Alternative Theorizing

crusader wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The tile, curtain and sofa samples were sent to Forensic Science Services in Birmingham.

John Lowe of FSS, said in his report that the DNA result from the back of the sofa,appeared to have originated from at least 3 people, 2 of which were male.

There was no evidence to support the view that Gerry or Madeleine contributed DNA to the result.

You can read the full report in the PJ files Here: The Dogs- F.S.S. portuguese forensics.

F.S.S. John Lowe report.

cookiemuncher wrote:

crusader wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The tile, curtain and sofa samples were sent to Forensic Science Services in Birmingham.

John Lowe of FSS, said in his report that the DNA result from the back of the sofa,appeared to have originated from at least 3 people, 2 of which were male.

There was no evidence to support the view that Gerry or Madeleine contributed DNA to the result.

You can read the full report in the PJ files Here: The Dogs- F.S.S. portuguese forensics.

F.S.S. John Lowe report.

Wasn't the FSS closed down shortly after Gordon Brown visited it, I'm doing this all from memory so you'll have to forgive me if I get things wrong.

I also remember Goncala Amaral doing an interview many years ago and he said the one thing he regretted was that they sent the samples to the FSS, does anyone else remember that?

crusader wrote:@ cookiemuncher    In chapter 18 of GA book when he talks about the FSS results, I believe he is talking about the first preliminary results.

Anyone reading the book, without reading through the results in the PJ files will be led to believe that Madeleine's blood was on the sofa, floor and curtains.

According to the FSS, there is no evidence to support this.

Have you read the report? It is very interesting. It also gives the report on the hire car.

crusader wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The tile, curtain and sofa samples were sent to Forensic Science Services in Birmingham.

John Lowe of FSS, said in his report that the DNA result from the back of the sofa,appeared to have originated from at least 3 people, 2 of which were male.

There was no evidence to support the view that Gerry or Madeleine contributed DNA to the result.

You can read the full report in the PJ files Here: The Dogs- F.S.S. portuguese forensics.

F.S.S. John Lowe report.

crusader wrote:I do remember GA saying something along those lines, cant at the moment remember where I saw it. He said he sent the samples to the UK so there wouldn't be any suspicions about the results,he said they had excellent science services in Portugal, something along those lines anyway. 

I believe GA is a man of great integrity,  if it is ever proved that what was sent to the PJ from FSS I will give up.

Have you read the FSS report in the PJ files.

crusader wrote:Ok, I can see I'm flogging a dead horse, we will have to disagree on the FSS forensics.

I'm sure I read somewhere a list of non perishable items sent back to the PJ from FSS.

cookiemuncher wrote:

crusader wrote:I do remember GA saying something along those lines, cant at the moment remember where I saw it. He said he sent the samples to the UK so there wouldn't be any suspicions about the results,he said they had excellent science services in Portugal, something along those lines anyway. 

I believe GA is a man of great integrity,  if it is ever proved that what was sent to the PJ from FSS I will give up.

Have you read the FSS report in the PJ files.

It'l s all in Chapter 19 in GA's book that I gave a link to.  Yes, he said they sent the samples to the UK as they didn't want any suspicion arising about the results.

I believe the DNA was destroyed by the FSS as they said they can only keep results for a short while (how convenient), again I'm going by my memory from a long time ago.

No I haven't read the FSS report, but GA wrote his book and included his thoughts on the FSS files, as I said, I would believe him over the FSS that was owned by the UK government that were working against the PJ.

Destruction of Samples

Investigating officer. Stuart Prior

A  -  Perishable samples.

Certain samples constitute a potential health risk. With the concurrence of the Home Office, it has been decided that such samples will not be submitted to the courts unless specifically requested by the Defence. (This is an extension of the procedures for the disposal of blood samples previously agreed by the Lord Chief Justice, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the former Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.

The laboratory has examined one or more of the samples listed below. They will not be returned to you but will be destroyed in due course unless we are requested by the Defence to preserve them. You should notify the Defence solicitors in accordance with Home Office circulars 40/73 and 74/82 which allow a period of 21 days in which notice in writing must be given, by the defendant or his legal representative to the laboratory to prevent the samples being destroyed.

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

The above list includes perishable personal samples, the destruction of which is required by Section 64 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984).

B  -  Non-Perishable samples

The destruction of other, non-perishable personal samples is required by Section 64 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act. These include:

- Control head hair samples.
- Control pubic hair samples.
- Finger nail samples.
- Casts- e.g of teeth or feet.

Except as below those non-perishable personal samples are returned to you as parts of exhibits for production at court, etc. The laboratory is not responsible for their destruction.

The part of these samples which were removed for examination, will be retained by the laboratory for the period of time as specified in the MOU for Retained Materials (3, 7 or 30 years) from the date of this notice to allow access to other legitimate parties. After this period, in the absence of written instruction to the contrary, the retained samples will be destroyed and a record made of their destruction.

Signed.

Dated 21st August 2007.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

crusader wrote:Don't hold back cookiemuncher, say whats on your mind.
As a Deluded' blind to the truth person, who does indeed live in a poor town somewhere " up North", I chose at this juncture, to not go down the conspiracy route.

cookiemuncher wrote:

crusader wrote:Ok, I can see I'm flogging a dead horse, we will have to disagree on the FSS forensics.

I'm sure I read somewhere a list of non perishable items sent back to the PJ from FSS.

Crusader, I'm not being rude but I think you should open your eyes to what the UK Establishment is all about.  They control everything, they can do what they like when they like, they can say what they want without anyone disagreeing with them most of the time.

Why do you think Blair and Brown were kotowing to the McCanns, would they have done the same to Mr & Mrs Joe Bloggs who lived in abject poverty in a poor town somewhere "up North".

They all had connections, don't delude yourself.  Gerry McCann was on the Committee regarding the effect of nuclear power stations on children's health.  How much does he know that has been hidden from the UK population for example.

miffy8 wrote:Do you honestly think for one minute that GA and his team would not have thought that forensic tests might return an incorrect result?  GA is a man of great integrity and not bloody stupid! He would have known about the necessary permissions required to preserve perishable samples and every other piece of evidence that could be forensically tested and I am sure they would have been obtained in anticipation that they might be required at a later date for re-testing. I haven't read the files but common sense dictates that you don't hand over the entirety of your evidence. 

pdlsleuth1990 wrote:Before I became engrossed in the Madeline McCann case I used to read every book going about the JFK assassination. 

One of the better books bemoaned the fact that some of the more outlandish theories had been backed up by little research and very little evidence. These alternative theories made it easier to debunk the whole "conspiracy" theory debate and put the more likely theories in the same boat. In the authors view the real perpetrators were very happy with the number of theories and claims as it took the focus off the real facts. Confusion was their best friend (I think Gerry also said something about confusion). In reality even if you believe the Mc Canns to be guilty of something only one theory will probably be correct ( e.g. it may be that the death was caused by accident, but then the abuse theories will probably not be correct).  

PS This is my first post and I am certainly not having a go at any of the theories proposed here. I have looked at Amaral's analysis, James Bogart, Richard Hall, Nich Van Der Leer and they all have different conclusions. 

Also feel free to delete if you feel it adds nothing to the debate

cookiemuncher wrote:I said that the PJ were naive and thought that the FSS would do the right thing for a 3 year old girl who had gone missing....

I'll leave it that.

miffy8 wrote:I don't know if anyone else agrees with me but I've always had the feeling that this case was initially investigated with an honest approach and, things changed. The turning point for me was when I watched the interview on breakfast TV when Philip Schofield interviewed Kate and the discussion was about a theory that Madeleine's was under RM's newly tarmacked driveway.  Somebody had offered to pay for thermal imaging cameras and an excavation of the site. Now considering the McCann's campaign was called 'Leave no stone unturned' one could reasonably assume she would have jumped at the chance but, instead, was shockingly dismissive. Alarm bells started to ring for me at this point as most mothers of a missing child would dig the site up with a teaspoon given half a chance if they thought there was even the remotest possibility their precious child could be under it. I remember thinking how could she possibly sit there and expect the nation to swallow that when all eyes were on her. My initial gut feeling was that she had been silenced.