Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car

by Guest 19.03.17 21:17

Yes you are mistaken.

Unless you think the PJ bungled it.

by Phoebe 19.03.17 21:40

I think Winslow Boy that we should accept that the P.J. covered all these angles as a matter of course. Once the dogs alerted to the hire car they would immediately have checked previous users and whether the McCanns specifically requested that particular car.

by winslow boy 19.03.17 22:54

BlueBag wrote:Yes you are mistaken.

Unless you think the PJ bungled it.

#53

=25c8ad2065c525746d358cd16e2f4876&cvf[1]=eb8f8822d6f46cc62aa6d110e8ba8c30&eval=plus&p_vote=321834]0

Re: The Renault Scenic

Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car - Page 2 Empty

by kaz on 15.09.15 13:46
I did do some research on this a couple of years ago but came up against a brick wall. The hire car was not used between
13/04/2007 and 7/05/2007 according to the records.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P11/rentedcars.jpg

Gerry had friends who lived in the area notably John Gerahty, a golfer with connections to Leicestershire. It was he who stored the car for Gerry during August. An Englishman , Adrian Lowes, who I believe worked for GlaxoSmithKline was the last to use the car previous to the 'abduction.'

Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car - Page 2 59da2711

Hi again found this elsewhere on this site. This is the Scenic record. It doesn't appear to have been used from the 12th of April till the 8th of May. RL certainly clocked up some miles in 10 days. As you can see the mileage for the 25th March is obviously from another vehicle but in the wrong vehicle log. Indicating IMO that the records are open to possible manipulation. Creche Records ?

by Guest 19.03.17 23:16

Phoebe wrote:I think Winslow Boy that we should accept that the P.J. covered all these angles as a matter of course. Once the dogs alerted to the hire car they would immediately have checked previous users and whether the McCanns specifically requested that particular car.

Exactly - basic policing.

Car hire companies, more so reputable international companies, always have a fleet of cars available for rental. Not every car is under hire every day of every week of every month of every year.

This is an uneccesary distraction without foundation.

by Guest 19.03.17 23:34

:

winslow boy wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Yes you are mistaken.

Unless you think the PJ bungled it.

#53

=25c8ad2065c525746d358cd16e2f4876&cvf[1]=eb8f8822d6f46cc62aa6d110e8ba8c30&eval=plus&p_vote=321834]0

Re: The Renault Scenic

by kaz on 15.09.15 13:46
I did do some research on this a couple of years ago but came up against a brick wall. The hire car was not used between
13/04/2007 and 7/05/2007 according to the records.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P11/rentedcars.jpg

Gerry had friends who lived in the area notably John Gerahty, a golfer with connections to Leicestershire. It was he who stored the car for Gerry during August. An Englishman , Adrian Lowes, who I believe worked for GlaxoSmithKline was the last to use the car previous to the 'abduction.'

Hi again found this elsewhere on this site. This is the Scenic record. It doesn't appear to have been used from the 12th of April till the 8th of May. RL certainly clocked up some miles in 10 days. As you can see the mileage for the 25th March is obviously from another vehicle but in the wrong vehicle log. Indicating IMO that the records are open to possible manipulation. Creche Records ?

So what are you suggesting? Robert 'alias Adrian' Lowes, hired the Renault Scenic prior to Gerry McCann because he was said by a forum member to have worked for pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline and Gerry McCann is claimed to be a friend of John Gerhaty and "as 'you' can see, the mileage for the 25th March is obviously from another vehicle but in the wrong vehicle log" - are you having a laugh?

Please get a grip, realise you're creating a theory based on nothing credible - unless you genuinely believe what the UK press said of the PJ.

Move on..

by **Nina** 19.03.17 23:56

Verdi wrote::
winslow boy wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Yes you are mistaken.

Unless you think the PJ bungled it.

#53

=25c8ad2065c525746d358cd16e2f4876&cvf[1]=eb8f8822d6f46cc62aa6d110e8ba8c30&eval=plus&p_vote=321834]0

Re: The Renault Scenic

by kaz on 15.09.15 13:46
I did do some research on this a couple of years ago but came up against a brick wall. The hire car was not used between
13/04/2007 and 7/05/2007 according to the records.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P11/rentedcars.jpg

Gerry had friends who lived in the area notably John Gerahty, a golfer with connections to Leicestershire. It was he who stored the car for Gerry during August. An Englishman , Adrian Lowes, who I believe worked for GlaxoSmithKline was the last to use the car previous to the 'abduction.'

Hi again found this elsewhere on this site. This is the Scenic record. It doesn't appear to have been used from the 12th of April till the 8th of May. RL certainly clocked up some miles in 10 days. As you can see the mileage for the 25th March is obviously from another vehicle but in the wrong vehicle log. Indicating IMO that the records are open to possible manipulation. Creche Records ?
So what are you suggesting? Robert 'alias Adrian' Lowes, hired the Renault Scenic prior to Gerry McCann because he was said by a forum member to have worked for pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline and Gerry McCann is claimed to be a friend of John Gerhaty and "as 'you' can see, the mileage for the 25th March is obviously from another vehicle but in the wrong vehicle log" - are you having a laugh?

Please get a grip, realise you're creating a theory based on nothing credible - unless you genuinely believe what the UK press said of the PJ.

Move on..

Also bear in mind this log is in kms and not miles so not a huge amount apart from the McCanns.

by Guest 20.03.17 0:05

Good point Nina - it makes a great difference. Besides, what is being suggested here - Robert 'alias Adrian' Lowes was aimlessly driving around for hours wondering what to do with a corpse that was hidden in the boot sometime between the 2nd and 12th April 2007?

Wasn't Madeleine McCann in Rothley or Ireland at that time or is some other fantastical theory being whipped-up here?

by **Nina** 20.03.17 0:20

Verdi wrote:Good point Nina - it makes a great difference. Besides, what is being suggested here - Robert 'alias Adrian' Lowes was aimlessly driving around for hours wondering what to do with a corpse that was hidden in the boot sometime between the 2nd and 12th April 2007?

Wasn't Madeleine McCann in Rothley or Ireland at that time or is some other fantastical theory being whipped-up here?

by winslow boy 20.03.17 0:27

Verdi wrote:Good point Nina - it makes a great difference. Besides, what is being suggested here - Robert 'alias Adrian' Lowes was aimlessly driving around for hours wondering what to do with a corpse that was hidden in the boot sometime between the 2nd and 12th April 2007?

Wasn't Madeleine McCann in Rothley or Ireland at that time or is some other fantastical theory being whipped-up here?

Think you should read it again.

by winslow boy 20.03.17 0:36

Nina wrote:
Verdi wrote::
winslow boy wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Yes you are mistaken.

Unless you think the PJ bungled it.

#53

=25c8ad2065c525746d358cd16e2f4876&cvf[1]=eb8f8822d6f46cc62aa6d110e8ba8c30&eval=plus&p_vote=321834]0

Re: The Renault Scenic

by kaz on 15.09.15 13:46
I did do some research on this a couple of years ago but came up against a brick wall. The hire car was not used between
13/04/2007 and 7/05/2007 according to the records.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P11/rentedcars.jpg

Gerry had friends who lived in the area notably John Gerahty, a golfer with connections to Leicestershire. It was he who stored the car for Gerry during August. An Englishman , Adrian Lowes, who I believe worked for GlaxoSmithKline was the last to use the car previous to the 'abduction.'

Hi again found this elsewhere on this site. This is the Scenic record. It doesn't appear to have been used from the 12th of April till the 8th of May. RL certainly clocked up some miles in 10 days. As you can see the mileage for the 25th March is obviously from another vehicle but in the wrong vehicle log. Indicating IMO that the records are open to possible manipulation. Creche Records ?
So what are you suggesting? Robert 'alias Adrian' Lowes, hired the Renault Scenic prior to Gerry McCann because he was said by a forum member to have worked for pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline and Gerry McCann is claimed to be a friend of John Gerhaty and "as 'you' can see, the mileage for the 25th March is obviously from another vehicle but in the wrong vehicle log" - are you having a laugh?

Please get a grip, realise you're creating a theory based on nothing credible - unless you genuinely believe what the UK press said of the PJ.

Move on..
Also bear in mind this log is in kms and not miles so not a huge amount apart from the McCanns.

"Move on" heard that before somewhere.

by Guest 20.03.17 0:53

winslow boy wrote:
Verdi wrote:Good point Nina - it makes a great difference. Besides, what is being suggested here - Robert 'alias Adrian' Lowes was aimlessly driving around for hours wondering what to do with a corpse that was hidden in the boot sometime between the 2nd and 12th April 2007?

Wasn't Madeleine McCann in Rothley or Ireland at that time or is some other fantastical theory being whipped-up here?
Think you should read it again.

I think I've wasted enough time on this road to nowhere.

I bid you farewell howdy

.

by Constablekid 20.03.17 2:07

Thanks Mirage & Verdi for providing that info about where that comment was said about the DNA being enough to arrest in the U.K. To me this has always been a huge deal, I wish the general public knew this one tiny fact which is so powerful. We hear a lot of "there's not a shred of evidence" but that comment suggests there IS enough evidence..... for the UK! So what are OG doing?

Where can I read about UK law when it comes to how many markers in DNA a U.K. Court requires to be a match? I know it's 10 but is there a website which states that? I googled it but couldn't find quite what I was looking for. I know there's some clever legal brains on here who may already have a link?

by winslow boy 20.03.17 3:13

Verdi wrote:
Phoebe wrote:I think Winslow Boy that we should accept that the P.J. covered all these angles as a matter of course. Once the dogs alerted to the hire car they would immediately have checked previous users and whether the McCanns specifically requested that particular car.
Exactly - basic policing.

Care hire companies, more so big international companies, always have a fleet of cars available for rental. Not every car is under hire every day of every week of every month of every year.

This is an uneccesary distraction without foundation.

"This is an uneccesary distraction without foundation."

Do you think that the PJ asked people about the car and were told the truth by the BIG Circle of Trust? How can it be a distraction if it concerns the possible moving of a body.Didn't they also get statements from the Tapas (How Many ?) I suppose they didn't lie to the P.J. And the creche records weren't altered either I suppose. How easy is it to allegedly change documents/mileage to parties who have the power to Control and distract to maintain a campaign for 10 years IMO.

"Please get a grip, realise you're creating a theory based on nothing credible - unless you genuinely believe what the UK press said of the PJ."

Do you believe then that Ge&$^ ran down the road hid the body then returned to the appartment with his smelly clothes then had a drink with his buddies,and then phoned the Police. And then a few weeks later the Mc&$^$ hired a vehicle in front of everybody (aware that they would be followed or even bugged) picked up a body, drove round the country and buried/disposed of it. And then returned, leaving the boot open to get rid of the smell. Come on.
The PJ did a good job but were obstructed by most people they questioned.

In another post I wrote "about the powers that be" need to control, this includes the For and Against McCann forums. So some people on these sites steer people in the direction that they want you to go. As soon as somebody mentions a theory that doesn't coincide with their version of events, or the direction they want to lead you they try to shut you down. When they do this you know you've touched a nerve. The idea of the Scenic being in the vicinty at the time of the McC&*%£ holiday seems to me to be more credible than the McC&$%£ picking up a body driving round the country being watched by every man and his dog, with a cadaver in the boot- Credible? The Scenic record book mileages and renters being possibly manipulated. " Not Credible". But Creche records being manipulated-Credible ? I am an open minded person who is willing to read everybodies point of view, so why are some people trying to "distract" me from my point of view and try to Direct away from it. Peoples different views on here try to piece together what may have happened. The facts are there but they don't give a solution, I thought this site tried to put pieces together. If any body on here feels that they have been "steered away" please drop me a line as there could be truth in what you said. This forum is doing a fantastic job because it's the people's chance to voice their opinions based on what could have occured tied in with possibilities, as there aren't enough FACTS that lead to truth, or is that not the case.The reason this forum exists is because the facts haven't solved it.

"Please get a grip, realise you're creating a theory based on nothing credible."

But the other option of picking up a dead body and putting it in the boot whilst all the worlds media are watching is ?

Let Right Be Done.

by Guest 20.03.17 6:22

Meanwhile Fernando and Enawgaw didn't notice any smells.

So you are saying the PJ bungled it and the car hire company were in on it.

by Phoebe 20.03.17 10:01

The McCanns were not under constant surveillance by either police or media. They arranged with the media when they would be available for filming/ interviews and requested privacy outside of these times, which they were afforded. There were also other family members who had access to the car while they were away on trips abroad etc. Suspicion only really fell on them after the dogs findings by which time any removal in the car had already occurred. I deem it much more likely that they, or a trusted person close to them may have been responsible for moving the body. Let's not have half of the Algarve "in on it" please.

by ChippyM 20.03.17 10:57

Constablekid wrote:Thanks Mirage & Verdi for providing that info about where that comment was said about the DNA being enough to arrest in the U.K. To me this has always been a huge deal, I wish the general public knew this one tiny fact which is so powerful. We hear a lot of "there's not a shred of evidence" but that comment suggests there IS enough evidence..... for the UK! So what are OG doing?

Where can I read about UK law when it comes to how many markers in DNA a U.K. Court requires to be a match? I know it's 10 but is there a website which states that? I googled it but couldn't find quite what I was looking for. I know there's some clever legal brains on here who may already have a link?

This is a Crown Prosecution Service guide. it's more about the value of the evidence for trial rather than about arrest.

[url=https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/assets/uploads/files/lawyers' DNA guide KSWilliams 190208 (i).pdf]https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/assets/uploads/files/lawyers'%20DNA%20guide%20KSWilliams%20190208%20(i).pdf [/url]

by Guest 20.03.17 11:49

ChippyM wrote:
Constablekid wrote:Thanks Mirage & Verdi for providing that info about where that comment was said about the DNA being enough to arrest in the U.K. To me this has always been a huge deal, I wish the general public knew this one tiny fact which is so powerful. We hear a lot of "there's not a shred of evidence" but that comment suggests there IS enough evidence..... for the UK! So what are OG doing?

Where can I read about UK law when it comes to how many markers in DNA a U.K. Court requires to be a match? I know it's 10 but is there a website which states that? I googled it but couldn't find quite what I was looking for. I know there's some clever legal brains on here who may already have a link?

This is a Crown Prosecution Service guide. it's more about the value of the evidence for trial rather than about arrest.

[url=https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/assets/uploads/files/lawyers' DNA guide KSWilliams 190208 (i).pdf]https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/assets/uploads/files/lawyers'%20DNA%20guide%20KSWilliams%20190208%20(i).pdf [/url]

Also this might address the particular point raised. I haven't had a chance to skim through the documentation as yet, as can be seen it's rather lengthy..

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/dna-guidance

This bit however, did jump out at me as it confirms what I've always said about Gerry McCann's visit to Rothley, when he allegedly collected a pillow case to provide a clean reference sample of Madeleine's DNA..

From a forensic science perspective, crime investigation activities can be considered as two distinct phases:

a. The pre submission phase (scene/victim/suspect) during which investigative agencies are involved in locating, recovering, packaging,storing and transporting exhibits; and

b. The analytical phase (laboratory) in which the recovered exhibit is processed within a laboratory.

I digress.

by Guest 20.03.17 12:37

Phoebe wrote:The McCanns were not under constant surveillance by either police or media. They arranged with the media when they would be available for filming/ interviews and requested privacy outside of these times, which they were afforded. There were also other family members who had access to the car while they were away on trips abroad etc. Suspicion only really fell on them after the dogs findings by which time any removal in the car had already occurred. I deem it much more likely that they, or a trusted person close to them may have been responsible for moving the body. Let's not have half of the Algarve "in on it" please.

They certainly weren't hounded by the media on that mysterious 'campaign' trip to Huelva, Spain, with long term friend Jon Corner, on a public holiday, were they? According to the PJ investigation, not only did they clock-up mileage but they somehow manged to slip the radar for about three hours. That aside..

Jane Tanner's rogatory interview - April 2008 [snipped]

Reply “Yeah this is the one I think it would be, this is erm, this is Charlotte, my friend in Exeter who was actually out in Portugal with us when we were there, but I think I rang her, she went home on the Saturday and she hadn’t taken her mobile out with her, cos I’d (inaudible) texted her, that day we were supposed to go, it was her husband’s birthday, I must have, I’ve still got the text on here that she, we were supposed to go to their apartment for a barbecue at lunch time, so I text her in the morning and said, (inaudible) text (inaudible), there you go, I text her in the morning and said that, so you see what time that is and but she didn’t answer so, cos she hadn’t got her mobile phone”.
----------

by winslow boy 20.03.17 12:57

BlueBag wrote:Meanwhile Fernando and Enawgaw didn't notice any smells.

So you are saying the PJ bungled it and the car hire company were in on it.

Hi,No I'm saying that they seemed to be hit by a brick wall every where they tried to investigate. And as I said it would IMO be more feasible that the cadaver was transported in the car a much lesser distance (ie less than 5 miles earlier in the week before the mass invasion) so that the smell was negligable and in decomposition terms quite fresh but more than 3 hours old, that only dogs could pick it up. Not taken on a long hot drive later on where the smell would be overwhelming, and leaving the boot open would not get rid of the smell to humans. Did I read that the DNA was diluted, refrigerated OR washed and dried (Bathed).But there again it's also possible that Mc*$^% knew nothing about the vehicle and as someone said no evidence that they selected that vehicle, no evidence that they were driving round the countryside with a body in the boot as well, no evidence as to when and how that evidence got inside that car.

Thank you for your reply and as I say I am neither for or against the McCanns just looking for the truth like everyone else.

The Supreme Court said as I read it that the case was about Freedom of Speech not to decide the innocent or guilty, still under suspicion as you would expect in a disapperance, and so therefore deemed and are innocent as no conclusive proof one way or the other. All people are mostly under suspicion when there is a death or abduction it doesn't mean they are guilty.Lee Harvey Oswald, the Jill Dando episode imprisonment of an innocent man,the Christie case where an innocent man was hung,at the time all the information pointed at them, I could go on and on, as you probably think I do.
We are seeking the truth and when theories are put forward and there are comments where it's possible or not possible that is the way forward. When we have discussed, logically and not just sticking to our opinions what could or couldn't have happened that is where the truth in the lie will be found.It's not about for or against it's finding the truth.

I do not accuse anybody of any wrong doings only put forward an hypothesis IMO to be proven right or wrong.
As I said I don't mind anybody shooting me down in flames as long as it's constructive with reasons why. If it's unfounded, why is it unfounded ?
Thank you for all the valid replies, and sorry about another long winded narrative.It is not my intention to detract.
The Abduction theory has been heavily scrutinised, but is still possible not impossible. The dog evidence, no evidence when it got there,when did it get there,how did it get there, during the Holiday,or after, or much later. If it was put there later and it is possible not impossible why, by whom. Why take only one child,would this be a show of power that they could take the other two at will, and therefore control them. Oops conspiracy theory. Tell me why it's not possible.
Ready to be shot down in flames with logic not opinion.

by Phoebe 20.03.17 13:11

Cadaver odour was detected by the dogs on Kate's clothing and also on cuddle cat which she kept with her continuously. Who could have "planted" cadaver odour on these and how? Are you seriously suggesting some "powerful force" broke in to their villa and made off with Kate's T shirt, capri pants and cuddle-cat without her knowledge? Did they found a handy corpse at, say, the local morgue/funeral home and rub these items on them before sneaking them back in to her wardrobe?

by winslow boy 20.03.17 13:43

d different locations.

Phoebe wrote:Cadaver odour was detected by the dogs on Kate's clothing and also on cuddle cat which she kept with her continuously. Who could have "planted" cadaver odour on these and how? Are you seriously suggesting some "powerful force" broke in to their villa and made off with Kate's T shirt, capri pants and cuddle-cat without her knowledge? Did they found a handy corpse at, say, the local morgue/funeral home and rub these items on them before sneaking them back in to her wardrobe?

It's possible, if they had the cadaver Why didn't the Mc^£%% burn/get rid of the articles with the body, these aren't average intelligent people nothing on Ge$&£ stuff, but as suggested by others Ge&£% was implicit. If on her clothes in the wardrobe why didn't it transfer to his. Always wondered about cuddle cat though is that possible ? On her clothes and always carrying cuddle cat, transference, how long after was it tested for cadaver smell. You would not know that your clothes carried the smell of death, but the dogs would. Is this possible. But why only K^£$^ clothes ? Please don't say it couldn't be transference, the body wasn't found but the dogs smelt where it had been, in various and different locations. If you can say why it's not possible we get closer to the truth.

Not disputing the Dogs at all, IMO they smelt/detected what they were trained to do. It's the timeline that those items came into contact with each other that needs to be determined.

by **Nina** 20.03.17 14:44

winslow boy wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Meanwhile Fernando and Enawgaw didn't notice any smells.

So you are saying the PJ bungled it and the car hire company were in on it.
Hi,No I'm saying that they seemed to be hit by a brick wall every where they tried to investigate. And as I said it would IMO be more feasible that the cadaver was transported in the car a much lesser distance (ie less than 5 miles earlier in the week before the mass invasion) so that the smell was negligable and in decomposition terms quite fresh but more than 3 hours old, that only dogs could pick it up. Not taken on a long hot drive later on where the smell would be overwhelming, and leaving the boot open would not get rid of the smell to humans. Did I read that the DNA was diluted, refrigerated OR washed and dried (Bathed).But there again it's also possible that Mc*$^% knew nothing about the vehicle and as someone said no evidence that they selected that vehicle, no evidence that they were driving round the countryside with a body in the boot as well, no evidence as to when and how that evidence got inside that car.

Thank you for your reply and as I say I am neither for or against the McCanns just looking for the truth like everyone else.

The Supreme Court said as I read it that the case was about Freedom of Speech not to decide the innocent or guilty, still under suspicion as you would expect in a disapperance, and so therefore deemed and are innocent as no conclusive proof one way or the other. All people are mostly under suspicion when there is a death or abduction it doesn't mean they are guilty.Lee Harvey Oswald, the Jill Dando episode imprisonment of an innocent man,the Christie case where an innocent man was hung,at the time all the information pointed at them, I could go on and on, as you probably think I do.
We are seeking the truth and when theories are put forward and there are comments where it's possible or not possible that is the way forward. When we have discussed, logically and not just sticking to our opinions what could or couldn't have happened that is where the truth in the lie will be found.It's not about for or against it's finding the truth.

I do not accuse anybody of any wrong doings only put forward an hypothesis IMO to be proven right or wrong.
As I said I don't mind anybody shooting me down in flames as long as it's constructive with reasons why. If it's unfounded, why is it unfounded ?
Thank you for all the valid replies, and sorry about another long winded narrative.It is not my intention to detract.
The Abduction theory has been heavily scrutinised, but is still possible not impossible. The dog evidence, no evidence when it got there,when did it get there,how did it get there, during the Holiday,or after, or much later. If it was put there later and it is possible not impossible why, by whom. Why take only one child,would this be a show of power that they could take the other two at will, and therefore control them. Oops conspiracy theory. Tell me why it's not possible.
Ready to be shot down in flames with logic not opinion.

Snipped from your post Winslow boy.......

But there again it's also possible that Mc*$^% knew nothing about the vehicle and as someone said no evidence that they selected that vehicle,

I have hired many cars during the last few years and can tell you that you don't 'choose' a particular vehicle you choose a group, say 3 door or 5 door, low cc or powered cars, cheap and cheerful or top of the range. I would say it is quite understandable the type of car they chose having 2 children and lots of visitors to transport too and from the airport.

by Guest 20.03.17 15:12

BlueBag wrote:So that blows the obfuscation theory.

You would think so wouldn't you - but apparently not!

by Phoebe 20.03.17 16:07

If, as you seem to suggest, cuddle-cat was transferring cadaver odour onto Kate's clothes then, logically, all clothes she wore would have been contaminated as would all fabric furniture she sat on. Martin Grime explains clearly that neither blood nor cadaver odour is destroyed by washing. I doubt the McCanns,(for all their "intelligence") were aware of this. If odours were as easily transferrable from clothing to clothing I'd save a fortune. My favourite ,(rather costly) perfume lingers on the article it was sprayed on but alas, has yet to penetrate other items nestling next to it in my wardrobe, despite my very liberal applications.

by Rob Royston 20.03.17 16:25

I have also considered that the dogs could have been misled. It has been mentioned on this forum in the past,

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10343p200-creche-signatures-revisited

April 10th 2015

by winslow boy 20.03.17 16:52

As several members of CMOMM have noted, 'winslow' boy displayed clear evidence of coming here to disrupt and distract. It is despicable for anyone to come here and try to undo the good and hard work of so many who strive to unravel this dreadful mystery.

winslow boy's post has been removed.

And so has s/he - Mod

by nglfi 20.03.17 17:12

I hesitate to get involved in this thread, but for me the massive problem with 'I attended 6 dead bodies before I came away on holiday and that's how the cadaver odour got there' is the idea that Kate McCann would want to go on holiday in cadavery work clothes. Who goes on holiday in their work clothes?
Even though she wouldn't wear a uniform as a GP I've no doubt she and most have a specific set of clothes they wear to work.

And in what context does a GP come into contact with cadavers?

by Phoebe 20.03.17 17:18

The notion of Kate going to work as a G.P. in capri pants and a string topped vest in the U.K. in March is as bizarre as the notion of her bringing cuddle-cat with her. How do we know what clothes Gerry brought to Portugal or whether he disposed of any? With regard to being able to smell whether someone has a dog as soon as I enter a house, sorry but until Fido puts in an appearance I am regularly surprised by his being there! A recently deceased body, in my experience, does not produce a strong odour. I've been to enough wakes to say that (no embalming). Yes a dog would pick that scent up but my nose would be no more successful in this instance than it would in detecting that the passenger beside me is carrying drugs or explosives.

by **sandancer** 20.03.17 17:39

https://www.bma.org.uk>gp-practices

English law
Does not require a doctor to confirm a death has occurred
Does not require a doctor to view the body of the deceased
Does require the doctor who attended the deceased during the last illness to issue a certificate .

No obligation on the doctor even to see , let alone examine the body .

So Kate as a part time locum GP working 1/12 days had no reason to drape herself whilst carrying Cuddlecat over even one body !

If a doctor does check for signs of life , it's pulse and eyes. ( Seen it done myself ) takes longer to fill out the forms !

You can read more at the BMA link .

So let's forget the attending bodies in a t shirt , Capri pants with Cuddlecat in tow please .

by Harmon521 20.03.17 18:08

Today at 16:25
by Rob Royston
I have also considered that the dogs could have been misled. It has been mentioned on this forum in the past,

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10343p200-creche-signatures-revisited

Sorry I have looked through your link and can't find post regarding dogs,but I don't understand what you mean.
These are two highly trained dogs used by police forces world wide.they are trained to find a particular scent which they did.it matters not to them who the scent belongs to or how it got there.
All they know is ,"what they were looking for,they found"

Latest topics