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

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

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

Forensics Revisited

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 25.10.17 16:54

I don't think there is any doubt that Eddie was a cadaver dog.

"Victim recovery dog".

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

Cadaver is mentioned 31 times in this report.

CADAVER SCENT

The odour target of cadaver is scientifically explained through 'volatile organic
compounds' that in a certain configuration are received by the dog as a
receptor. Recognition then gives a conditioned response 'ALERT'. Despite
considerable research and analytical investigation the compounds cannot as
yet be replicated in laboratory processes. Therefore the 'alert' by dogs without
a tangible source cannot be forensically proven at this time. Cadaver scent
cannot readily be removed by cleaning as the compounds adhere to surfaces.
The scent can be 'masked' by bleach and other strong smelling odours but
the dog's olfactory system is able to isolate the odours and identify specific
compounds' and mixes. Cadaver scent contamination may be transferred in
numerous scenarios. Any contact with a cadaver which is then passed to any
other material may be recognised by the dog causing a 'trigger' indication.

Yes I know the report says that Eddie reacts to body fluids and blood but nobody in the reports thinks its only blood.

They have included some examples of Eddie's track records and it's always dead bodies.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 25.10.17 17:04

Also... Eddie indicated in places where Keela didnt.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by MayMuse on 25.10.17 17:19

I agree Eddie was brought in as the EVRD ...to detect cadaver...of which he is most known for,  Keela for human blood... 

I do not believe that Keela was sent in after Eddie because Eddie detected blood behind the sofa...he detected cadaverine odour in that area and other locations, even outside in the garden area.....he sniffed all over the sofa, the back of the sofa in the corner, in the air  etc because he was "in scent" . Keela alert to human blood confirmed its presence under the tiles. 


Interestingly McCann and their followers try to discount in such a way as to undermine the cleverness,and training of the dogs and their handler in their accuracy! 

Now if an anaesthesiologist kept losing patients or they were waking mid op,  then that could be considered very unreliable couldnt it?

____________________
“Basically, I’m just an ordinary, straightforward guy who’s the victim of the biggest f***-up on this planet – if you’ll excuse the language.”

Robert Murat talking to David Jones, Daily Mail, 02 June 2007

MayMuse

Posts : 1717
Reputation : 1236
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

McCann's internet Trolls

Post by willowthewisp on 25.10.17 17:49

@MayMuse wrote:I agree Eddie was brought in as the EVRD ...to detect cadaver...of which he is most known for,  Keela for human blood... 

I do not believe that Keela was sent in after Eddie because Eddie detected blood behind the sofa...he detected cadaverine odour in that area and other locations, even outside in the garden area.....he sniffed all over the sofa, the back of the sofa in the corner, in the air  etc because he was "in scent" . Keela alert to human blood confirmed its presence under the tiles. 


Interestingly McCann and their followers try to discount in such a way as to undermine the cleverness,and training of the dogs and their handler in their accuracy! 

Now if an anaesthesiologist kept losing patients or they were waking mid op,  then that could be considered very unreliable couldnt it?
That's why they had the big mallett,approach,thwack,they're fine?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1986
Reputation : 791
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by MayMuse on 25.10.17 19:36

A good read, where should trust be placed, in Daddy or the Dogs? 
http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/Daddy_or_the_Dogs_.html

____________________
“Basically, I’m just an ordinary, straightforward guy who’s the victim of the biggest f***-up on this planet – if you’ll excuse the language.”

Robert Murat talking to David Jones, Daily Mail, 02 June 2007

MayMuse

Posts : 1717
Reputation : 1236
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Casey5 on 25.10.17 20:09

Any parent who had a missing three year old child and was informed by the police that sniffer dogs had scented cadaver and blood in the same place their daughter had vanished from would never in a million years react like the McCanns did imo.
Imagine the devastation you would feel, the utter horror and desolation of being caught up in a nightmare that never ends.
And then there's the McCanns, Kate wittering on about people being inherently good and Gerry smugly saying "ask the dogs, Sandra" and calling the dogs "incredibly unreliable".
These red flags should have been noticed immediately, this is SO not how ordinary parents would react.

Casey5

Posts : 339
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by MayMuse on 25.10.17 20:16

@Phoebe wrote:Without hard evidence in the form of an actual body Eddie and Keela's findings of cadaver odour and blood in 5A are something which lead to interpretation of what this fact means. The P.J. and Dr. Amarel were of the opinion that this indicated -

"From the OFFICIAL POLICE FILES

10 September 2007
(Processo: VOL ,X, p. 2587-2602)


"....we conclude that:

- The minor Madeleine McCann DIED in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of May 3rd of 2007

 - It was performed a SIMULATION of kidnapping;
 
 - Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are INVOLVED in the occultation of the cadaver of their child Madeleine McCann;...


If we accept the Portuguese police conclusion above then it is reasonable to say that Madeleine's corpse was indeed in 5A for a period, which seems to be the crux of the dispute upthread. Where exactly in the apartment that corpse lay we cannot be sure but it does seem fairly reasonable to connect its position with the cadaver odour alerts methinks.


______________________________________________________________


Title of thread:  McCanns and the Internet Trolls


Back on topic please.  Mod
Im confused, can the dogs be discussed on this thread as it has been?

____________________
“Basically, I’m just an ordinary, straightforward guy who’s the victim of the biggest f***-up on this planet – if you’ll excuse the language.”

Robert Murat talking to David Jones, Daily Mail, 02 June 2007

MayMuse

Posts : 1717
Reputation : 1236
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Forensics Revisited

Post by JohnyT on 25.10.17 20:35

@Verdi wrote:
@MayMuse wrote:Considering I have read the reports, and have never blown anything out of proportion! 
Let's get this in perspective...
Yes, let's. 

You can't just pluck out random passages from the forensic reports to prove a point - that's not how it works.  The whole subject of the forensic evidence has to be taken into consideration and thus put into perspective, before selecting appropriate text for the purpose of commentary.  This is why I initially said that it will take time considering the length, detail and complexity of the subject as regards the disapearance of Madeleine McCann.

Concerning the subject of forensics, my original response to a fellow member's post related only to the following statement, I quote  ".... the dogs indicated that a body had lain in the apartment long enough for cadaverine to be detected by dogs, cadaverine that was also found on certain items of clothing....".

This statement is fundamentally incorrect, which I have been trying (without much success it would seem) to redress.  I totally understand why the particular phraseology was used but that's beside the point.  CMoMM is read by the thousands - members and guests - it only takes one incorrect statement or facetious comment to set the tongues wagging.  Anyone who has followed this case on the various fora and blogs will be aware of how quickly a false claim will grow legs and then roam around cyberspace for eternity - the cyber grapevine whisper .  Trouble being that there are many people out there who have nothing better to do than propagate lies and rubbish in order to distort or distract from the truth.

So yes, let's do just starting with the dogs credentials ..

EVRD

'Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.R.D.) will search for and
locate human remains and body fluids including blood
in any environment or
terrain.

CSI HUMAN BLOOD DETECTING DOG

'Keela' The Crime Scene Investigation (C.S.I.) dog will search for and locate
exclusively human blood.

Stop there for a moment to ponder the dogs training, in particular the Enhanced Victim Recover Dog.  This is not a case of bark once for cadavarine bark twice for blood bark thrice for body fluid etc, we can leave that sort of nonsense at the door of the likes of the drole humorist - Clement Freud.

Moving on .. for the moment concentrating only on the dogs inspection of apartment 5a, follow the finger print trail..

Verbal Report by Martin Grime Relating to the Searches Carried out with the Dogs in the Ocean Club Apartments

Apartment 5 A


Ok what was done was we deployed the victim recovery dog into the apartment and by experience and the training of the dog what I first noticed is that as soon as I came in that the dog was very excited and as a handler I can pick up his body language etc and it would appear to me that as soon as he has come into the house he's picked up a scent that he recognises and he has then gone through the apartment trying to source where that scent source has come from and as he has worked through the house the only two places where he picks up enough scent to give me the bark alert are in this bedroom, in this corner where he was barking.

What we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn't a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner. But strong indication and I would say its positive for things that he is trained to find, which will be part of a separate debrief.

Moving onto the other rooms once he's found what he thinks he's looking for in this room, and we go into the bathroom and come into this bedroom he loses his interest because he's actually found the source that he was looking for, until we come over here and I think you've got it on video that when he first came in he was quite interested in the sofa but he didn't have access to the back of the sofa and when he's gone behind the sofa what I saw was that approximately in the centre of the wall where the window is, just along the tile area between the tiles and the wall, he's been scenting there a lot stronger than he has anywhere else and the when he's gone out there the second time he has decided yes that's what I'm looking for and that's when he has given me the bark indication.

What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.

The second dog that we've seen work today is the crime scene dog Keela. She will only indicate to me when she has found human blood, only human blood and it is only blood and there must be something there physically for her to be able to alert to me that's she has actually found something. At this point over here where the victim recovery dog has indicated, as you saw on the video, the crime scene dog had actually given me what we call a passive indication where she freezes in this spot here which would indicate to me that there is some human blood there. She will find blood that's historically very old and she will find anybody's blood, any human blood, which is important to make sure that everybody knows.
----------

All five apartments were searched using the EVRD. The only alert indications were at apartment 5a, the reported scene.

The EVRD alerted in the rear bedroom of the apartment in the immediate right hand corner by the door.

Living room, behind sofa.


Veranda outside parent's bedroom.

Garden area directly under veranda.

My observation of the dog's behaviour in this instance was that the dog's behaviour changed immediately upon opening the front door to the apartment.He will normally remain in the sit position until released and tasked to search. On this occasion he broke the stay and entered the apartment with an aboveaverage interest. His behaviour was such that I believed him to be 'in scent' and I therefore allowed him to free search without direction to allow him to identify the source of his interest. He did so alerting in the rear bedroom.

I released him from this and tasked him to continue to search. He did so alerting in an area to the rear of the sofa in the lounge. The dog's behaviour for these alerts led me to the following opinions:

MINISTERIO PUBLICO DE PORTIMAO

The first alert was given with the dogs head in the air without a positive area being identified. This is the alert given by him when there is no tangible evidence to be located only the remaining scent.

The second alert was one where a definitive area was evident. The CSI dog was therefore deployed who gave specific alert indications to specific areas on the tiled floor area behind the sofa and on the curtain in the area that was in contact with the floor behind the sofa. This would indicate to the likely presence of human blood.

The forensic science support officers were then deployed to recover items for laboratory analysis.

There were no alert indications from the remaining properties. I did however see the dog search in the kitchen waste bins. These contained meat foodstuffs including pork and did not result in any false alert response.
-----

It's all here in the link I previously posted..

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

I think that's enough for the moment.  Pay particular attention to the EVRD dogs training, his reaction to the crime scene and the two alerts in apartment 5a living area where both Eddie and Keela alerted.  Do you think Eddie was alerting to blood residue or cadavarine - or more to the point is it debatable?

As I think I've said before, this area is better left to those with knowledge of forensic science - otherwise the subject is grossly misunderstood/misinterpreted.  One thing relative to the subject however is open to discussion .... why was Leicestershire Constabulary, John Lowe and the UK's prestigious Forensic Science Service involved with a Portuguese investigation?  Why did every sample submitted to the FSS for analysis produce a negative result?
Wow what a coincidence....of all the other apartments searched by the dogs......someone only ever 'cut' themselves or bled in apartment 5a...................
JohnyT
Save

Save

JohnyT

Posts : 197
Reputation : 91
Join date : 2014-06-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Julie on 25.10.17 21:14

I don't know about anyone else but I wholeheartedly trust Eddie and Keela. Highly trained dogs who alerted to specific things the GNR dogs did not. 

The GNR dogs were 'agitated' by appartment 5J - later to have discovered that there were 'rotting meat and vegetables' in an 'open' fridge. This topic has led to thoughts that possibly food was deliberately put into the appartment to offset cadaverine..  I believe that if there was any trace of cadaverine in 5J that Eddie would have alerted. I therefore dismiss any idea of Madeleine being hidden in 5J (sorry hope I'm not going off topic here).

One thing that always sticks in my mind with regards to the dog searches is that: "In six years operational deployment in over 200 cases the dog has never alerted to meat based foodstuffs".  Something which I think should be kept in mind. Seabass and dirty nappies not Eddies thang. Neither is rotting meat n veg (possibly) placed in a fridge to attract/divert attention.


 http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

Julie

Posts : 43
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2016-04-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 26.10.17 7:03

Martin Grime in his report absolutely rules out rotting food and he gives the reasons why.

These dogs were good.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 28.10.17 13:04

Inspired by Jim Gamble and his Pavlov's Dog revelation.

Why were the forensic samples harvested, following Eddie and Keela's haunting investigation in Praia da Luz, sent to the UK's Forensic Science Service for analysis?

Analysis that proved fruitless.  Out of all the samples - not one??? 

Although I've had the technicalities of such analysis dumped on me from a great height by some pseudo scientist, somehow I find this very suspicious.

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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 28.10.17 13:38

Analysis that proved fruitless.  Out of all the samples - not one???  

Wasn't it the interpretation of the analysis that proved fruitless?
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Doug D on 28.10.17 14:09

Doesn’t answer Verdi's question of why the FSS were used (did the UK team volunteer them?), but I found the FSS stuff in the Stephen Lawrence case very interesting.
 
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14634-in-pursuit-of-the-truth-by-dci-clive-driscoll#376170
 
(P305)
 
Although Driscoll was talking about 1993, so much earlier, the forensic examination appeared to be very much on a ‘jobsworth’ basis, which is why he took it away from them in 2006. Whether this was down to being government funded and therefore having to justify every expense, rather than a private company just getting on with it and charging for the time spent, is of course down to conjecture.
 
He doesn’t say so, but logically must have had other poor experiences from them to take such action and from the evidence handed over, the new private forensics company managed to find the needed evidence.
 
Although the FSS initially tried to resist handing over the Lawrence exhibits, which had been held since 1993, there was no talk of any evidence having been destroyed because of biological reasons, so what was different about the MM case? Most ‘cold case’ reviews have been based on technical and scientific advances, so surely the policy should have been ‘keep everything just in case’.
 
A couple of years ago we heard (officially?) that the PJ were sending more evidence for forensic analysis, but since then, nothing. I’ll have to have another look at what was said at the time and by whom.

Doug D

Posts : 2458
Reputation : 847
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 28.10.17 21:22

The Truth of the Lie - Goncalo Amaral

PRELIMINARY RESULTS
PREPARATION FOR THE INTERROGATIONS

Analyses of the residues collected following the visit by the dogs is entrusted to the English Forensic Science Service laboratory. To avoid any leaks of information, Stuart Prior, a senior officer with Leicestershire police, is responsible for liaison between the laboratory and José Freitas of Scotland Yard. The latter, who is with us, in Portimão, is passing on any relevant reports.

We confidently wait for the evaluation reports from FSS. A few days after the samples are sent, we are informed that the DNA of the blood found in the boot of the McCanns’ car shows a significant match – 50% – with Gerald’s, which means that it is definitely the blood of one of his children. We telephone the public minister to pass on this initial result and wait for the follow-up to the analyses and definite conclusions But the laboratory takes its time.

At the beginning of September, shortly before the McCann couple are placed under investigation, Superintendent Stuart Prior travels to Portimão to present the first of the two preliminary reports from the laboratory and to discuss the progress of the investigation.

At a meeting in our office, with the Portuguese and the English investigation team, Stuart expresses his disappointment over the test results. This is where the saga of the FSS reports begins. We read the part of the report dealing with the traces of blood lifted from the floor of apartment 5A, from behind the sofa and in the boot of the McCanns’ car and we don’t agree with  Stuart’s disappointment.   We talk about blood traces because the CSI dog is trained to find only that bodily fluid. The reports that support that decision are clear: the CSI dog was used to detect human blood. Low Copy Number, the technique used to determine the DNA of the samples, does not identify the nature of the bodily fluid they are derived from. But we know it’s definitely traces of blood and not other bodily fluids since the CSI dog is trained to detect only human blood.

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!.

As for the second case, after an explanation about the DNA components in Madeleine’s genetic profile, it concludes that 15 out of 19 markers in Madeleine’s profile are present in the sample examined. Only 4 short of 100% reliability. The FSS specialists qualify the results as, “complex,” and state that these 15 markers are not enough to conclude with certainty that it’s definitely Madeleine’s DNA profile, especially as Low Copy Number picked out a total of 37 in the sample. That means that at least three individuals contributed to this result.

But there was more in this first preliminary report. In the same report, the scientist went further and explained that in the profiles of many of the lab experts, elements from the DNA profile of Madeleine are present. This means that a major part of the DNA profile of any given person can be built by three donors. That is understandable. Two questions arose immediately. The first one: what good is a DNA profile in terms of criminal evidence, if it can be the combination of three or more donors? Another question was simple: why did the DNA profile from those three donors contribute to Madeleine’s DNA profile and not to that of any other person, like the scientist who carried out the test? But the surprises from the preliminary reports were not to end there.

On the very day that interrogation of the McCann couple starts, a second preliminary report reaches us. Contrary to the first report, it accords more importance to the DNA profile of the blood lifted from the floor of the apartment. In that sample, the DNA came from more than one donor, but the confirmed DNA components match the corresponding components of Madeleine’s DNA profile.

As for the samples lifted from the boot of the car, there is no further mention of the 15 markers, as if they had never existed.

Suddenly, light was starting to be cast on the issue:either this LCN technique is not reliable or it’s simply much easier to explain the presence of Madeleine’s DNA in the apartment than in the boot of a car hired 24 days after her disappearance.

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.

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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 28.10.17 21:27

The Truth of the Lie - Goncalo amaral


HARVESTING OF THE SAMPLES DERIVED FROM THE SPECIALIST DOGS’ INSPECTIONS


So that the items of evidence might constitute admissible proof, the harvesting and packing must conform to the rules avoiding all risk of deterioration and contamination. It is experts from our police forensic laboratory who carry out the harvesting. The minuscule traces cannot be gathered in situ, so the tiling is gently lifted out before being transferred to the Forensic Science Laboratory in Birmingham. Photos bear witness to every stage of the operation. For added security, it is the expert responsible for the collection who takes them to FSS on the morning of August 7th. The choice of this laboratory is not insignificant. Apart from their use of cutting-edge technologies – LCN (Low Copy Number) a DNA identification test, used particularly when only microscopic samples are available -, the results, whatever they might be will not be able to be contested by the British since it’s one of their most reliable laboratories. All other items of evidence gathered – the keys to the McCanns’ car, hair and traces of blood found in the boot – are also sent to England.

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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 28.10.17 23:08

It's important here to bear in mind the source of the 'clean' DNA reference sample used - the pillow case said to be used by Madeleine, allegedly collected from the McCanns Rothley home, during one of Gerald McCann's early visits to the UK in May 2007, for the purpose of a DNA profile  Particularly how it was packaged for transportation between the Rothley home and the forensic laboratories.  The chain of passage between May and September 2007 would be very interesting to learn, as would the choice of article for a 'clean' reference sample.

I would have thought an item of clothing, under garments for example, that had been in direct contact with Madeleine's skin would be more appropriate.  Not a pillowcase that could have been compromised by any number of contaminants.

I think Stuart 'call me Stu' Prior has got some explaining to do.

This all leaves me to believe that the UK authorities, i.e. the police, were responsible for the decision for the forensic reference samples to be analyzed by the UK's Forensic Science Service.

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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 29.10.17 0:29


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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 29.10.17 0:39

Examination and results

Reference objects

I received [obtained] information from the pillow-case SJM/1, the tops SJM2, 4 and 5, and the hairbrush SJM/36 belonging to Madeleine McCann or used by her. The hair found on these objects was used in substitution of [in place of] reference samples of her hair, [which were] not considered to be authentic samples of her hair.

No hair was recovered from the pillow-case SJM/1 nor the hairbrush SJM/36.

A total number of twelve [12] hairs or hair fragments were recovered from the tops SJM/2, SJM/4 and SJM/5. All of these appeared to be hair and not down, being mainly blonde in colour. One of the hairs was brown and distinctly darker than the other hairs, suggesting, at the least, that this was a hair from someone else.

The remaining eleven hairs/fragments varied in length from 4 millimetres to 45 millimetres [~1/8" to ~1,3/4"]. I could not conclude that all hairs were from the same person. If they had been from Madeleine McCann, then they are not representative/typical/characteristic of a sample of her hair, given the length of that seen in photographs of her.

----------


Which photograph?  Forensic science at it's finest?

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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 29.10.17 0:45

@BlueBag wrote:I don't think there is any doubt that Eddie was a cadaver dog.
I don't think anyone has suggested that Eddie isn't a cadaver dog - at least not on CMoMM.

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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 29.10.17 7:59

@Verdi wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:I don't think there is any doubt that Eddie was a cadaver dog.
I don't think anyone has suggested that Eddie isn't a cadaver dog - at least not on CMoMM.
I was just worried that people saw that he alerted to blood as a get-out.

The context of Grimes Report is clear.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 29.10.17 11:23

@BlueBag wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:I don't think there is any doubt that Eddie was a cadaver dog.
I don't think anyone has suggested that Eddie isn't a cadaver dog - at least not on CMoMM.
I was just worried that people saw that he alerted to blood as a get-out.

The context of Grimes Report is clear.
I take you point, it could well have looked that way to a casual observer who is not familiar with the consensus of opinion of CMoMM as regards the dog alerts.

A storm was whipped-up by a hysterical reaction.  If, as I asked in the first place, the words were read in context this temporary distraction could have been avoided.  Still, hopefully that's in the past.

The point is of course, Eddie the EVRD dog alerted to the scent of cadavar and Keela the CSI dog alerted to the scent of blood in apartment 5a - logical conclusion under the circumstances that the evidence was connected to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.  More importantly, as I've before questioned and am again trying to establish - why were the forensic samples alerted by the dogs from apartment 5a and the hired Renault Scenic, sent to the UK's FSS for analysis.  Why with all their alleged advanced technology in the field of forensic analysis were they unable to produce one single meaningful result - as recorded in John Lowe's final report!?!

I recall it being said there were numerous laboratories across Europe, more local to Portugal, with similar expertise.  I believe it was Snr Amaral.  I was trying to find the quote last night, hence the deluge of random reports I found along the way.  All of which relate to John Lowe and the FSS.

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

Posts : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by JRP on 29.10.17 14:44

Is it plausible that the PJ decided to use a UK lab because if the results had returned positive and helped to gain a conviction, the British public would be more inclined to believe a British lab?

Snipped from Verdi above,

The remaining eleven hairs/fragments varied in length from 4 millimetres to 45 millimetres [~1/8" to ~1,3/4"]. I could not conclude that all hairs were from the same person. If they had been from Madeleine McCann, then they are not representative/typical/characteristic of a sample of her hair, given the length of that seen in photographs of her.
----------


Which photograph?  Forensic science at it's finest?


I understand the comment, it would have been interesting to see which photo they compared the hair length to. But 1/8th of an inch is clipper length, I've not seen a photo of Madeleine with a crew cut. The 1 3/4 inch length is also a lot shorter than any published photo.


With regard to another point you made Verdi, about Madeleine's clothes being a good source of DNA, why were they not used?

JRP

Posts : 552
Reputation : 498
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by nglfi on 29.10.17 16:38

Its shocking how badly this aspect of the case was handled by the British police. The media does nothing but hound the PJ, but why is it never publicised that one of the supposedly best police forces in the world was unable or more likely unwilling to provide a simple DNA sample from Madeleine to match it with that obtained from the apartment? So there was nothing at all in the McCanns property which belonged exclusively to Madeleine? Hairbrush, clothing, toys, toothbrush, sponge, anything?
Coupled with the fact that they refused to provide ant credit card details for either parent or medical records for Madeleine. They look like the shoddy outfit to me.

nglfi

Posts : 477
Reputation : 215
Join date : 2014-01-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Casey5 on 29.10.17 17:49

nglfi:-
"So there was nothing at all in the McCanns property which belonged exclusively to Madeleine? Hairbrush, clothing, toys, toothbrush, sponge, anything"

Madeleine's underwear, socks etc was available but wasn't it the British Ambassador who said the PJ weren't to remove the McCanns' laundry in case the press thought the McCanns were under suspicion? And lo and behold the next day all their laundry was sent to Mark Warner laundry. In itself a damning episode because Kate and Gerry would then have nothing with the scent of their missing daughter on it to hold and sniff and keep.
So why did they get rid of it so early, what was the rush I wonder?

Casey5

Posts : 339
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Phoebe on 29.10.17 18:44

I can half accept that there was no guarantee that one of the twins hadn't accidentally used Madeleine's toothbrush or that it could have been cross-contaminated by touching other toothbrushes and therefore it might have been awkward to get a clean D.N.A. sample from this source. (Did Kate really claim all the children shared a toothbrush or is that a myth?) Ditto for a hairbrush. However, one would have expected her pillow-case in Luz to have yielded results. After all, it was a pillow case from home which eventually provided a sample. Odd that this didn't happen, even allowing for a change of bed-linen on Wednesday morning. As Verdi points out her clothing, particularly under-garments should have provided easy access. There almost seems to have been a deliberate delaying tactic in securing a sample of Madeleine's D.N.A for comparison.
avatar
Phoebe

Posts : 547
Reputation : 616
Join date : 2017-03-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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