Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
Page 1 of 3 • Share
Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3 
Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Jill Havern 30.10.16 21:59
Ben Thompson
Yesterday at 12:21pm
Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car.
Both Eddie and Keela alerted to the Renault Scenic; the car the McCanns hired 24 days after Madeleine was reported missing. Following an alert to the side of the boot, Martin Grime (the dogs' handler), instructed the forensic team to inspect further.
Using the following link from the PJ files as source:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm
"From the observations made inside the vehicle several areas were detected containing stains that appeared to be of haematic origin, they were subjected to tests looking for peroxide existing in blood using the Kastle-Mayer test, all of them reacted negatively."
"After the examination of the vehicle was complete the human blood specialist sniffer dog was introduced along with Martin Grime of the British police who coordinated the dog?s movements. After a few moments Mr Grime informed the team that they should collect the key and other materials from zone M or from the interior of the luggage compartment given the fact that the dog in reference had identified these materials as places where eventual blood vestiges existed. The undersigned gathered these materials placing them in paper envelopes with the following references:
10. Parts of the vehicle luggage area.
12. Vehicle ignition key."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given that Keela alerted to the boot (ref 10 on the photo at the bottom of this post), and that Fernando Viegas Um Henriques, of the Forensic specialist team in Portugal, confirmed that areas of the vehicle contained stains that appeared to be blood, it was fair to assume that these stains/areas could have had the presence of blood. We can see from the link above, that a forensic light kit was used. This kit would have lit up bodily fluids such as saliva, semen, and vaginal fluids, as they contain natural fluorescents. This isn't the case with blood. Blood will actually show up as approximately four times darker.
The link below has more information on forensic light kits:
http://www.spexforensics.com/…/categ…/forensic-light-sources
Also below, using the Huber murder case as a source:
http://articles.latimes.com/1994-0…/…/mn-18567_1_murder-case
The Kastle-Mayer test, which was used in this case, whilst, not confirming the presence of blood, cannot rule it out.
http://www.bluestar-forensic.com/…/en/STR_validation_study.…
As can be seen from the above link, the Kastle-Mayer test, has known to give a negative, even when blood is present. A possible reasons for this, is that the test simply isn't sensitive enough.
Here is what Goncalo said regarding the DNA samples found in the boot of the car:
"In the first case, the laboratory considers that the result of the analysis is inconclusive because the samples gathered provide very little information when the DNA comes from more than one person. But all the confirmed DNA components match with the corresponding components in Madeleine’s DNA profile!."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...and here is what John Lowe of the FSS said:
"A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.
Why?...
Well, lets look at the question that is being asked
"Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab?"
It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No misinterpretation there whatsoever. In fact, when we look at Goncalo Amaral's summary of the DNA, he confirms, exactly what John Lowe has told him:
"The preliminary results from FSS were enlightening in a way, and confirmed the information given by the EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and the CSI dog.
- The CSI dog, Keela, signaled the presence of human blood where Eddie, the EVRD dog, marked the presence of cadaver odour - on the floor tiles behind the sofa in the lounge, on the key and in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was used by the McCanns from May 27th onwards.
- the bodily fluids, according to the FSS, contain markers from Madeleine's DNA profile.
These elements do not constitute concrete proof but simply clues to be added to those we already possess. In itself, the definition of a DNA profile from LCN is not considered as evidence in a criminal investigation. In his report, the English scientist says that he cannot give answers to the following questions: when was the DNA deposited? In what way? What bodily fluid does the DNA come from? Has a crime been committed?
The scientific evidence is not enough and it has to be accompanied by other types of material, documented and testimonial evidence. It is only in this way that the entire puzzle can be reconstructed and certainties can be achieved, for the material truth to be established."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for Snr. Amaral referring to the sample from the boot as blood, consider this:
Keela (blood only dog), alerted to the boot; specifically the area marked 10.
It was also visually thought to be blood.
DNA confirmed by John Lowe of FSS.
DNA can only come from tissues such as blood, sweat, skin, semen, saliva etc.
As all other fluids from the body would have glowed under inspection, anything other than blood can be ruled out.
The assumption that the sample was in fact blood, is a perfectly reasonable one to make.
Oh one more thing...
Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/694723627350796/
Yesterday at 12:21pm
Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car.
Both Eddie and Keela alerted to the Renault Scenic; the car the McCanns hired 24 days after Madeleine was reported missing. Following an alert to the side of the boot, Martin Grime (the dogs' handler), instructed the forensic team to inspect further.
Using the following link from the PJ files as source:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm
"From the observations made inside the vehicle several areas were detected containing stains that appeared to be of haematic origin, they were subjected to tests looking for peroxide existing in blood using the Kastle-Mayer test, all of them reacted negatively."
"After the examination of the vehicle was complete the human blood specialist sniffer dog was introduced along with Martin Grime of the British police who coordinated the dog?s movements. After a few moments Mr Grime informed the team that they should collect the key and other materials from zone M or from the interior of the luggage compartment given the fact that the dog in reference had identified these materials as places where eventual blood vestiges existed. The undersigned gathered these materials placing them in paper envelopes with the following references:
10. Parts of the vehicle luggage area.
12. Vehicle ignition key."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given that Keela alerted to the boot (ref 10 on the photo at the bottom of this post), and that Fernando Viegas Um Henriques, of the Forensic specialist team in Portugal, confirmed that areas of the vehicle contained stains that appeared to be blood, it was fair to assume that these stains/areas could have had the presence of blood. We can see from the link above, that a forensic light kit was used. This kit would have lit up bodily fluids such as saliva, semen, and vaginal fluids, as they contain natural fluorescents. This isn't the case with blood. Blood will actually show up as approximately four times darker.
The link below has more information on forensic light kits:
http://www.spexforensics.com/…/categ…/forensic-light-sources
Also below, using the Huber murder case as a source:
http://articles.latimes.com/1994-0…/…/mn-18567_1_murder-case
The Kastle-Mayer test, which was used in this case, whilst, not confirming the presence of blood, cannot rule it out.
http://www.bluestar-forensic.com/…/en/STR_validation_study.…
As can be seen from the above link, the Kastle-Mayer test, has known to give a negative, even when blood is present. A possible reasons for this, is that the test simply isn't sensitive enough.
Here is what Goncalo said regarding the DNA samples found in the boot of the car:
"In the first case, the laboratory considers that the result of the analysis is inconclusive because the samples gathered provide very little information when the DNA comes from more than one person. But all the confirmed DNA components match with the corresponding components in Madeleine’s DNA profile!."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...and here is what John Lowe of the FSS said:
"A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.
Why?...
Well, lets look at the question that is being asked
"Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab?"
It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No misinterpretation there whatsoever. In fact, when we look at Goncalo Amaral's summary of the DNA, he confirms, exactly what John Lowe has told him:
"The preliminary results from FSS were enlightening in a way, and confirmed the information given by the EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and the CSI dog.
- The CSI dog, Keela, signaled the presence of human blood where Eddie, the EVRD dog, marked the presence of cadaver odour - on the floor tiles behind the sofa in the lounge, on the key and in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was used by the McCanns from May 27th onwards.
- the bodily fluids, according to the FSS, contain markers from Madeleine's DNA profile.
These elements do not constitute concrete proof but simply clues to be added to those we already possess. In itself, the definition of a DNA profile from LCN is not considered as evidence in a criminal investigation. In his report, the English scientist says that he cannot give answers to the following questions: when was the DNA deposited? In what way? What bodily fluid does the DNA come from? Has a crime been committed?
The scientific evidence is not enough and it has to be accompanied by other types of material, documented and testimonial evidence. It is only in this way that the entire puzzle can be reconstructed and certainties can be achieved, for the material truth to be established."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for Snr. Amaral referring to the sample from the boot as blood, consider this:
Keela (blood only dog), alerted to the boot; specifically the area marked 10.
It was also visually thought to be blood.
DNA confirmed by John Lowe of FSS.
DNA can only come from tissues such as blood, sweat, skin, semen, saliva etc.
As all other fluids from the body would have glowed under inspection, anything other than blood can be ruled out.
The assumption that the sample was in fact blood, is a perfectly reasonable one to make.
Oh one more thing...
Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/694723627350796/
____________________
PeterMac's FREE e-book
Gonçalo Amaral: The truth of the lie
CMOMM & MMRG Blog
MAGA 
MBGAA wise man once said:
"Be careful who you let on to your ship,
because some people will sink the whole ship
just because they can't be the Captain."
Jill Havern- Captain, Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31115
Activity : 43929
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Reply to Verdi
by winslow boy 18.03.17 1:44
Why would they hire that car in front of the worlds press and all ? I think I read on one of the forum sites that some one suggested that the car was rented by somebody apparently not connected to them but in that area and the body was removed earlier in the week, not leaving it to the last night because that would have been stupid. I think it said something along the lines that they had to be seen in the car at a later date because the cars used in the locality were going to be checked for forensics. If their dna hair etc were found in the car when it was checked how did it get there, but by being aware and one step ahead they hired it so if evidence of them was found it wouldn't raise eyebrows.Has anybody else seen this somewhere and is it true or just conjecture.
In reply to Verdi: Was the car forensically checked before it was hired weeks later or was it going to be ? Just looking for established facts. I am not for or against the McCanns, as innocent until proven guilty by facts and not conjecture' and the return of Maddie would be the best outcome for all. It does seem at bit strange that all assertions seem to be directed at K*"* being missing or away from the crowd,the alledged " Cadaver smell on HER clothes but not G$%^"&. The statements of the Tapas (how Many ?)being a little bit blurred, the amazing amount of paedophiles in the area at the time (According to the Bri&*$R Press ). And yet G$%^" IMO has distanced himself or somebody has from being any part of it. Witnesses saying they saw him at various times. Playing Tennis standing in the road talking to someone, before the event even talking to the pretty woman in the bar and going home straight to bed whilst K*"& slept in the other room after leaving early. He didn't find Maddie gone she was all right when he was checking.The blinds weren't Jemmied, if they are guilty who was supposed to Jemmy them and why didn't they ?. I think K$*£ said that they were framed if so they certainly put K*£^ in the frame but not G&£$^^. Why would G&£% send Friends to check on K*£^ and the Kids and not go himself. How if this theory was supposed to occur wasn't K&£%
given the same protection as well as the Tapas ( How Many ) as their statements would implicate her if, pardon my French,
things went tits up.This would leave G&%^$£ in the clear ( Lack of evidence to convict ?)if he didn't know anything about it because he doesn't appear to be there at the relevant times.
The Abduction: Here we have Drs. etc. above average intelligence I would assume, who have been alleged to have K*%^$£th M^£%%$ and then disposed off her. I think a great deal of Doctors could remember a simple abduction theory if they had a day or two to rehearse it, but in the heat of the moment ie during the post abduction, exact times are not remembered. They could of Jemmied the window, messed the room up a bit,G&$^% and K^*$ going back later together with a few friends,bootprint outside the window,any other door forced,any amount of distracting evidence. These people aren't stupid IMO they would have come up with a better scenario than this. G*$&£% on video said something along the lines of it's not a holiday for him ? A meeting of DRS to discuss important issues, per'haps he was being pressured to agree to something or had found out information he was not happy with or something that had happened in the past.Per'haps he wouldn't comply with the ethics of something. Multi Million/Billion pound operation ? Without his compliance it wouldn't be possible. So he would need to be controlled or blackmailed and who would have the power to do that and why would so many " Agencies " respond. K&£$ I think it was reported said that they were framed.Why when the abduction theory and paedophile rings could have been the reason, why do they get so angry when they are accused, could it be that they are innocent and that somebodies holding tha Ace card if they differ from the controller wishes. Was K&£^ told not to mention the being framed episode again. Why are they so guarded is it because they have to be calm incase they get angry and say something they shouldn't. Why delete texts etc. they would have known that the Police could simply checkon this, and I'm sure they could have explained them away easily one way or another. If they were incriminating why not get rid of the phones completely or say they were stolen along with M^£$"$ and other valuable items, really doesn't make sense for intelligent people.On the other hand what if they were from the kidnappers,M*$^%$£ safe return do as we tell you "THEY'VE taken her"? CONTROL. The evidence found by the Dogs. Framed ? What if the people who took her went back into the appartment after the McCanns were moved and put evidence there, it wasn't highly guarded after all, and the car. Using a car in front of everyone and leaving evidence, answered that earlier, but there again FRAMED CONTROL. The supposed files held by the Police but empty ready to be made up, another threat ? CONTROL. New evidence that may be found later on if they don't comply or keep quiet. Not naming names the alleged discussion of D.Pa*%^& and G$^&$ of an explicit nature. Didn't she say that she wouldn't let them bathe the kids unless she or her husband were there. I don't think I would let them be in the same Town. The death of M*&^^$ due to evidence that could be "found" at any time. Control.
All this is circumstantial and cannot be proven or somebody would be in prison if it was true. With the lack of actual evidence actually implicating the McC&*%^ all that is there is IMO the evidence in the room, snuggly or whatever that toy is,the clothes (K&£%$) the rest is held above their heads like the Sword of D.......
Evidence in the car that that they alledgedly hired to dispose of M*£^&* whilst they were being watched by nearly everybody in that area, that wouldn't be clever would it (Except as I've read before).It all incriminates as IMO it was meant to, but doesn't prove. Efits of per'haps G*$&*( carrying her away ). That one MAY put him in the frame! Is he an idiot IMO I don't think so, how far could he get, he'd know that the Police would search the surrounding area, the smell would be on the clothes he was wearing?Just so many things left hovering that could be used as a threat. Complete Control.
In the Ma&^$%^ case she fooled the Police with a simple plan, IMO the M^%££%^ would have a much better and believable abduction than this. As the Por*^$^%^ Police and some of the British Police were to have been quoted at the time:They knew virtually straight away that she hadn't been abducted. I'm not casting any aspersions but DRs have been reported in the papers many times of covering their tracks with medical issues for many years.Why would these not organise an abduction that would be highly feasible, instead of making it so easy a 10 year old would have sussed out straight away there was no abduction.Maybe because it was intended to point at the Mc^%%.
As a Disclaimer this is IMO and doesn't intend to deride innocent people in any way. I am neither for or against the McC%^&
but feel that the did they didn't they theories should be more open, but people are maybe scared to have their theories aired in case of court action. Are the Mc&^%%^ being instructed to squash these by the people who maybe controlling them. Remember the control that some very powerful people have over other people, it's not a game it can be life or death IMO Remember they are being advised by possibly the best people in the business why aren't they doing a better job ?
In reply to Verdi: Was the car forensically checked before it was hired weeks later or was it going to be ? Just looking for established facts. I am not for or against the McCanns, as innocent until proven guilty by facts and not conjecture' and the return of Maddie would be the best outcome for all. It does seem at bit strange that all assertions seem to be directed at K*"* being missing or away from the crowd,the alledged " Cadaver smell on HER clothes but not G$%^"&. The statements of the Tapas (how Many ?)being a little bit blurred, the amazing amount of paedophiles in the area at the time (According to the Bri&*$R Press ). And yet G$%^" IMO has distanced himself or somebody has from being any part of it. Witnesses saying they saw him at various times. Playing Tennis standing in the road talking to someone, before the event even talking to the pretty woman in the bar and going home straight to bed whilst K*"& slept in the other room after leaving early. He didn't find Maddie gone she was all right when he was checking.The blinds weren't Jemmied, if they are guilty who was supposed to Jemmy them and why didn't they ?. I think K$*£ said that they were framed if so they certainly put K*£^ in the frame but not G&£$^^. Why would G&£% send Friends to check on K*£^ and the Kids and not go himself. How if this theory was supposed to occur wasn't K&£%
given the same protection as well as the Tapas ( How Many ) as their statements would implicate her if, pardon my French,
things went tits up.This would leave G&%^$£ in the clear ( Lack of evidence to convict ?)if he didn't know anything about it because he doesn't appear to be there at the relevant times.
The Abduction: Here we have Drs. etc. above average intelligence I would assume, who have been alleged to have K*%^$£th M^£%%$ and then disposed off her. I think a great deal of Doctors could remember a simple abduction theory if they had a day or two to rehearse it, but in the heat of the moment ie during the post abduction, exact times are not remembered. They could of Jemmied the window, messed the room up a bit,G&$^% and K^*$ going back later together with a few friends,bootprint outside the window,any other door forced,any amount of distracting evidence. These people aren't stupid IMO they would have come up with a better scenario than this. G*$&£% on video said something along the lines of it's not a holiday for him ? A meeting of DRS to discuss important issues, per'haps he was being pressured to agree to something or had found out information he was not happy with or something that had happened in the past.Per'haps he wouldn't comply with the ethics of something. Multi Million/Billion pound operation ? Without his compliance it wouldn't be possible. So he would need to be controlled or blackmailed and who would have the power to do that and why would so many " Agencies " respond. K&£$ I think it was reported said that they were framed.Why when the abduction theory and paedophile rings could have been the reason, why do they get so angry when they are accused, could it be that they are innocent and that somebodies holding tha Ace card if they differ from the controller wishes. Was K&£^ told not to mention the being framed episode again. Why are they so guarded is it because they have to be calm incase they get angry and say something they shouldn't. Why delete texts etc. they would have known that the Police could simply checkon this, and I'm sure they could have explained them away easily one way or another. If they were incriminating why not get rid of the phones completely or say they were stolen along with M^£$"$ and other valuable items, really doesn't make sense for intelligent people.On the other hand what if they were from the kidnappers,M*$^%$£ safe return do as we tell you "THEY'VE taken her"? CONTROL. The evidence found by the Dogs. Framed ? What if the people who took her went back into the appartment after the McCanns were moved and put evidence there, it wasn't highly guarded after all, and the car. Using a car in front of everyone and leaving evidence, answered that earlier, but there again FRAMED CONTROL. The supposed files held by the Police but empty ready to be made up, another threat ? CONTROL. New evidence that may be found later on if they don't comply or keep quiet. Not naming names the alleged discussion of D.Pa*%^& and G$^&$ of an explicit nature. Didn't she say that she wouldn't let them bathe the kids unless she or her husband were there. I don't think I would let them be in the same Town. The death of M*&^^$ due to evidence that could be "found" at any time. Control.
All this is circumstantial and cannot be proven or somebody would be in prison if it was true. With the lack of actual evidence actually implicating the McC&*%^ all that is there is IMO the evidence in the room, snuggly or whatever that toy is,the clothes (K&£%$) the rest is held above their heads like the Sword of D.......
Evidence in the car that that they alledgedly hired to dispose of M*£^&* whilst they were being watched by nearly everybody in that area, that wouldn't be clever would it (Except as I've read before).It all incriminates as IMO it was meant to, but doesn't prove. Efits of per'haps G*$&*( carrying her away ). That one MAY put him in the frame! Is he an idiot IMO I don't think so, how far could he get, he'd know that the Police would search the surrounding area, the smell would be on the clothes he was wearing?Just so many things left hovering that could be used as a threat. Complete Control.
In the Ma&^$%^ case she fooled the Police with a simple plan, IMO the M^%££%^ would have a much better and believable abduction than this. As the Por*^$^%^ Police and some of the British Police were to have been quoted at the time:They knew virtually straight away that she hadn't been abducted. I'm not casting any aspersions but DRs have been reported in the papers many times of covering their tracks with medical issues for many years.Why would these not organise an abduction that would be highly feasible, instead of making it so easy a 10 year old would have sussed out straight away there was no abduction.Maybe because it was intended to point at the Mc^%%.
As a Disclaimer this is IMO and doesn't intend to deride innocent people in any way. I am neither for or against the McC%^&
but feel that the did they didn't they theories should be more open, but people are maybe scared to have their theories aired in case of court action. Are the Mc&^%%^ being instructed to squash these by the people who maybe controlling them. Remember the control that some very powerful people have over other people, it's not a game it can be life or death IMO Remember they are being advised by possibly the best people in the business why aren't they doing a better job ?
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by The Rooster 18.03.17 10:09
Two interesting posts!
____________________
F J Leghorn
"DOO-Dah! DOO-Dah-Day!"
The Rooster- Posts : 429
Activity : 525
Likes received : 94
Join date : 2011-04-12
Age : 78
Location : Virginia
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Constablekid 18.03.17 14:03
Is there a link to a video or record of the below? A statement or something?
"Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns"
"Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns"
Constablekid- Posts : 88
Activity : 122
Likes received : 16
Join date : 2014-03-11
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 18.03.17 15:29
If I'm reading you correctly, the hire contracts for the Renault Scenic prior to the McCanns rental, were examined by the PJ in line with basic policing. It's here..winslow boy wrote:Why would they hire that car in front of the worlds press and all ? I think I read on one of the forum sites that some one suggested that the car was rented by somebody apparently not connected to them but in that area and the body was removed earlier in the week, not leaving it to the last night because that would have been stupid. I think it said something along the lines that they had to be seen in the car at a later date because the cars used in the locality were going to be checked for forensics. If their dna hair etc were found in the car when it was checked how did it get there, but by being aware and one step ahead they hired it so if evidence of them was found it wouldn't raise eyebrows.Has anybody else seen this somewhere and is it true or just conjecture.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RENTAL_CONTRACTS-1.htm
Apologies if I've misunderstood your point.
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Mirage 18.03.17 15:35
Hi Constablekid.Constablekid wrote:Is there a link to a video or record of the below? A statement or something?
"Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns"
There is this from the thread "Joana Morais' full transcript of G Amaral's TV interview on 23rd April 2016":
quote:
Goncalo Amaral: ....... And when returning to the starting point, there's a new inspection to the apartment where the dogs brought by the British police were used. We were working in close cooperation with the British police, they were always with us until the day when the couple left. Then they all left. I wondered at the time what exactly they were doing here then, because one thing is to assist in an investigation and the investigation wasn't concluded when the couple left Portugal in September 2007, and they all left in the following day, "good bye, see you again, let's talk on the phone, exchange mails". We were left alone when we had already reached these conclusions along with the British police input. Earlier I spoke about the Judiciary Police's opinion, but it was also the British police's opinion that was always present and present in the investigations.
Anchor - So there were members of the British police whose opinions agreed with this thesis?
Gonçalo Amaral - I can tell you that one of the officers, a former police officer, that was present when the preliminary reports were known, what he said about the results was that back in England they would already have been arrested. The issue was that report was just a preliminary one and we needed the data of the official report, which arrived at the PJ as it did. That was his opinion, affirmed in front of several people who can testify to that.
Quote ends
-------
He does not name Prior here but, from memory, I think he does so in 'Truth of the Lie'.
Mirage- Posts : 1905
Activity : 2711
Likes received : 764
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 18.03.17 15:38
This is the only reference that I'm aware of..Constablekid wrote:Is there a link to a video or record of the below? A statement or something?
"Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns"
The Truth of the Lie by Goncalo Amaral - Chapter 18
Preliminary Results
Preparation for the Interrogations
At our insistence, Stuart contacts the FSS and asks them if they think the Portuguese are idiots. We hear him saying: “With a lot less than that, we would have already arrested someone in England.” I look at my colleagues and see that they are as stupified as I am. In fact, in Portugal, it’s not so easy to arrest someone. We explain to Stuart that the McCanns interrogations would not result in detention. According to Portuguese law, the crimes of concealment of a corpse and simulating an abduction are not liable to remanding in custody.
http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2009-06-06T14%3A51%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=1
ETA: @Mirage
.Hope I'm not breaking any copyright law by posting the above extract
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Mirage 18.03.17 16:13
Verdi wrote:This is the only reference that I'm aware of..Constablekid wrote:Is there a link to a video or record of the below? A statement or something?
"Stuart Prior of Leicestershire police force, who was with Goncalo Amaral, at the time they were discussing the DNA results, stated that in England, the results would have been enough to arrest the McCanns"
The Truth of the Lie by Goncalo Amaral - Chapter 18
Preliminary Results
Preparation for the Interrogations
At our insistence, Stuart contacts the FSS and asks them if they think the Portuguese are idiots. We hear him saying: “With a lot less than that, we would have already arrested someone in England.” I look at my colleagues and see that they are as stupified as I am. In fact, in Portugal, it’s not so easy to arrest someone. We explain to Stuart that the McCanns interrogations would not result in detention. According to Portuguese law, the crimes of concealment of a corpse and simulating an abduction are not liable to remanding in custody.
http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2009-06-06T14%3A51%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=1
ETA: @Mirage
Hope I'm not breaking any copyright law by posting the above extract
Ha ha. I just found it too @Verdi. You beat me to it. Chapter 18 in The Truth of the Lie.
I think copyright law is waived by those concerned only with the pursuit of truth!
Mirage- Posts : 1905
Activity : 2711
Likes received : 764
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by winslow boy 18.03.17 21:38
Why would they hire that car in front of the worlds press and all ? I think I read on one of the forum sites that some one suggested that the car was rented by somebody apparently not connected to them but in that area and the body was removed earlier in the week, not leaving it to the last night because that would have been stupid. I think it said something along the lines that they had to be seen in the car at a later date because the cars used in the locality were going to be checked for forensics. If their dna hair etc were found in the car when it was checked how did it get there, but by being aware and one step ahead they hired it so if evidence of them was found it wouldn't raise eyebrows.Has anybody else seen this somewhere and is it true or just conjecture.
In reply to Verdi: Was the car forensically checked before it was hired weeks later or was it going to be ? Just looking for established facts. I am not for or against the McCanns, as innocent until proven guilty by facts and not conjecture' and the return of Maddie would be the best outcome for all. It does seem at bit strange that all assertions seem to be directed at K*"* being missing or away from the crowd,the alledged " Cadaver smell on HER clothes but not G$%^"&. The statements of the Tapas (how Many ?)being a little bit blurred, the amazing amount of paedophiles in the area at the time (According to the Bri&*$R Press ). And yet G$%^" IMO has distanced himself or somebody has from being any part of it. Witnesses saying they saw him at various times. Playing Tennis standing in the road talking to someone, before the event even talking to the pretty woman in the bar and going home straight to bed whilst K*"& slept in the other room after leaving early. He didn't find Maddie gone she was all right when he was checking.The blinds weren't Jemmied, if they are guilty who was supposed to Jemmy them and why didn't they ?. I think K$*£ said that they were framed if so they certainly put K*£^ in the frame but not G&£$^^. Why would G&£% send Friends to check on K*£^ and the Kids and not go himself. How if this theory was supposed to occur wasn't K&£%
given the same protection as well as the Tapas ( How Many ) as their statements would implicate her if, pardon my French,
things went tits up.This would leave G&%^$£ in the clear ( Lack of evidence to convict ?)if he didn't know anything about it because he doesn't appear to be there at the relevant times.
The Abduction: Here we have Drs. etc. above average intelligence I would assume, who have been alleged to have K*%^$£th M^£%%$ and then disposed off her. I think a great deal of Doctors could remember a simple abduction theory if they had a day or two to rehearse it, but in the heat of the moment ie during the post abduction, exact times are not remembered. They could of Jemmied the window, messed the room up a bit,G&$^% and K^*$ going back later together with a few friends,bootprint outside the window,any other door forced,any amount of distracting evidence. These people aren't stupid IMO they would have come up with a better scenario than this. G*$&£% on video said something along the lines of it's not a holiday for him ? A meeting of DRS to discuss important issues, per'haps he was being pressured to agree to something or had found out information he was not happy with or something that had happened in the past.Per'haps he wouldn't comply with the ethics of something. Multi Million/Billion pound operation ? Without his compliance it wouldn't be possible. So he would need to be controlled or blackmailed and who would have the power to do that and why would so many " Agencies " respond. K&£$ I think it was reported said that they were framed.Why when the abduction theory and paedophile rings could have been the reason, why do they get so angry when they are accused, could it be that they are innocent and that somebodies holding tha Ace card if they differ from the controller wishes. Was K&£^ told not to mention the being framed episode again. Why are they so guarded is it because they have to be calm incase they get angry and say something they shouldn't. Why delete texts etc. they would have known that the Police could simply checkon this, and I'm sure they could have explained them away easily one way or another. If they were incriminating why not get rid of the phones completely or say they were stolen along with M^£$"$ and other valuable items, really doesn't make sense for intelligent people.On the other hand what if they were from the kidnappers,M*$^%$£ safe return do as we tell you "THEY'VE taken her"? CONTROL. The evidence found by the Dogs. Framed ? What if the people who took her went back into the appartment after the McCanns were moved and put evidence there, it wasn't highly guarded after all, and the car. Using a car in front of everyone and leaving evidence, answered that earlier, but there again FRAMED CONTROL. The supposed files held by the Police but empty ready to be made up, another threat ? CONTROL. New evidence that may be found later on if they don't comply or keep quiet. Not naming names the alleged discussion of D.Pa*%^& and G$^&$ of an explicit nature. Didn't she say that she wouldn't let them bathe the kids unless she or her husband were there. I don't think I would let them be in the same Town. The death of M*&^^$ due to evidence that could be "found" at any time. Control.
All this is circumstantial and cannot be proven or somebody would be in prison if it was true. With the lack of actual evidence actually implicating the McC&*%^ all that is there is IMO the evidence in the room, snuggly or whatever that toy is,the clothes (K&£%$) the rest is held above their heads like the Sword of D.......
Evidence in the car that that they alledgedly hired to dispose of M*£^&* whilst they were being watched by nearly everybody in that area, that wouldn't be clever would it (Except as I've read before).It all incriminates as IMO it was meant to, but doesn't prove. Efits of per'haps G*$&*( carrying her away ). That one MAY put him in the frame! Is he an idiot IMO I don't think so, how far could he get, he'd know that the Police would search the surrounding area, the smell would be on the clothes he was wearing?Just so many things left hovering that could be used as a threat. Complete Control.
In the Ma&^$%^ case she fooled the Police with a simple plan, IMO the M^%££%^ would have a much better and believable abduction than this. As the Por*^$^%^ Police and some of the British Police were to have been quoted at the time:They knew virtually straight away that she hadn't been abducted. I'm not casting any aspersions but DRs have been reported in the papers many times of covering their tracks with medical issues for many years.Why would these not organise an abduction that would be highly feasible, instead of making it so easy a 10 year old would have sussed out straight away there was no abduction.Maybe because it was intended to point at the Mc^%%.
As a Disclaimer this is IMO and doesn't intend to deride innocent people in any way. I am neither for or against the McC%^&
but feel that the did they didn't they theories should be more open, but people are maybe scared to have their theories aired in case of court action. Are the Mc&^%%^ being instructed to squash these by the people who maybe controlling them. Remember the control that some very powerful people have over other people, it's not a game it can be life or death IMO Remember they are being advised by possibly the best people in the business why aren't they doing a better job ?
In reply to Verdi: Was the car forensically checked before it was hired weeks later or was it going to be ? Just looking for established facts. I am not for or against the McCanns, as innocent until proven guilty by facts and not conjecture' and the return of Maddie would be the best outcome for all. It does seem at bit strange that all assertions seem to be directed at K*"* being missing or away from the crowd,the alledged " Cadaver smell on HER clothes but not G$%^"&. The statements of the Tapas (how Many ?)being a little bit blurred, the amazing amount of paedophiles in the area at the time (According to the Bri&*$R Press ). And yet G$%^" IMO has distanced himself or somebody has from being any part of it. Witnesses saying they saw him at various times. Playing Tennis standing in the road talking to someone, before the event even talking to the pretty woman in the bar and going home straight to bed whilst K*"& slept in the other room after leaving early. He didn't find Maddie gone she was all right when he was checking.The blinds weren't Jemmied, if they are guilty who was supposed to Jemmy them and why didn't they ?. I think K$*£ said that they were framed if so they certainly put K*£^ in the frame but not G&£$^^. Why would G&£% send Friends to check on K*£^ and the Kids and not go himself. How if this theory was supposed to occur wasn't K&£%
given the same protection as well as the Tapas ( How Many ) as their statements would implicate her if, pardon my French,
things went tits up.This would leave G&%^$£ in the clear ( Lack of evidence to convict ?)if he didn't know anything about it because he doesn't appear to be there at the relevant times.
The Abduction: Here we have Drs. etc. above average intelligence I would assume, who have been alleged to have K*%^$£th M^£%%$ and then disposed off her. I think a great deal of Doctors could remember a simple abduction theory if they had a day or two to rehearse it, but in the heat of the moment ie during the post abduction, exact times are not remembered. They could of Jemmied the window, messed the room up a bit,G&$^% and K^*$ going back later together with a few friends,bootprint outside the window,any other door forced,any amount of distracting evidence. These people aren't stupid IMO they would have come up with a better scenario than this. G*$&£% on video said something along the lines of it's not a holiday for him ? A meeting of DRS to discuss important issues, per'haps he was being pressured to agree to something or had found out information he was not happy with or something that had happened in the past.Per'haps he wouldn't comply with the ethics of something. Multi Million/Billion pound operation ? Without his compliance it wouldn't be possible. So he would need to be controlled or blackmailed and who would have the power to do that and why would so many " Agencies " respond. K&£$ I think it was reported said that they were framed.Why when the abduction theory and paedophile rings could have been the reason, why do they get so angry when they are accused, could it be that they are innocent and that somebodies holding tha Ace card if they differ from the controller wishes. Was K&£^ told not to mention the being framed episode again. Why are they so guarded is it because they have to be calm incase they get angry and say something they shouldn't. Why delete texts etc. they would have known that the Police could simply checkon this, and I'm sure they could have explained them away easily one way or another. If they were incriminating why not get rid of the phones completely or say they were stolen along with M^£$"$ and other valuable items, really doesn't make sense for intelligent people.On the other hand what if they were from the kidnappers,M*$^%$£ safe return do as we tell you "THEY'VE taken her"? CONTROL. The evidence found by the Dogs. Framed ? What if the people who took her went back into the appartment after the McCanns were moved and put evidence there, it wasn't highly guarded after all, and the car. Using a car in front of everyone and leaving evidence, answered that earlier, but there again FRAMED CONTROL. The supposed files held by the Police but empty ready to be made up, another threat ? CONTROL. New evidence that may be found later on if they don't comply or keep quiet. Not naming names the alleged discussion of D.Pa*%^& and G$^&$ of an explicit nature. Didn't she say that she wouldn't let them bathe the kids unless she or her husband were there. I don't think I would let them be in the same Town. The death of M*&^^$ due to evidence that could be "found" at any time. Control.
All this is circumstantial and cannot be proven or somebody would be in prison if it was true. With the lack of actual evidence actually implicating the McC&*%^ all that is there is IMO the evidence in the room, snuggly or whatever that toy is,the clothes (K&£%$) the rest is held above their heads like the Sword of D.......
Evidence in the car that that they alledgedly hired to dispose of M*£^&* whilst they were being watched by nearly everybody in that area, that wouldn't be clever would it (Except as I've read before).It all incriminates as IMO it was meant to, but doesn't prove. Efits of per'haps G*$&*( carrying her away ). That one MAY put him in the frame! Is he an idiot IMO I don't think so, how far could he get, he'd know that the Police would search the surrounding area, the smell would be on the clothes he was wearing?Just so many things left hovering that could be used as a threat. Complete Control.
In the Ma&^$%^ case she fooled the Police with a simple plan, IMO the M^%££%^ would have a much better and believable abduction than this. As the Por*^$^%^ Police and some of the British Police were to have been quoted at the time:They knew virtually straight away that she hadn't been abducted. I'm not casting any aspersions but DRs have been reported in the papers many times of covering their tracks with medical issues for many years.Why would these not organise an abduction that would be highly feasible, instead of making it so easy a 10 year old would have sussed out straight away there was no abduction.Maybe because it was intended to point at the Mc^%%.
As a Disclaimer this is IMO and doesn't intend to deride innocent people in any way. I am neither for or against the McC%^&
but feel that the did they didn't they theories should be more open, but people are maybe scared to have their theories aired in case of court action. Are the Mc&^%%^ being instructed to squash these by the people who maybe controlling them. Remember the control that some very powerful people have over other people, it's not a game it can be life or death IMO Remember they are being advised by possibly the best people in the business why aren't they doing a better job ?
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 18.03.17 23:34
Why would the Renault Scenic be forensically checked before being hired - or in your words going to be? You want established facts, I gave you a link to the PJ files detailing the rental history of the Renault Scenic prior to the McCanns contract - what more do you need?winslow boy wrote:In reply to Verdi: Was the car forensically checked before it was hired weeks later or was it going to be ? Just looking for established facts.
The McCanns rented a car from a local hire firm as any other person might. As far as I'm aware, car rental companies don't have their fleet of cars forensically tested between hire contracts - unless you know differently.
I can't begin to respond to the rest of your lengthy post because frankly you're not making much sense, nor have I time to try and decipher code such as #$%^&*}+_.
Not per-chance a wind-up merchant are you? I'll give you the benefit of doubt for the moment in the hope that you might clarify your observations in bite size pieces on the appropriate threads. I bid you good evening!
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by MRNOODLES 18.03.17 23:47
Forensically checked before it was was hired. Whiffs a bit of being drawn down the 'South African route' of planted DNA evidence in the car. IMO
MRNOODLES- Posts : 751
Activity : 1059
Likes received : 298
Join date : 2013-07-04
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 18.03.17 23:57
Certainly a bit whiffy.MRNOODLES wrote:Forensically checked before it was was hired. Whiffs a bit of being drawn down the 'South African route' of planted DNA evidence in the car. IMO
Sanskrit being the native language methinks.
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by JohnyT 19.03.17 0:15
From what I can gather.....unless i'm totally mis-reading the post, I think he/she means that the Renault was in the area with the body inside at some point so it had to be hired by the McC's at a later date to explain DNA etc., or have I got that wrong?
@winslow boy ...is that what you mean?
JohnyT
@winslow boy ...is that what you mean?
JohnyT
JohnyT- Posts : 354
Activity : 507
Likes received : 139
Join date : 2014-06-01
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by winslow boy 19.03.17 0:23
Hi Verdi, not a wind up merchant, and codes are easily deciphered to show the main players. My point being we know the evidence was in the car but not how or when it was put there, or indeed the apartment. The Main Topics are Guilty or not Guilty. IMO this is a route that higher forces would be happy to let roll on and on, as it seems to be their aim, whilst deflecting from the truth.Things can be completely covered up, but trickles enter the media from various locations. IMO they could silently stop this information coming out , but they don't, they publicly make it known that the McCanns are trying to silence people,actually fuelling the for and against debate why would they do that, because it suits their agenda. If they have control of the media/Government etc. etc. we wouldn't even be having this conversation unless they wanted us to. It keeps all concerned under CONTROL. I was in my later reply trying to put a balanced theory as to the Real Agenda. I am open to comments and will not feel insulted if people want to shoot me down in flames. I am just a little curious as to why a blackmail theory hasn't been leaked, would that be nearer the truth.
Sorry about the longevity of my posts.
Sorry about the longevity of my posts.
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by winslow boy 19.03.17 0:27
That's about the size of it, have you read the replies I put, can you let me know if those are understandable. CheersJohnyT wrote:From what I can gather.....unless i'm totally mis-reading the post, I think he/she means that the Renault was in the area with the body inside at some point so it had to be hired by the McC's at a later date to explain DNA etc., or have I got that wrong?
@winslow boy ...is that what you mean?
JohnyT
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 0:29
rocessos Vol XI Pages 2963 to 2965
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm
| TRANSLATED BY INES | ||||||
FAX Confidential Very Urgent To: The German Police Liaison Officer Appointed to the Portuguese Authorities From: Policia Judiciaria, Portimao DIC Date: 28-09-2007 Following our telephone conversation I enclose a copy of the rental contract for the Renault Scenic, number plate 59-DA-27, which the person named below used in Portugal during the period between 23 and 26 May 2007. This is Mr Enawgaw, resident of Wittenberg, driver licence N***** who stayed at the Atlantico Vila hotel in Praia da Rocha, Portimao. Please confirm: 1. The rental and use of the vehicle and during which period of time this occurred. 2. Clarify the reason for the use of the vehicle and if possible indicate the routes taken and the places where the vehicle was whilst in his possession. 3. If during this period the vehicle was always in his possession, clarifying who else used the car and who travelled in it. 4. Clarify whether he took the car to cemeteries, if he had any contact with cadavers or any other situation that could be related to cadaver odour having been detected in the car. 5. Indicate whether he knows the McCanns and if he had any contact with them or with anyone who knows them. 6. Any other information that could be related to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. With compliments Signed The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Dr Goncalo Amaral See also statement here Processos Vol XII Pages 3274 to 3275 | ||||||
| 2997 to 2999 - Witness testimony 3 October 2007 of Fernando Adolfo de Vasconcelos Pereira (secondary school instructor, and prior lessee of Renault Scenic 59-DA-27 used by the McCann couple) | ||||||
| 11 Processo Volume 11 pages 2997 to 2999 | ||||||
the McCann couple) Date: 3 October 2007; Time: 15h00; Place: DIC Portimao Officer: Paulo F., Inspector To the matter at hand he said: --- He appears in the case as a witness given that he had in his possession, between 17 May 2007 and 22 May 2007, a vehicle, Renault Scenic, whose licence number he does not recall, that was rented through the Liberty insurance company as a substitute vehicle for his usual one that had been involved in an accident. It being that he was shown a copy of the rental contract referring to the vehicle of that make and model with licence 59-DA-27, which he confirmed as having signed, through the insurance company. --- He had collected the vehicle from the AAC premises in Praia da Rocha on 17 May, having returned it at the premises of the school where he worked, where an employee of the rental company had gone [to collect it] on 22 May. --- Asked to clarify his use of the vehicle he states that it was used basically for daily routine trips in the area around his residence. He was the driver of the vehicle during that time, admitting, though, that his wife had used it once for the specific purpose of going to the school where he worked. --- Questioned he states that besides his children, his wife and his/her father, no other person was conveyed in that vehicle. --- Also questioned he states that he never transported cadavers, human or any other species, nor any objects that could have been in contact with cadavers. He states further that during that period neither he nor other people transported in the vehicle had been in contact with cadavers. --- Asked he affirms not meeting nor having had any kind of relationship either with the McCanns or with any other persons with whom they were related/associated. --- He affirms not having knowledge of any situation happening with the vehicle that could possibly relate to the fact of cadaver odour having been found in it. --- The witness was advised of the fact that from this moment he was obligated under judicial secrecy and to its inherent consequences. Nothing more was said ... |
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by winslow boy 19.03.17 0:38
It was the user for the first week in May I was looking for. Excuse me for seeming a bit thick but I've got a cracking headache at the moment, but would be grateful if this information is available, and was/is the person "connected". Further to that and other replies, of course the car wasn't checked for forensics before the event .
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 1:11
I've given you the links, you'll have to do your own research - unless @JohnyT can help you out again.
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by winslow boy 19.03.17 2:03
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 7:46
I don't think that the McCanns hiring the car to obfuscate the DNA makes much sense.
Why draw any attention to the car at all?
Anyway... previous renters:
Apri 02 to 12 Adrian Robert Lowes
May 08 to 15 John Brown
May 17 to 22 Fernando Aldolfo Vilela
May 23 to 26 Enawgaw Mengistate
May 27 to .. Gerry McCann
I think John Brown has been discussed here before.
I don't think it was Gordon Brown's brother.
Also, do you think Fernando and Enawgaw (what a name) might have noticed a smell?
Why draw any attention to the car at all?
Anyway... previous renters:
Apri 02 to 12 Adrian Robert Lowes
May 08 to 15 John Brown
May 17 to 22 Fernando Aldolfo Vilela
May 23 to 26 Enawgaw Mengistate
May 27 to .. Gerry McCann
I think John Brown has been discussed here before.
I don't think it was Gordon Brown's brother.
Also, do you think Fernando and Enawgaw (what a name) might have noticed a smell?
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 8:06
Re: John Brown (Gordon's brother).
I can't find any discussion of John Brown other than Jill Renwick meeting him on a street and asking if he can get Gordon to help.
Do we know who John Brown (car renter) was?
I can't find any discussion of John Brown other than Jill Renwick meeting him on a street and asking if he can get Gordon to help.
Do we know who John Brown (car renter) was?
Guest- Guest
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 12:11
13 Volume XIII Pages 3897 to 3900
Witness Statement
John Brown
Date: 2007.10.05
I am the above named person and I write this statement in relation to a week I went to Portugal to play golf. I flew from Luton Airport, London to Faro, Portugal Airport on May 8th 2007. I went with my wife B*** B***, Michael WRIGHT a friend and his wife S*** W****, N***** R******, his wife J***** R******. It was a golfing holiday over four different courses. We all stayed with a friend out in the country. It was a villa belonging to D**** B*****. I have known him for 15 years. It is his privately owned villa. I booked my flights separately through EASy Jet. It is the first time I have stayed there with him. The only other time I have been to Portugal is approx 10 yrs ago. I usually go on holiday three times a year, this year I have been away four times in various locations, Egypt, Croatia, Devon and Portugal. I booked the flight myself. I booked the hire car online via the Easy Jet web page. I cant remember through whom. I hired this car in the spring time but I can't remember when. I booked it with two named drivers, myself and Michael WRIGHT. We both drove the car I hired at different times throughout the holiday. We used the car the transport some of the group to different courses for golf, restaurants and the villa. The only people to use or get in the car were myself, my wife, mr and mrs Wright and mrs R*****. No other person got into or used the car at all. To the extent that no one got into the car to even park it for us. the villa we stayed at was near Faro I believe. I collected the hire car upon arrival from the rental company at the airport in Faro and returned it to the same spot.
It had no damage to it at all. It was clean. I don't remember any marks or anything. The car was a people carrier with a rear storage area. It was a four door with tailgate boot door. We put suitcases for travelling to and from the airport and otherwise everyone I have mentioned that has travelled in the car has put golfing clothing and equipment. I had no problems with the car and did not need to change tyres or fill water up or anything. I think we travelled in the car alone. The car was a light colour. It was I believe a Renault car. I dropped the car off at the same place I hired it and picked it up on May 15th when I flew back to Luton, London. I generally followed Mr B****** around and he took us everywhere. One of the places we went to was TEVIRA. I can't remember the other places. The car was always left secure and locked to my knowledge.
Beyond the people named, at no point did we take any other baggage, belongings or property belonging to anyone else in the car. I have no idea how much I paid for the hire car. I think I paid for it by a Natwest access card but I am not totally sure. I did not do any other checks on the car or have trouble with it. I fully support police proceedings and I am willing to attend court should I be required to do so. I am sure also could provide further information from my papers at home if required.
| 13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3897 |
 |
| 13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3898 |
 |
| 13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3899 |
 |
| 13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3900 |
 |
John Brown
Date: 2007.10.05
I am the above named person and I write this statement in relation to a week I went to Portugal to play golf. I flew from Luton Airport, London to Faro, Portugal Airport on May 8th 2007. I went with my wife B*** B***, Michael WRIGHT a friend and his wife S*** W****, N***** R******, his wife J***** R******. It was a golfing holiday over four different courses. We all stayed with a friend out in the country. It was a villa belonging to D**** B*****. I have known him for 15 years. It is his privately owned villa. I booked my flights separately through EASy Jet. It is the first time I have stayed there with him. The only other time I have been to Portugal is approx 10 yrs ago. I usually go on holiday three times a year, this year I have been away four times in various locations, Egypt, Croatia, Devon and Portugal. I booked the flight myself. I booked the hire car online via the Easy Jet web page. I cant remember through whom. I hired this car in the spring time but I can't remember when. I booked it with two named drivers, myself and Michael WRIGHT. We both drove the car I hired at different times throughout the holiday. We used the car the transport some of the group to different courses for golf, restaurants and the villa. The only people to use or get in the car were myself, my wife, mr and mrs Wright and mrs R*****. No other person got into or used the car at all. To the extent that no one got into the car to even park it for us. the villa we stayed at was near Faro I believe. I collected the hire car upon arrival from the rental company at the airport in Faro and returned it to the same spot.
It had no damage to it at all. It was clean. I don't remember any marks or anything. The car was a people carrier with a rear storage area. It was a four door with tailgate boot door. We put suitcases for travelling to and from the airport and otherwise everyone I have mentioned that has travelled in the car has put golfing clothing and equipment. I had no problems with the car and did not need to change tyres or fill water up or anything. I think we travelled in the car alone. The car was a light colour. It was I believe a Renault car. I dropped the car off at the same place I hired it and picked it up on May 15th when I flew back to Luton, London. I generally followed Mr B****** around and he took us everywhere. One of the places we went to was TEVIRA. I can't remember the other places. The car was always left secure and locked to my knowledge.
Beyond the people named, at no point did we take any other baggage, belongings or property belonging to anyone else in the car. I have no idea how much I paid for the hire car. I think I paid for it by a Natwest access card but I am not totally sure. I did not do any other checks on the car or have trouble with it. I fully support police proceedings and I am willing to attend court should I be required to do so. I am sure also could provide further information from my papers at home if required.
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 12:15
Before anyone goes into overdrive, NO it's not the same Michael Wright connected to the McCann family. By way of confirmation, here is the witness statement given by the Michael Wright referred to in John Brown's statement..
Witness statement of Michael George Wright (previous Renault Scenic lessee) 2008.05.01
Deposition of: Michael G Wright
Age if less than 18 years:
Occupation: Retired
_______________________________________
This deposition (comprising 1 page and signed by me) is true and according to my understanding. I testify with the knowledge that, given evidence to the contrary, I will be subject to arrest in the case I have voluntarily testified about something that I know to be false or not to correspond to the truth.
I live at the address previously furnished to the Leicester police and I am currently retired.
In May 2007 I went to Portugal with my wife on a golfing trip known as Wycherts Springs Tour. We were 14 people on a trip organised by Roger Ga.
We were lodged in a house of one of the group members named David Be. and whose address is: Casa xxxxxxxxx, Rua Ricardo Filipe, Quinta das Raposeiras, Bordeira, Santa B?bara de Nexe.
Although the trip was organised by by Roger, it was I who reserved the flights for my wife and for me. Our friend John Brown organised the rental vehicle that we were going to use whilst we were in Portugal.
My wife and I caught the Easyjet flight from Luton to Faro on 8 May 2007. At the Faro airport John was to collect the rental car that he had reserved, on which I was added as additional driver. The car was used basically by me and my wife, by John and his wife. The only other person of the group who travelled in the vehicle during that week was Sra Ra.
I don't remember any detail of the car. I think it was a silver-grey Peugeot, but consulting the Budget rental contract I confirm that it was a Renault. The only memory that I have of the vehicle is that it did not have a key to start the ignition, but some kind of credit card that was inserted into a slot.
The car was returned to Rent-a-Car at the airport on 15 May 2007 at the end of our stay. But no-one other than John Brown and myself drove the vehicle during that week.
I am not known by the McCann family nor have I ever met with any of them.
During the period that I used the vehicle no-one was wounded or had wounds that bled, nor was any cadaver transported nor did anyone die.
This testimony was made by me and is true according to my understanding.
Witness statement of Michael George Wright (previous Renault Scenic lessee) 2008.05.01
Deposition of: Michael G Wright
Age if less than 18 years:
Occupation: Retired
_______________________________________
This deposition (comprising 1 page and signed by me) is true and according to my understanding. I testify with the knowledge that, given evidence to the contrary, I will be subject to arrest in the case I have voluntarily testified about something that I know to be false or not to correspond to the truth.
I live at the address previously furnished to the Leicester police and I am currently retired.
In May 2007 I went to Portugal with my wife on a golfing trip known as Wycherts Springs Tour. We were 14 people on a trip organised by Roger Ga.
We were lodged in a house of one of the group members named David Be. and whose address is: Casa xxxxxxxxx, Rua Ricardo Filipe, Quinta das Raposeiras, Bordeira, Santa B?bara de Nexe.
Although the trip was organised by by Roger, it was I who reserved the flights for my wife and for me. Our friend John Brown organised the rental vehicle that we were going to use whilst we were in Portugal.
My wife and I caught the Easyjet flight from Luton to Faro on 8 May 2007. At the Faro airport John was to collect the rental car that he had reserved, on which I was added as additional driver. The car was used basically by me and my wife, by John and his wife. The only other person of the group who travelled in the vehicle during that week was Sra Ra.
I don't remember any detail of the car. I think it was a silver-grey Peugeot, but consulting the Budget rental contract I confirm that it was a Renault. The only memory that I have of the vehicle is that it did not have a key to start the ignition, but some kind of credit card that was inserted into a slot.
The car was returned to Rent-a-Car at the airport on 15 May 2007 at the end of our stay. But no-one other than John Brown and myself drove the vehicle during that week.
I am not known by the McCann family nor have I ever met with any of them.
During the period that I used the vehicle no-one was wounded or had wounds that bled, nor was any cadaver transported nor did anyone die.
This testimony was made by me and is true according to my understanding.
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 12:32
02 CARTAS ROGATIAS 2 PAGE 110
From the Letter of Request:
VI - Interview to the below identified individuals that had rented the Renault Scenic vehicle, number plate 59-DA-27 before GERALD MCCANN :
* JOHN BROWN, 16, HoXXX - GrXXX, MiXXXX - GrXXX BrXXXX MIXXXX, England, as well as MICHAEL WRIGHT, additional driver, at the same address.
Page 110
* ADRIAN ROBERT LOWES, 14 WoXXXXXXX ROXX - Barnard Castle, England, as well as RUTH AMANDA LOWES, additional driver, at the same address.
* KENNETH ARTHUR WALDEN, 37 LOXXXXXXXXXX RoXX, Walton Le Wolds, IEXX 8 XX, England.
* JOHN GRAY PATERSON, ThXXXXXXXX- TIXXXXXXXXXX, PAXX 2XX, England, as well as DR. GEORGE JEREMY THOMPSON, additional driver and holder of the driving licence THOMS30XXXX, issued on February 14th, 2007, in the UK.
* SIMON JOHN HALDER, 43 DE TAXX CoXXX, St Albans, England, as well as RAYMOND SMITH DUNCAN, additional driver and holder of the driving licence SMITH50XXXX, issued on January 24th, 2000, in the UK.
The aforementioned individuals should be asked as follows :
* Do you confirm having rented this vehicle ? Under what circumstances did you rent it ?
* Can you remember the date on which you signed the contract ?
* Are you acquainted with the MCCANN family ? If yes, what sort of relationship do you have with them ?
* Have you ever transported anyone dying or wounded, namely ble*ding ?
* Any further questions deemed useful, necessary or pertinent in view of the previous replies.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm
----------
It can be clearly seen from the files, the PJ thoroughly investigated the history of the Renault Scenic rental prior to Gerry McCann, in accordance with standard policing. I have no reason to doubt the integrity of the PJ on this issue - unless anyone prefers to think the PJ as the bungling sardine munching beer swilling disgraced cops, as so insolently portrayed by the UK press.
I see no reason to presume that Gerry McCann, or any one of his 'circle', hired the Renault Scenic prior to the contract recorded in the PJ files - even less evidence to suggest it was hired 'just in case', because a corpse had been previously transported in the car.
| cr2_110 |
 |
VI - Interview to the below identified individuals that had rented the Renault Scenic vehicle, number plate 59-DA-27 before GERALD MCCANN :
* JOHN BROWN, 16, HoXXX - GrXXX, MiXXXX - GrXXX BrXXXX MIXXXX, England, as well as MICHAEL WRIGHT, additional driver, at the same address.
Page 110
* ADRIAN ROBERT LOWES, 14 WoXXXXXXX ROXX - Barnard Castle, England, as well as RUTH AMANDA LOWES, additional driver, at the same address.
* KENNETH ARTHUR WALDEN, 37 LOXXXXXXXXXX RoXX, Walton Le Wolds, IEXX 8 XX, England.
* JOHN GRAY PATERSON, ThXXXXXXXX- TIXXXXXXXXXX, PAXX 2XX, England, as well as DR. GEORGE JEREMY THOMPSON, additional driver and holder of the driving licence THOMS30XXXX, issued on February 14th, 2007, in the UK.
* SIMON JOHN HALDER, 43 DE TAXX CoXXX, St Albans, England, as well as RAYMOND SMITH DUNCAN, additional driver and holder of the driving licence SMITH50XXXX, issued on January 24th, 2000, in the UK.
The aforementioned individuals should be asked as follows :
* Do you confirm having rented this vehicle ? Under what circumstances did you rent it ?
* Can you remember the date on which you signed the contract ?
* Are you acquainted with the MCCANN family ? If yes, what sort of relationship do you have with them ?
* Have you ever transported anyone dying or wounded, namely ble*ding ?
* Any further questions deemed useful, necessary or pertinent in view of the previous replies.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/59-DA-27.htm
----------
It can be clearly seen from the files, the PJ thoroughly investigated the history of the Renault Scenic rental prior to Gerry McCann, in accordance with standard policing. I have no reason to doubt the integrity of the PJ on this issue - unless anyone prefers to think the PJ as the bungling sardine munching beer swilling disgraced cops, as so insolently portrayed by the UK press.
I see no reason to presume that Gerry McCann, or any one of his 'circle', hired the Renault Scenic prior to the contract recorded in the PJ files - even less evidence to suggest it was hired 'just in case', because a corpse had been previously transported in the car.
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 12:32
So that blows the obfuscation theory.
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by JohnyT 19.03.17 13:33
? I don't know.......I was just giving you my interpretation of your post.
JohnyT
JohnyT- Posts : 354
Activity : 507
Likes received : 139
Join date : 2014-06-01
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by winslow boy 19.03.17 16:45
Hi I was looking to see who hired it 28th April - 7th May which is not in your list. Just putting it out there if it had been used nearby. If the MC&%%£ had used it and knew (because if they were being informed cadaver dogs were going to be used- they WERE coming from Britain ) this it would be hard to explain their DNA being present in the car. Ge&$^ was reportably sick when he had to go on that trip, was it because they couldn't get that car that day. The car couldn't be lost or burnt as it would draw too much attention to the people that hired it. Nobody smelt a cadaver in the appartment and it had been there some time as reported by others. Only the dogs detected it as only dogs can. The leaving the boot open, red herring, if you've ever smelt a cadaver it's a very strong smell that any policeman would recognise instantly,therefore the smell wasn't detectable by humans.BlueBag wrote:I don't think that the McCanns hiring the car to obfuscate the DNA makes much sense.
Why draw any attention to the car at all?
Anyway... previous renters:
Apri 02 to 12 Adrian Robert Lowes
May 08 to 15 John Brown
May 17 to 22 Fernando Aldolfo Vilela
May 23 to 26 Enawgaw Mengistate
May 27 to .. Gerry McCann
I think John Brown has been discussed here before.
I don't think it was Gordon Brown's brother.
Also, do you think Fernando and Enawgaw (what a name) might have noticed a smell?
If their DNA (G & K) was found in the car then it would have opened a whole new investigation,they had never mentioned driving any where on that Holiday. Is this the reason they had to come back even though they were under suspicion IMO
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by Guest 19.03.17 20:15
Not my list.Hi I was looking to see who hired it 28th April - 7th May which is not in your list.
The PJ list.
And the answer is nobody.
OK?
Guest- Guest
Re: Blood in the boot of the McCanns' hire car
by winslow boy 19.03.17 20:33
Ok, didn't know if I'd read somewhere that it was a golfer from g^£*% golf club. Must be mistaken, Many Thanks CheersBlueBag wrote:Not my list.Hi I was looking to see who hired it 28th April - 7th May which is not in your list.
The PJ list.
And the answer is nobody.
OK?
winslow boy- Posts : 16
Activity : 17
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2017-03-18
Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Similar topics» Blood found in McCanns' hire car 'DID come from Madeleine'
» Two top UK Dogs who alerted to blood and cadaver odour in McCanns’ apartment and hire car had never been wrong in 200 previous outings.
» 'SUMMONS' magazine found in the boot of the McCann's hire car
» Statement analyst, expert in lying and deception, Mark McClish, says Sandy Cameron's statement about 'blood' and 'a foul smell in the boot of the Scenic' ' NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION'
» Dr Vernon Coleman: Former GP and Police Surgeon
» Two top UK Dogs who alerted to blood and cadaver odour in McCanns’ apartment and hire car had never been wrong in 200 previous outings.
» 'SUMMONS' magazine found in the boot of the McCann's hire car
» Statement analyst, expert in lying and deception, Mark McClish, says Sandy Cameron's statement about 'blood' and 'a foul smell in the boot of the Scenic' ' NEEDS FURTHER EXAMINATION'
» Dr Vernon Coleman: Former GP and Police Surgeon
Page 1 of 3
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
