into the mix...

ALL of the components behind the sofa matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Maddie


Are we to presume that the blood found behind the sofa WAS CONFIRMED to be Madeleine's?


avatar
HiDeHo
Researcher

Posts : 3184
Reputation : 956
Join date : 2010-05-07

View user profile http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by mike7777 on 24.11.15 21:07

@HiDeHo wrote:This thread was about John Lowe's report indicating that there was a match to Madeleine and it was possible that she could have been in the car.

With that established there are still many questions surrounding the DNA and dog alerts so I would like to throw this into the mix...

ALL of the components behind the sofa matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Maddie


Are we to presume that the blood found behind the sofa WAS CONFIRMED to be Madeleine's?



how many dna components were there

mike7777

Posts : 60
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-11-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by mike7777 on 24.11.15 21:17

@HiDeHo wrote:This thread was about John Lowe's report indicating that there was a match to Madeleine and it was possible that she could have been in the car.

With that established there are still many questions surrounding the DNA and dog alerts so I would like to throw this into the mix...

ALL of the components behind the sofa matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Maddie


Are we to presume that the blood found behind the sofa WAS CONFIRMED to be Madeleine's?



could you tell me where this is from....I cannot find it in the files

mike7777

Posts : 60
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-11-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by mike7777 on 24.11.15 21:20

@mike7777 wrote:
@HiDeHo wrote:This thread was about John Lowe's report indicating that there was a match to Madeleine and it was possible that she could have been in the car.

With that established there are still many questions surrounding the DNA and dog alerts so I would like to throw this into the mix...

ALL of the components behind the sofa matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Maddie


Are we to presume that the blood found behind the sofa WAS CONFIRMED to be Madeleine's?



could you tell me where this is from....I cannot find it in the files


is this what is being referred to....An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.

mike7777

Posts : 60
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-11-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by Verdi on 24.11.15 22:26

@mike7777 wrote:
@mike7777 wrote:
@HiDeHo wrote:This thread was about John Lowe's report indicating that there was a match to Madeleine and it was possible that she could have been in the car.

With that established there are still many questions surrounding the DNA and dog alerts so I would like to throw this into the mix...

ALL of the components behind the sofa matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Maddie


Are we to presume that the blood found behind the sofa WAS CONFIRMED to be Madeleine's?



could you tell me where this is from....I cannot find it in the files


is this what is being referred to....An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.
10-Processo 10 - 2615 to 2616
10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2615
10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2616
Letter dated 11 September regarding FSS report received by PJ
on on 4 September from Leicester Police, citing 15/19 matches of Madeleine DNA
profile

This serves to add
[to the case file] a laboratory examination report prepared
in England, written in English and translated into Portuguese, delivered to this
police force on 4 September 2007 by English police officer Stuart Prior.

This laboratory report tells about the examinations made of two trace evidence
recoveries, one behind the living room sofa in apartment 5A and the other in the
boot area of the vehicle used by the McCann family, hired
[by them] from the end of May this year.

In some of these recoveries (samples) DNA was found whose components are also
found in the profile of Madeleine McCann.

With respect to the trace evidence recovered behind the sofa all the confirmed
DNA components coincide with corresponding components in the DNA profile of
Madeleine McCann.

In the sample collected in the boot area of the vehicle, 15 of the identified
DNA components coincide with the corresponding components in the DNA profile of
Madeleine McCann, this of [having] 19 components.

Portimao, 11 September 2007
Inspector
Joao Carlos






ETA: http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MADELEINES_DNA.htm









[ A number of members have suggested that Mike7777's posts are disrupting the work of the forum.  S/he has therefore been banned. If, however, any members feel that s/he has made a valuable contribution to this debate and should be reinstated, by all means contact a member of the Admin & Moderation Team - Mod ]    

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8955
Reputation : 3952
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by HiDeHo on 25.11.15 3:06

@HiDeHo wrote:


mike7777,

Many members today, including myself, have spent time and patience responding to your comments.

I am not sure of you agenda as I see no apparent effort to acknowledge what this thread was about other than to claim you disagree, even when you have been carefully shown important details to the contrary.

This leads me to wonder whether your reason for being here is to seriously search for the truth, or to play games and have everyone spending their precious time answering you.

I was fully aware of that possibility from the start but chose to respond for many hours for one reason...

We have had nearly 5,000 views on this thread, more than 1100 of those in the last 4 hours and though you may not appreciate the time and effort of members in here, I'm sure there were many viewers that were able to see some information they were not aware of.


.

@HiDeHo wrote:(mike777 claim)
3)No evidence that it was blood in the car (except Gerry's blood on key fob)

What is interesting about this comment, that you were insistent on continually claiming, is that it is one of the most common 'defences' used against the possibility of Maddie being in the car.

We are always hearing claims that any DNA found in the car can be accounted for.  DNA can be found on many bodily fluids that could be transferred from any of Maddie's belongings that were in the car.  THAT has been, as mentioned before, the MAIN insistence for anyone defending the possibility of Maddie being in the car and therefore defending the parents for not being complicit in their daughter's removal of her body.

If it were to be established that Maddie's BLOOD was in the car that was rented weeks after her disappearance then that would be VERY troubling for Kate and Gerry and anyone defending them.   That is why the PJ brought in a BLOOD dog.

It is OBVIOUS why ANY suggestion that Maddie's BLOOD is in the car needs to be curtailed as soon and effectively as possible.

May I ask if that was the MAIN reason you joined this forum today ONLY to discredit the possibility it was blood?

(...)

In summary, it is absolutely your prerogative to have your own opinions, despite the proof that has been carefully shown to you, but it is NOT acceptable to attempt to influence other members and viewers by the age old method of 'suggestion'.  (ie. if you say it often enough then people will believe it)

(...)

If I am wrong in my thoughts then please explain to me why your 'discussion' was based primarily on the points I have highlighted and in 45 posts you INSIST it was not blood more than 15 times, even after you had been corrected several times!

That is not what most would consider a 'discussion'.


The above snippets from previous posts (and the rest of the posts) show that we were fully aware of the probable agenda.

The subject of blood found in the back of the car is, as mentioned, probably the most troubling to the McCanns or anyone defending them as it seriously suggests that Madeleine was was in the car more than 3 weeks after she disappeared.

For that reason, it seems that the classic technique of repeating a lie often enough will have some people believe it by suggestion (ie 'ABDUCTED' - 'No blood in back of car' 'absolutely no evidence' etc etc)

All of us have heard the same mantras over and over again.... There's probably a good reason....






The signs that there was an effort by mike 7777 to promote a lie was most definitely recognisable.  Was this the agenda? Probably but we will never know for sure.

One often finds that some go to extremes to dispute,and produce minutiae to 'correct', mainly for their own grandiosity.  mike77 didn't do that.  He/she was not rude or disrespectful to anyone that I am aware of.


We can't sit back complacently presuming that all discussions about a subject that few, if any, are experts in and take it for granted that the information is correct.  We need to be challenged to ensure that everything we learn is correct and I am more comfortable being challenged and after second guessing myself find I was correct, rather than post information that is incorrect and left to be believed by many as a fact.

As I pointed out, mike777 may not have provided us with valuable information, but his/her presence gave us the opportunity to post lots of information that may not have been seen by many.

Currently there are 10271 views to this thread.  Would those people have viewed the information we were able to post had mike777 not given input?  I doubt it.


Many people have an aversion to 'pros' (for want of a better word). Personally I have always welcomed them.  I love being challenged to ensure that as much information that I give is as factual as possible.  Although I make every effort to give correct information, I have no problem admitting to being mistaken and subsequently correcting the information as that is far more important then being 'right'.

I have always welcomed discussions with anyone that holds a different opinion, and as long as the discussion remains respectful I don't see it as disruptive.  That's just my opinion.

Was it a good decision to ban mike777?  I can't answer that on behalf of others, but I am hoping that whether he/she returns or not, that any discussion can continue (as long as in a respectful manner) as there is so much information, (particularly on the forensics) that needs to be explained as informatively as possible and that sometimes falls on deaf ears if the discussion is not lively enough or if the information isn't challenged.

Maybe my views are different to most, but I attribute a lot of my knowledge from being challenged by those with a different opinion to mine.

We are all here for Madeleine and whatever the TRUTH is, we want to find it....
avatar
HiDeHo
Researcher

Posts : 3184
Reputation : 956
Join date : 2010-05-07

View user profile http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by jean-pierre.t50 on 25.11.15 10:26

This post is, I imagine, not going to be popular on this forum.  I am a of course a forum outsider.  But have been generally welcomed here, and appreciate an opportunity to argue my position on certain aspects of this case.  So I hope the comments below will be taken in the positive spirit in which they are intended. 

__________

The poster Mike7777 made a number of well argued and cogent posts, on the basis that there is no compelling evidence that Madeleine was in the car.

This is consistent with the reports from the FSS. (email 3rd Sept 2007, 15:01)

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id268.html

Snipped from that email:

"The individual components in Madeline's profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline's profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Bimiingham, myself included. lt's important to stress that 50% of Madeline's profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles."

This has been written off as "the sample was contaminated."  No it wasn't.  Read it again.

And it has been determined by members of this forum that it was
definitely Madeleine's blood in the car.] 

Yet the FSS say:

"What questions will we never be able to answer with LCN DNA profiling?

When was the DNA deposited?
How was the DNA deposited?
What body fluid(s) does the DIVA originate from?
Was a crime committed?"

Who to believe?  A qualified forensic scientist, commissioned by a police force to produce a formal report to be entered as evidence in a criminal investigation?

Or.......?



________________

The quite incredible response to any dissent from the "forum position", (which seems to be based on what some members want to believe despite the actual, professional reports), is to ban the poster for "disrupting the work of the forum".  


[ A number of members have suggested that Mike7777's posts are disrupting the work of the forum.  S/he has therefore been banned. If, however, any members feel that s/he has made a valuable contribution to this debate and should be reinstated, by all means contact a member of the Admin & Moderation Team - Mod ]    

If this forum wishes to be taken seriously as a contribution to this mystifying case, then maybe a starting point would be to stop writing off official reports which are inconsistent with the forum position as wrong or biased. 

And perhaps stop reaching for the "ban" button for posters who (politely and intelligently) vary from the forum position.


Finally, I was struck by the following notes on the paradox of freedom of speech.


___________


Free speech does not mean adhering to a set of accepted guidelines laid down by a consensus; to pretend it does is to warp the very definition of it. If you are in favour of free speech, you have to acknowledge free speech encompasses both multiculturalism and racism; it encompasses both pro and anti-gay rights; it encompasses both feminism and misogyny; it encompasses both Islam and the EDL; it encompasses both left and right. You can be in favour of one and utterly opposed to the other, but to attempt to censor or outlaw the one you oppose implies free speech is fine as long as it chimes with your own opinion. And that isn’t free speech. 

(with thanks to PW, Anna Raccoon blog)


[ NOTE: Re-formatted by a Mod for clarity.  Please note that your presence here is not universally welcomed - and for the information of forum members and guests, we know you to be a poster who for 8 years has campaigned strongly against anyone who doubts the McCanns' claim that Madeleine was abducted. You are very fortunate to be allowed to post here, wso e suggest you stick to the facts and the arguments about the forensics - and avoid hostile comments about this forum. Especially on its sixth anniversary of continued success - Mod ]

jean-pierre.t50

Posts : 46
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-07-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by jean-pierre.t50 on 25.11.15 10:31

Some of those didnt come out well on the post above!

Hopefully these will be better.
______________



"What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine and legitimate; because Madeline has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeline merely appears to match the result by chance. The individual components in Madeline's profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline's profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Birmingham, myself included. lt's important to stress that 50% of Madeline's profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles".

This is written off as "the sample was contaminated"

But it does not say that if you read it carefully.

__________________

What questions will we never be able to answer with LCN DNA profiling?

When was the DNA deposited?
How was the DNA deposited?
What body fluid(s) does the DIVA originate from?
Was a crime committed?

Yet this was described as a fact that is was Madeleine's blood.






[ Once again re-formatted (and typos amended) by a Mod ]  

jean-pierre.t50

Posts : 46
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-07-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

mike7777

Post by Jill Havern on 25.11.15 11:05

It's never easy to copy and paste anything from mccannfiles....(sort it out please, Nigel big grin )

I have unbanned mike7777 so that he can continue to debate this topic with HiDeHo and other members should he choose to.

As HiDeHo says: "mike7777 may not have provided us with valuable information, but his/her presence gave us the opportunity to post lots of information that may not have been seen by many."
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 12085
Reputation : 5668
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by pennylane on 25.11.15 11:22

Get'emGonçalo wrote:It's never easy to copy and paste anything from mccannfiles....(sort it out please, Nigel big grin )

I have unbanned mike7777 so that he can continue to debate this topic with HiDeHo and other members should he choose to.

As HiDeHo says: "mike7777 may not have provided us with valuable information, but his/her presence gave us the opportunity to post lots of information that may not have been seen by many."

Amen GeG! thumbup

pennylane

Posts : 2770
Reputation : 1619
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by aquila on 25.11.15 12:11

@jean-pierre.t50 wrote:This post is, I imagine, not going to be popular on this forum.  I am a of course a forum outsider.  But have been generally welcomed here, and appreciate an opportunity to argue my position on certain aspects of this case.  So I hope the comments below will be taken in the positive spirit in which they are intended. 

__________

The poster Mike7777 made a number of well argued and cogent posts, on the basis that there is no compelling evidence that Madeleine was in the car.

This is consistent with the reports from the FSS. (email 3rd Sept 2007, 15:01)

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id268.html

Snipped from that email:

"The individual components in Madeline's profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline's profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Bimiingham, myself included. lt's important to stress that 50% of Madeline's profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles."

This has been written off as "the sample was contaminated."  No it wasn't.  Read it again.

And it has been determined by members of this forum that it was
definitely Madeleine's blood in the car.] 

Yet the FSS say:

"What questions will we never be able to answer with LCN DNA profiling?

When was the DNA deposited?
How was the DNA deposited?
What body fluid(s) does the DIVA originate from?
Was a crime committed?"

Who to believe?  A qualified forensic scientist, commissioned by a police force to produce a formal report to be entered as evidence in a criminal investigation?

Or.......?



________________

The quite incredible response to any dissent from the "forum position", (which seems to be based on what some members want to believe despite the actual, professional reports), is to ban the poster for "disrupting the work of the forum".  


[ A number of members have suggested that Mike7777's posts are disrupting the work of the forum.  S/he has therefore been banned. If, however, any members feel that s/he has made a valuable contribution to this debate and should be reinstated, by all means contact a member of the Admin & Moderation Team - Mod ]    

If this forum wishes to be taken seriously as a contribution to this mystifying case, then maybe a starting point would be to stop writing off official reports which are inconsistent with the forum position as wrong or biased. 

And perhaps stop reaching for the "ban" button for posters who (politely and intelligently) vary from the forum position.


Finally, I was struck by the following notes on the paradox of freedom of speech.


___________


Free speech does not mean adhering to a set of accepted guidelines laid down by a consensus; to pretend it does is to warp the very definition of it. If you are in favour of free speech, you have to acknowledge free speech encompasses both multiculturalism and racism; it encompasses both pro and anti-gay rights; it encompasses both feminism and misogyny; it encompasses both Islam and the EDL; it encompasses both left and right. You can be in favour of one and utterly opposed to the other, but to attempt to censor or outlaw the one you oppose implies free speech is fine as long as it chimes with your own opinion. And that isn’t free speech. 

(with thanks to PW, Anna Raccoon blog)


[ NOTE: Re-formatted by a Mod for clarity.  Please note that your presence here is not universally welcomed - and for the information of forum members and guests, we know you to be a poster who for 8 years has campaigned strongly against anyone who doubts the McCanns' claim that Madeleine was abducted. You are very fortunate to be allowed to post here, wso e suggest you stick to the facts and the arguments about the forensics - and avoid hostile comments about this forum. Especially on its sixth anniversary of continued success - Mod ]
jp, you are here on CMoMM and your opinions (because that is all they are) are being published. Please don't resort to calling people 'my dear' or 'diva'.

Say what it is you have come here to say and quit with the 'I'm an outsider' and other patronising/disruptive nonsense.

You never know jp, you might have something of value to bring to a discussion or perhaps not.

Each time a person with a totally opposing view is extended the courtesy of being allowed to have their say it doesn't take long for them to abuse the welcome. Just stop it. You are here on CMoMM, no-one has banned you (yet) and I note you are a member of JATYK2 which is a closed shop.

I'm interested in your opinions (and that's all they are) because nothing about Madeleine is discussed on JATYK2 and you have very little to say there. This is an observation.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8888
Reputation : 1799
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by Verdi on 25.11.15 12:36

@jean-pierre.t50 wrote:Some of those didnt come out well on the post above!

Hopefully these will be better.
______________



"What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine and legitimate; because Madeline has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeline merely appears to match the result by chance. The individual components in Madeline's profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline's profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Birmingham, myself included. lt's important to stress that 50% of Madeline's profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles".

This is written off as "the sample was contaminated"

But it does not say that if you read it carefully.

__________________

What questions will we never be able to answer with LCN DNA profiling?

When was the DNA deposited?
How was the DNA deposited?
What body fluid(s) does the DIVA originate from?
Was a crime committed?

Yet this was described as a fact that is was Madeleine's blood.






[ Once again re-formatted (and typos amended) by a Mod ]  
You wrote up-thread "The poster Mike7777 made a number of well argued and cogent posts, on the basis that there is no compelling evidence that Madeleine was in the car".  I disagree - mike7777's contribution to the discussion has so far been restricted to a reiteration of the same text taken from the PJ files, seemingly in an attempt to dispel any alternative interpretation that might lead to a more comprehensive explanation of the forensic results.  I believe most readers of this forum will now be au-fait with that particular paragraph about forensic procedures but mike7777 and it would appear you also, fail to distinguish the difference between John Lowe's forensic report and the evidence provided by the specialist dogs - Eddie and Keela.  I don't think anyone here is suggesting that, contrary to Lowe's report, it was definitely MBM's blood located in the Renault Scenic.  If you combine the detail contained in the forensic report WITH (and not ignoring) the dog alerts - that makes for some pretty explosive reading.  The bloodhound alerted to an area in the luggage compartment - the dog is trained to alert to the scent of human blood and human blood only.

Remember the title of the thread - John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car.  He asks if it was because she was in the car or a chance match.  Perhaps with our joint efforts we could help answer his question?

He/she has been given the opportunity to expand on why the FSS forensic report should be taken at face value, questions have also been asked of the poster to aid a better understanding but here, he/she has failed to respond.  That to my way of thinking is not presenting  well argued cogent posts.  I could of course have missed something so if you could point me in the right direction so much the better.

Whilst I agree with HiDeHo's point about keeping certain topics up front, no matter how contrary to reason varying opinions might be but there is a limit!  I generally prefer to discuss issues with others, little point in talking to yourself, although it can be a lark for a while the novelty soon wears off.

ETA:  Maybe now mike7777 has been un-banned, so to speak, he/she will answer a few of the unanswered quesitons and explain why John Lowes report is considered sacrosanct - hopefully before running to a safe place with tales of woe yes !

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8955
Reputation : 3952
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by pennylane on 25.11.15 14:00

The CSI dog alerts to all things McCann, will forever cast major doubts over their dubious version of events; and the Eugene Zapata case they used in a vain attempt to discredit the dogs, in the end only served to further confirm how amazingly accurate these CSI dogs truly are!

pennylane

Posts : 2770
Reputation : 1619
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by HiDeHo on 25.11.15 14:13

I would like to add one thing here regarding my post above...

I wrote it in the capacity of the thread originator and not im my capacity of 'mod'.  I was involved in the thread and able to monitor as it was unfolding.

As a mod for the whole forum I may not have been able to control it and it could easily have got out of hand and therefore there may have been very good reason for the banning.

You have no idea of the huge effort that Jill, Tony and other mods VOLUNTARILY give to this forum EVERY DAY!

I am known for being 'strict' in what I allow on FB.  We welcome various opinions but there is  NO rudeness or disruption allowed.  We stick to files threads only and to avoid speculation, we ask everyone to provide the original links to their claims.

This is not just to allow members and visitors to view a page that focuses on information, it's also to enable the admin to have clear guidelines and to not have to enter into personal attacks and rudeness.  This is vital on a page that has a format that only allows a few visible threads on the top.  

Admin give their time freely, they are appreciated and it makes life easier for them.

Here at CMOMM it is a very different story.

All the threads are easily accessible with a HUGE volume of subjects and research that is second to none.  You are given a 'freedom of speech' that is often curtailed elsewhere.  An opportunity that is ONLY available to you here because of the passion and dedication of Jill, Tony and the other mods.

If someone is banned they have a very good reason, and if anyone wishes to dispute they take the time to reassess your side of the story.

There is a BIG difference between some of the disruptors.  

Some of them have a 'goal' (as I believe mike7777 may have done) and as long as the repetition of using SUGGESTION to influence viewers/members is curtailed and a reasonable effort is made to have a discussion, then that may be deemed acceptable

WUMS that are here only for their own agenda to disrupt and create adversity between members are of very little value to the forum.

In every sector of life there are those that play 'devils advocate' for no particular reason...just for their own satisfaction and will challenge others in their effort to 'win'.  They are not here for Maddie they are here for their own grandiosity.

Those that passionately believe in the parent's innocence can often be frustrating to converse with as their blind belief has no basis of 'fact'.  Often they cannot be 'blamed'.  We cannot presume that everyone has the time to research the details in the files and for those in the UK that have only been privy to the spin and media reports, its understandable.  It can be difficult to spend more than 8 years believing and defending their innocence to suddenly realise that you could have been wrong.  It's hard to admit being wrong and therefore many will continue to defend their original belief.

Then there are the infiltrators.  They give the illusion of being here to discuss and learn.  They can be friendly and informative, and gain confidence from other members but they are here to curtail the IMPORTANT threads... They APPEAR to be 'anti' (for want of a better word) but they are recognisable when discussions about the 'dogs' appear and they question the findings.

The dog's finding are the most powerful piece of 'evidence' and though no proof has been established, what the dogs have shown is that the VOLUME of alerts (17) to ONLY areas associated with the McCanns.  That in itself is an ENORMOUS indication of them being complicit, and needs to be addressed as often as possible instead of only being led astray by disruptors that will take you down the road of the 'double speak' found in the Lowes report.

Don't get taken in by being led astray from the big picture.

Notice how this thread had originally a CLEAR FACT.  John Lowe said it was a MATCH to Maddie and it could have been from her being in the car or by a 'chance' match.

It's not PROOF that Maddie was in the car but MADELEINE CANNOT BE EXCLUDED from being in the car...

BLOOD was found behind the sofa and,  ALL the components matched Madeleine's DNA profile. A COINCIDENCE?

A CADAVER dog alerts in the apartment (with no previous deaths known).  A COINCIDENCE?

WHAT ARE THE CHANCES of components in your daughter's DNA profile being found... 

- in a BLOOD spot in the apartment, 
- a BLOOD spot in a car rented AFTER she disappeared,

A CADAVER dog that 'alerts' at the door of the apartment
- inside the parents bedroom, 
- the same spot behind the sofa as Keela the blood dog, (Eddie also alerts to blood)  
- on the verandah outside the bedroom, (in the files but not in video), in the garden
- TWO items of clothing belonging to Kate McCann
- A small red TShirt
- Cuddlecat - the cupboard was ignored when empty but once it was put in cupboard without Eddie's knowledge he alerted to the odour.
- The driver's side of the car
and more...

When disruptors focus on the minutiae, and detract from the BIG PICTURE members need to be aware of their agenda.

Don't be taken in with their efforts.  The IMPORTANT fact of 15 of Maddie's 19 markers being found in the car can be disputed, and hours upon hours have been spent searching for proof.

The BIG picture tells us there are SO MANY COINCIDENCES that there has to be a point that the volume of coincidences has VALUE.

Without the time and effort put in by Jill, Tony and the other mods you would not have the opportunity to discuss these details and the HUGE amount of research contained on this forum.

There will always be disruptors and often, for the purpose of time available, members have to be removed for the benefit of other members and VIEWERS.


Hopefully everyone appreciates the hard work that has gone into this forum and, regardless of your opinion, treat the threads and other members with respect.


For the benefit of thread titles its always a good idea to STAY ON TOPIC, which, as you can see I have strayed from...

It's my topic and my prerogative...  winkwink

Hopefully I don't get banned for not following the rules  laughat
avatar
HiDeHo
Researcher

Posts : 3184
Reputation : 956
Join date : 2010-05-07

View user profile http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann

Back to top Go down

The 'clump' of Madeleine's hair

Post by Tony Bennett on 25.11.15 14:19

It's time surely to revisit the 'clump of hair' on this thread?

This report was carried by the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday 11 September 2007. The following day, so it says in Dr Kate McCann's book, 'madeleine', Senior Freemason Edward Smethurst, in-house lawyer for Cheshire-based businessman Brian Kennedy, 'phoned out of the blue to offer his boss's help. Two days later, a top lawyer from London drove up to The Crescent, Rothley, and took the McCanns down to a top-level meeting with five lawyers, Brian Kennedy and other very useful contacts. And the rest, as they say, is history:

 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1562823/Madeleine-Hair-in-car-came-from-her-body.html

By Caroline Gammell in Praia da Luz
4:34PM BST 11 Sep 2007

The police case against Kate and Gerry McCann was submitted to the public prosecutor today, amid conflicting reports about the nature of the DNA case against them.



According to police briefings given to Portuguese journalists, the samples found in the back of the McCanns' car were not blood but other "bodily fluids". These have provided an 88 per cent DNA match to Madeleine.

So much of Madeleine's hair was also found in the vehicle's boot that it must have come directly from her body, and not just been transferred from clothing or a toy, according to the briefing.

This conflicts with claims from British sources that the police's case is based on blood found in the silver Renault Scenic car hired 25 days after Madeleine disappeared.

It was claimed yesterday that the blood was a 100 per cent match, although this was played down this morning.

Ten volumes of evidence were today handed over in stages to Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses, the district attorney based in Portimao.

They outline the Portuguese police's version of events surrounding Madeleine's disappearance from Praia da Luz on May 3.

Detectives in the Algarve believe Mrs McCann might have killed her daughter by accident while her husband helped cover up the crime.

Mr Meneses will sift through a large amount of evidence, including the results from the Forensic Science Services in Birmingham.

Mr Meneses will also look at the toxicology reports and the interviews carried out with the couple last week.

A Portuguese police source said Mrs McCann's inability to sufficiently explain why traces of Madeleine's blood were found in the back of the hire car only added to the case against them.

The part-time GP was also asked why the "smell of death" was picked up on her clothes by specialist sniffer dogs.

Once he has studied the report, Mr Meneses has several options open to him.

He can order renewed police activity, such as searches of specific properties or sites.

He can upgrade the cautionary measures - or restrictions - on the couple, summoning them back to the Algarve and even placing them in custody if he felt it necessary.

If Mr Meneses decides there is enough evidence to call the McCanns before a criminal judge, he will notify the lawyers involved.

Police in Portugal are convinced that the couple are connected to their daughter's death.

A source said: "The investigation is far from finished. "Investigators are trying to demonstrate that her death in the apartment was an accident, negligence or provoked."
 

RELATED LINKS:

Q&A: The DNA evidence
Madeleine McCann DNA 100 per cent match
Questions remain over 'blood traces'

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14977
Reputation : 3028
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by HiDeHo on 25.11.15 15:06

IT IS POSSIBLE THAT HAIRS (WITHOUT ROOTS) FROM THE RENTAL CAR MAY NOW BE ANALYSED!


This program was broadcast on the 8th of June 2014 by Portuguese CMTV.


(GA) ....(...)..And in this latter respect I must point out that we do have the hairs found in that car (the McCanns rented after their daughter’s dematerialization)
.
(P) The car where they found the cadaver odour?


(GA) Yes, where they found the cadaver odour. These are hairs without roots, which the British laboratory (the defunct FSS) said – by analysing its colour – belonged to Madeleine McCann.


Most importantly, they pointed out that nothing – short of being accidentally transported there – would justify their presence in the luggage compartment of the car where the dog detected cadaver odour.


Therefore, I suggest the Policia Judiciária who, as far as I know, still has those hairs; send them to a laboratory competent enough to determine its DNA profile without the need for the hair roots.


(P) Is it so?


(PPS) It is!


(GA) Yes, there are those who say it is possible so let them, at long last, have those hairs analysed!


Probably they will loose less time and save money, who knows? They might even be able to advance a little bit more with the investigation.
This (farce?) has been going for too long!


Let them send it to Holland or Germany – where I am told there are laboratories perfectly capable to handle this type of analysis. It would be much easier (…)


https://zizipresscuts.wordpress.com/…/dr-goncalo-am…/page/2/





avatar
HiDeHo
Researcher

Posts : 3184
Reputation : 956
Join date : 2010-05-07

View user profile http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by Verdi on 25.11.15 15:12

@pennylane wrote:The CSI dog alerts to all things McCann, will forever cast major doubts over their dubious version of events; and the Eugene Zapata case they used in a vain attempt to discredit the dogs, in the end only served to further confirm how amazingly accurate these CSI dogs truly are!
Those few words pennylane, say more to me than anything John Lowe or his team of scientists could ever have said.  thumbsup

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8955
Reputation : 3952
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by jean-pierre.t50 on 25.11.15 15:30

Interesting.


Where is there any official report relating to a "clump of hair"? 



And to take a small, specific example -



(HiDiHo wrote)



(GA) ....(...)..And in this latter respect I must point out that we do have the hairs found in that car (the McCanns rented after their daughter’s dematerialization)
.
(P) The car where they found the cadaver odour?


(GA) Yes, where they found the cadaver odour. These are hairs without roots, which the British laboratory (the defunct FSS) said – by analysing its colour – belonged to Madeleine McCann.


Most importantly, they pointed out that nothing – short of being accidentally transported there – would justify their presence in the luggage compartment of the car where the dog detected cadaver odour.


Therefore, I suggest the Policia Judiciária who, as far as I know, still has those hairs; send them to a laboratory competent enough to determine its DNA profile without the need for the hair roots.


_______________

Are these true?  Is there an FSS or other official report to this effect to support the existence of clumps of Madeleines hair in the car, and hairs that have been identified by the FSS as being hers.  

It would be very interesting to see a credible cite because if true it would change my entire perception of the case.

jean-pierre.t50

Posts : 46
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2015-07-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: John Lowe tells us there was a MATCH to Maddie in the car & more about DNA & FORENSICS

Post by pennylane on 25.11.15 15:33

@Verdi wrote:
@pennylane wrote:The CSI dog alerts to all things McCann, will forever cast major doubts over their dubious version of events; and the Eugene Zapata case they used in a vain attempt to discredit the dogs, in the end only served to further confirm how amazingly accurate these CSI dogs truly are!
Those few words pennylane, say more to me than anything John Lowe or his team of scientists could ever have said.  thumbsup
Thank you, Verdi x hello

pennylane

Posts : 2770
Reputation : 1619
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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