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

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

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Mm11

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Regist10
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

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

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Mm11

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Regist10

Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Keelafreeze 27.11.22 19:25

Verdi,
‘Then take yourself over there, wherever that might be.’ is a command.
I’ll decide.
Not you.
You stink of an overinflated ego- ex copper perchance?😂
And Peter Hyatt trains the FBI- who do you train?
No one?
And here’s a simple question you can’t and won’t answer- if Hyatt is wrong with his conclusions then can you give me even one example?
For instance, if it’s only his opinion then where do you disagree with his linguistic analysis?
Where specifically is he WRONG?
Many thanks!
Keelafreeze
Keelafreeze

Posts : 10
Activity : 10
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2022-09-23

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 27.11.22 23:55

My my my - how brazen!

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Who invited Peter Hyatt to analyze statements in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?  Who invited Sharon Leal?  Who invited Mark Williams-Thomas to probe and make a documentary about Madeleine McCann's disappearance?  Who invited Jon Clarke of the Olive Press to capitalize on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Colin Sutton;  Martin Brunt;  Netflix;  Sandra Felguieras;  Discovery+ .... who invited them?

Peter Hyatt trains the FBI !?!  A misnomer with delusions of grandeur and a self promotional claim of expertise in scrabble?  Contemporary policing is nothing more than a joke, no more can they rely on bog basic policing, instead they are expected to rely on a university degree and peripheral 'expertise' for guidance. In contemporary parlance I believe it's called wokeism.

I don't think the hard working experienced reputable cop needs guidance from someone who thinks s/he can crack the case with word-mongering. The chief of police, Sr Amaral ,assigned to coordinate the case in Portugal certainly didn't need a statement analyst to assist his investigation - he was perfectly capable of conducting an investigation without sufferance of the perpetual insistence of pseudo science or any other fringe interference.

I don't feel the need to explain myself to your Keelafreeze, you on the other hand ....

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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by BrentM 28.11.22 1:31

Verdi wrote:My my my - how brazen!

Peter Hyatt trains the FBI !?!  A misnomer with delusions of grandeur and a self promotional claim of expertise in scrabble?  ...

I don't think the hard working experienced reputable cop needs guidance from someone who thinks s/he can crack the case with word-mongering.  The chief of police, Sr Amaral ,assigned to coordinate the case in Portugal certainly didn't need  a statement analyst to assist his investigation - he was perfectly capable of conducting an investigation without sufferance of the perpetual  insistence of  pseudo science or any other fringe interference.
From his own website:
Peter Hyatt is a Statement Analyst and instructor who teaches statement analysis and analytical interviewing to law enforcement and corporate America.  He has authored the investigator training manual for DHHS, State of Maine...etc
HIDTA Training: Deception Detection September 23, 2016 Phoenix, AZ
Lecture: Psychological Profiling from Statement Analysis: FBI Academy Behavioral Science Unit; Fall Semester 2016

October 31, 2016 FBI National Academy, Quantico, Virginia Behavioral Science Unit Training 7:30am – 5pm.

November 2017 FBI National Academy, Quantico, Va

November 15 2018. Anchorage, AK Psychologists, Social Workers, FBI, State & local Law Enforcement





It is clear Peter gives lectures at or to the fBI, works with the FBI and talks at their academy.


How extensive this is, and how useful the FBI finds it, is not clear, but for sure he does have some involvement in the training provided to the FBI.
I don't know how clearer Peter could make it, unless of course he's lying!


But i do fully agree with you that the PJ did a fantastic job without the need for statement analysis, by the dogged legwork of the humble policemen and women. Amaral was about to solve the riddle before he was taken off it (for political reasons I surmise.) A real shame he was. But others have completed it for him, but alas, it is unlikely to be taken up anytime soon by the police for further investigation and charges. 


I see statement analysis as another tool in the box of techniques, like behavioural analysis, profiling etc. Pseudoscience? If it solves crimes, it works, and thats what matters in the end. Its not a perfect science for sure, with many gaping flaws, but it is no doubt helpful to law enforcement with the correct checks and balances, which Peter is very keen to operate with.


Can I ask you why you have such a strong opinion on it, and why the antagonistic attitude that comes across the page? I am just starting out on my proper digging in this case after years of fascination, and the greatest obstacle to finding  the truth seems to be open mindedness, not just for my part. And i realise open-mindedness is a close cousin of gullibility!


So, do spill the beans if you are comfortable with it.
P.s. as my first thread/posting on this forum has been an awkward mix of information and heated debate and personal attack, i probably will avoid  future discussions and postings but will share my work when i dig into the source material.
BrentM
BrentM

Posts : 11
Activity : 12
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2022-11-24

Cammerigal likes this post

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by crusader 28.11.22 8:15

My problem with statement analysis and profilers are the end result.

They may be 100% correct in what they do and can guide the police as to weather the suspect is guilty of the crime they are suspected of, but unless the suspect confesses to the crime, or their DNA is found or some other irrefutable evidence comes to light, you are no nearer to solving the crime.

The McCann's are widely believed to be involved in knowing what happened to Madeleine and of hiding her body.

It's believed, Madeleine died of an accident and was not murdered by one of her parents.

This is what Peter Hyatt believes, nothing new was descovered by him analysing their statements or interviews and nothing to take the case foreward.

The Portuguese employed 2 of the best dogs in the world at the time, one to find blood and one to detect cadaver odour, which they did.

The evidence of the dogs moved the case along from looking for a lost/missing child to suspecting the parents and making them arguido's.

All the profilling and analysis in the world will not get the McCann's into a court room, so I ask, what is the point.
crusader
crusader

Posts : 3106
Activity : 3388
Likes received : 272
Join date : 2019-03-12

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 28.11.22 11:40

BrentM wrote:Can I ask you why you have such a strong opinion on it, and why the antagonistic attitude that comes across the page? I am just starting out on my proper digging in this case after years of fascination, and the greatest obstacle to finding  the truth seems to be open mindedness, not just for my part. And i realise open-mindedness is a close cousin of gullibility!

So, do spill the beans if you are comfortable with it.
P.s. as my first thread/posting on this forum has been an awkward mix of information and heated debate and personal attack, i probably will avoid  future discussions and postings but will share my work when i dig into the source material.

The only place I spill beans is the kitchen big grin I'll leave it there!

Please don't feel disheartened, isn't opposing views what debate is all about - surely?  Carry on regardless thumbsup .

I appreciate statement analysis and other fringe pseudo-sciences are used by law enforcement across the continents but (that word again) I don't share the opinion of some who appear to think it the be all and end all.

Anyway this isn't helping develop this new thread created for members to contribute their views on linguistic forensics.

grouphug


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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by CaKeLoveR 28.11.22 11:42

Most people are good at spotting liars. I'm always caught out when I say I haven't had cake or chocolate.
CaKeLoveR
CaKeLoveR

Posts : 1955
Activity : 1987
Likes received : 32
Join date : 2022-02-19

BrentM likes this post

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 28.11.22 12:03

At the beginning of 2021, CMOMM member Tania 'Hobs' Cadogan passed away unexpectedly - Tania contributed extensively to the forum in person and through her own blog..

https://tania-cadogan.blogspot.com

Tania was closely associated with the work of Peter Hyatt, members and readers can follow her interest on the above link, or by typing Hobs in the forum search.

Here's a starter..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16130-statement-analysis-by-hobs-and-peter-hyatt#400729

And an example of Tania's thought processes influenced by the teachings of Peter Hyatt...

Sunday, February 21, 2016
Kate McCann: Maddie - Still in the Algarve

Interesting timing and interesting language.

"We will never give up. You couldn't settle if you thought about giving up. I want an end, an answer. Whatever that it is."
We is used to show unity and shared co operation.
She starts off with We  and then tells us never give up.
This is to presuppose that Maddie will never be found, which contradicts all they have been telling us, that Maddie is alive somewhere waiting to be found.They could only say they will never give up if they know she will never be found?
Never give up presumes there will be no end date such as,

We will never give up until we find her.
Which indicates there is a possibility of an ending.

It is finite as opposed to infinite.

As she points out, other cases where a missing child has been found years and decades later.
What she doesn't mention is the high profile cases where children have been recovered, they were all pubescent or adolescents not toddlers.

The girls were raped and abused and forced to have the abductors children in some cases.

In cases where younger children have been abducted and later found and returned home, most if not all are parental or familial abduction rather than stranger abduction.

She doesn't tell us what they will never give up.
Readers would assume she was talking about the search for Maddie.
She doesn't say that though.
What is it they will never give up?
I don't know.
I suspect she is instead referring to threatening and suing anyone who disbelieves them including Dr. Goncalo Amaral.
They will never give up protecting their reputations.
They will never give up asking for donations to fund their non existent search for their daughter, rather the donations will be spent on protecting themselves from prosecution.

They can't give up since to do so would  likely mean the truth will come out and it's game over

Then she switches pronoun to her ever favorite 2nd person pronoun you indicates distancing.

She doesn't tell us I (she) couldn't settle if I (she) thought about giving up.
We know we wouldn't and couldn't settle or think about giving up.
She doesn't tell us that she wouldn't be able to settle or think about giving up.
How could she when she didn't tell us what the giving up related to
She then reverts back to first person singular I in relation to wanting an end.
Note though the dropped pronoun in relation to an answer.
There is also a dropped pronoun in relation to Whatever that it is."
She has no need for an answer since she knows what happened to Maddie although she may not know exactly where her remains are.I want an end is a strong statement.
She takes ownership of it with the first person singular I.

I suspect this is truthful as in after 9 years of investigation by the PJ and Scotland yard, there is still no evidence of their claim of alleged abduction of their daughter.
Not even something that indicates it could be a remote possibility.

After 9 years of investigation by 2 police forces as well as the alleged investigations by numerous private  investigators of a dubious provenance, there is still not an iota of evidence to show a stranger got into the apartment and abducted Maddie.

This is highly unusual given the mccann mantra of abduction by a paedophile.

Since there is not one iota of evidence to indicate a stranger abduction, i look for what if any evidence there is.

Surprisingly enough there is  forensic evidence.
Lots of it.
Evidence in their apartment 5a.
Evidence behind the sofa,  in the tile grouting and in the parents wardrobe.
There is also the recently laundered and still damp lounge curtains behind said sofa.

There is evidence relating to clothing and toys.
Kate's black and white checked trousers.
The child's red t shirt.
Cuddlecat, who was famously washed due to being dirty and smelling of sun lotion rather than Maddie.
All three caused a trained cadaver dog (Eddie) to react to them, a dog who cannot and will not react to any other scent.
A blood dog (Keela) also reacted behind the sofa indicating the presence of blood.

There is no record of anyone ever having died in the apartment

We then have the cadaver dog reacting in the apartment garden.
No report of anyone having died in the garden.

We then have both the cadaver dog and the blood dog reacting to the trunk of the hire car, a car hired weeks after Maddie disappeared.
We also have a reaction to a key fob.

Instead of the parents doing the expected which would be OMG is my child hurt?
Did the abductor injure her?
Did the abductor kill her?
Did the abductor use the hire car before we did?
On pages 249-250 of ‘madeleine’, for example, she writes:

“At one point [during the screening of a video of the cadaver dog Eddie alerting to the scent of a corpse in the living room of the McCanns’ apartment] the handler [Martin Grime] directed the dogs to a spot behind the conch in the sitting room, close to the curtains. He called the dogs over to him to investigate this particular site.

“The dogs ultimately ‘alerted’. I felt myself starting to relax a little. This was not what I would call an exact science”.

Why did she not do the expected, do what an innocent parent would do?
Why did she react as would a guilty person?
Where is her maternal concern for what could possibly have happened to her daughter ?

Further along the book she wrote about the cadaver and the car.
“…we were in an underground garage where eight or so cars were parked, including our rented Renault Scenic. It was hard to miss: the windows were plastered with pictures of Madeleine. In medicine we would call this an ‘unblinded’ study, one that is susceptible to bias. One of the dogs ran straight past our car, nose in the air, heading towards the next vehicle.

“The handler stopped next to the Renault and called the dog. It obeyed, returned to him, but then ran off again. Staying by the car, PC Grime instructed the dog to come back several times and directed it to certain parts of the vehicle before it eventually supplied an alert by barking…when researching the validity of sniffer dog evidence later that month, Gerry would discover that false alerts can be attributable to the conscious or unconscious signals of the handler…this certainly seemed to be what was happening here…”
Then we have the reports of the trunk of the hire car being left open nightly  to air as witnessed by neighbors and then a report by a family friend Michael Wright regarding the hire car.
I noted some disagreeable smells on a number of occasions which I judged to have come from the twins' nappies. Discarded nappies were collected in rubbish bags and held until thrown into the [rubbish] bins, [thereby] provoking smell.]
The mccanns and friends came up with explanations as to why the dogs reacted, blaming soiled diapers, rotting meat, sweaty sandals and the like.

Had the smell been down to simple garbage such as  diapers etc, the smell would have cleared fairly quickly once the source had been removed.
However cadaverine is a persistent little bugger and won't wash out.
Once something gets tainted with it, it hangs around despite laundering.

Instead of demanding to know who had access to the hire car in the weeks before they hired it, they came up with explanations.
There was also no report of anyone having died in said hire car, or anyone transporting a dead person in said hire car.

What is known is that a 3 year old disappeared from her vacation apartment.
The parents and chums lied about who was doing whom and what.
The parents refused to cooperate with Law Enforcement.
They hired very expensive defense lawyers.
Cadaver  and blood dogs reacted in the apartment, to certain items and also the hire car.
They reacted no where else, no other apartments of available clothing items.
Every indication from the forensics and statements from all parties in the group point to something happening to Maddie during that week that caused her death.
For the mccanns and chums, it became all about protecting their tainted reputations.
Cue legal suits and threats etc.
Then came the Leveson Inquiry where the mccanns made a statement  revealing their 'anguish'
However, kate being kate and a lousy liar, then promptly perjured herself in said Leveson Inquiry.
when:
Mrs McCann says that they had no recourse and lies became facts, for example that body fluids were found in their car.
Interesting.

The lies became facts according to the media, yet she and gerry had come up with explanations as to why the dogs could have reacted and indicated as they did.

In other words, the dogs were reacting to something non existent and the mccanns had an explanation for said non existent things in the hire car that provoked a canine response.

After 9 years, the investigation having been reopened by the PJ and the mccanns having no clue as to what evidence the PJ have is taking its toll.

How can they defend themselves against they know not what?

The suspicion has never stopped.
The threats and legal actions against the media and even the ex lead detective who was charged with finding their daughter have not silenced the critics.
Their reputations are in tatters, kate is pretty much unemployable, after all who is going to employ a self confessed child neglector in their practice, especially should she have to report an abused or neglected child.
She would be laughed out of court, pot and kettle springing to mind.
She could never work with the public because of who she is and the attention she would bring.
Gerry i suspect is trapped in his job and location since no reputable hospital is going to employ a self confessed child neglector.

It is also likely that staff would refuse to work with him and patients would refuse to be seen by him.

I wouldn't even be sure he could be employed abroad again since he and kate have not been cleared of involvement, and no hospital is going to employ a self confessed child neglector or child killer (by accident or design)

Kate wants an end, an end to all the stress she is suffering, the guilt she is suffering.
It is eating her alive as we can see in her later pictures.
She looks now like she should have done when Maddie first went missing.

She wants an answer, but she doesn't say what to.
The answer relates to her wanting an end.
Does this relate to her wanting to press a button and they would ALL be together?

Kate said: "It really isn't easy," coping. "Some days are better than others. ... There's days when you think, 'I can't do this anymore,' and you just want to press a button, and we're ALL gone, and it's all finished, and we're ALL together and gone.
Wherever.
But you can't, you know. Just occasionally you'll have a -- if you're having a really bad day, which we do. And you can't help but think that."
 ----------

Whatever that it is."
The obvious answer would be what happened to Maddie and where she is.

The answer would be identifying who took Maddie.

The answer would be why did he pick Maddie and not one of the twins or another child from another family?

The answer would be how he committed the abduction without leaving any physical trace.
Why does she need to ask whatever that it is?

Does it relate to confessing the truth and accepting the consequences?
If it does it would be a relief for her and an end to the stress she is suffering and will continue to suffer until the truth comes out.
Does it relate to pressing a button?
If so then the twins are at considerable risk of harm.
Is she asking herself about wanting an end?
She wants an answer to her wanting an end?
Is she asking herself whether she could end it?
What does she mean by an end?
What does she mean by an answer?

Is this something she has discussed with someone else, such as gerry, a priest, a therapist or someone trusted?
Is she signalling she wants to come clean?What answer would be an end?

I think kate is edging closer to a breakdown.
Trapped in a loveless marriage, a marriage that was in trouble before the vacation to PDL.
Judging by the bruises on her wrists and arms after Maddie vanished, was domestic violence involved?
She lives with the fear that perhaps one of the tapas 7 will decide to speak out (minimising their role as applicable)
Could they speak out due to guilt or guilty knowledge?
Could they speak out for a reward?
Could they speak out for immunity or maybe a plea deal?

What about their families?

Could gerry's family throw kate under the bus?

if kate was the only one charged, gerry could make millions from a book saying how he was deceived by kate, he did what he did to protect his family etc.
Act up the hardworking struggling single father  of twins.
Maybe even a movie as was previously suggested or a mini series.
All the chat shows.
Possible political role or charitable role.

££££££££££

Whilst she stews in a prison cell or maybe if she is lucky a suitable hospital.

Kate, you need to talk to someone, someone you can trust to do the right thing by Maddie and by you.
Someone who is willing to listen and advise.
Someone who will be right by your side as you take the first steps to bring this whole charade to an end.

Someone who will make sure the twins are cared for and that you get all the help you need.

Kate you want to talk, I and many others are prepared to listen, to be non judgemental, to advise on your options and, yes, even hold your hand as you take the first step.

Think about it please.

As gerry said

"Sometimes people do things for reasons that even they cannot understand."

"An act of madness, an accident or sudden impulse can lead to consequences that people may never have imagined or intended."
"Faced with such a situation we believe any human soul will ultimately suffer torment and feelings of guilt and fear."
He is right.

Speak out and it cannot be as bad as you imagined.

Speak the truth and we can and will forgive, for none of us are perfect.

If it was an accident, accidents happen, even if the parent is right next to the child.

Speak the truth if not for you, then for Sean and Amelie so they can grieve and move on with their lives.

Speak the truth so you can grieve publicly and start the long overdue healing process, to come to terms with what happened.

NB: Contrary to popular belief, CMOMM is a not a closed shop with a single mind.  Member's and readers alike can draw their own conclusions from information posted on the forum - no one is expected to agree.  The forum would never move forward if stuck in a single market, so to speak.

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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 28.11.22 12:13

CaKeLoveR wrote:Most people are good at spotting liars. I'm always caught out when I say I haven't had cake or chocolate.

Be sure the debris will find you out flan flinger big grin !

If someone says I didn''t, you can bet yer bottom dollar they did yes .

Children are very good teachers for spotting lies.

notme

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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by BrentM 28.11.22 14:27

Verdi wrote:The only place I spill beans is the kitchen big grin I'll leave it there!
How strange..

I bought a copy of 'Madeleine: Our daughters disappearance and the continuing search  for her.'
It arrived today, and i went to page 71 and read through to the "as if a can of beans had fallen off a kitchen shelf" part. (p75)

In life there are no coincidences :-)

no beans spilt tho,  lol.

Its those little things that intrigue me. Coincidences

Also, why would Kate  say 'fallen off a... shelf'? why a kitchen shelf (isn't that where beans  are normally?) Why that detail? Was there evidence or knowledge that  Maddie had either fallen in the kitchen, getting food perhaps, and then was moved elsewhere, or something else? Is the sofa hypothesis/ dog indicators missing  something? After all, the blood dog is much more specific: Keela had to be pointed where to sniff, and if Martin had missed pointing somewhere its highly likely Keela would also miss it.
Im not asking you to answer, but theres a whole treasure trove of detail that is waiting to be uncovered, and as I say, i hope something could help to the finding of Maddie.

I get people see the analysis as at best fringe, it is there to assist where other avenues fail, IMO.
BrentM
BrentM

Posts : 11
Activity : 12
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2022-11-24

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by crusader 28.11.22 14:35

Keep the conversation going BrentM, it's the way foreward.
Something may come to light that has been overlooked, it's always good to hear things from a different perspective, as long as it is evidence based.
crusader
crusader

Posts : 3106
Activity : 3388
Likes received : 272
Join date : 2019-03-12

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 28.11.22 15:11

The case of Madeleine McCann finds it's way into the conversation .... again!

Peter Hyatt on Sonja Poulton Cleo Smith


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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 28.11.22 15:22


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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by crusader 28.11.22 15:22

When Mrs Fenn said "Oh I see" when Kate said she told her Madeleine was missing, she thought Mrs Fenn's reaction should have been more concerned, so the remark  likening it to a can of beans falling off the shelf, is a sarcastic remark.
crusader
crusader

Posts : 3106
Activity : 3388
Likes received : 272
Join date : 2019-03-12

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 28.11.22 15:39

Monday, July 22, 2019

Kate's Accidental Leak Of What Really Happened To Maddie.

By Tania Cadogan, Statement Analyst

Breaking down in tears, distraught Kate said of the Portuguese police:

“They want me to lie – I’m being framed.

“Police don’t want a murder in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they’re blaming us.”

The problem is, kate doesn't leak that it was an accident where they panicked and covered up.

First she says "I'm being framed."
This then implies that evidence exists proving Maddie is dead.
This evidence has then been found by someone, probably the PJ, and then placed in locations and on items that would link kate to a dead Maddie.
The only evidence found that would frame kate are the body fluids in the hire car and in the apartment behind the sofa,and the reactions of the blood and cadaver dogs.

The cadaverine scent could come from any dead person, dogs cannot tie a specific cadaverine scent to a specific person.
The body fluids are a different matter.
They can be tested and blood group and DNA learned.
Even in cases where the sample isn't ideal, a lot can still be learned to exclude certain groups of people, male or female.
In this case we learned that 15 of 19 markers showed it could have come from Maddie, 4 markers were too damaged to be conclusively identified.
This does not exclude Maddie as being the donor despite what their supporters claim.
This was a big help to the mccanns.
Portugal requires a 15/15 match.Only a select number of STR markers are used in forensic DNA profiling (10 in the UK and 13 in the US)

In the UK they would now be cooling their heels in a prison cell.

Kate tells us though that she is being framed.
This means that she has told us that the evidence found in the apartment and hire car does in fact belong to Maddie.
This also tells us that, at that point, Maddie was in a physical condition that would allow for samples to be taken and then placed in the hire car and apartment.
What would not be known is when said samples were obtained from Maddie's remains.
They could have been obtained at some point early in the investigation within a couple of days of her alleged abduction or, they could have been obtained any time up to the point the cadaver dogs were brought in.
The problem here though is, if the samples had been obtained early on within a couple of days, how would they know to plant the incriminating evidence in the car which would become the car the mccanns hired 25 days later?

The police could be the ones who planted the evidence.
However, it could also be gerry or another member of the tapas 7.
Even gerry's family admitted they were expecting charges to be filed against kate.
It would suit his needs perfectly and fit his personality if he planted the evidence on kate's pants, the child's red t shirt and cuddle cat as well as in the apartment and hire car.
Should arrests be made then kate was the fall guy, the evidence implicated on her as nothing was found on any of his clothing.

If the samples had been obtained early on in the saga, how would the samples have been placed where they were found without attracting attention, especially the hire car?
The first thing done would be to see who had hired said car previously and who had access to it.
It still doesn't explain why if the samples were obtained to frame kate, why no mention was made of finding her remains or anything relating to Maddie
Since this is what kate is claiming, why then did the PJ not go the whole hog and announce they had found Maddie's remain and that charges would now be filed against those involved in her death and subsequent disposal.
If the PJ had found Maddie's remains, why did they then conceal her remains again after getting a few samples and then plant said samples to frame kate?

The case would have been solved within days or weeks.
Millions would not have been wasted on chasing imaginary sightings or following a specific remit limiting the investigation of both the police and private investigators to that of an abduction of a live child.

Kate would be cooling her heels in prison, gerry gets custody of the children and probably a book and movie deal, maybe more.
He disappears into the sunset, away from public view perhaps to be tempted out and back into the limelight with a role on some important board or maybe with a political role, maybe even a position in the House of Lords, an institution worthy of his knowledge and expertise.If she tried to implicate him, he could plead that he was as deceived as us, he was shocked when he learned the truth, or, that he lied to protect his children and kate's mental health issues.\

Alternatively.\

He tried to get her the help she needed figuring that since Maddie was dead, no good could come from admitting what really happened.
He was doing what any loving father and husband would do.
Cue the tears and a new fund to provide the twins with a secure future and perhaps a new book or movie deal showing how much he suffered yadda yadda.

We know the PJ have made no such announcement then or since.

We still get so called sighting cropping up in the media which are swiftly debunked, usually when something that paints the mccanns in a bad light or is sensitive to them such as Dr. Amaral's damages case.

Since the PJ have not announced finding her remains nor produced her body, the obvious conclusion is that kate was not being framed as she claimed.

She has admitted that the evidence found, specifically the body fluids, are in fact from Maddie, the child they claim was abducted and is still alive contrary to all the statistics.

“Police don’t want a MURDER in Portugal"
This is the big open mouth insert feet moment.
The leaked admission of what happened to Maddie.

The mccanns and chums, their extended family and not forgetting clarrie, all claim Maddie is still alive and not seriously harmed (what do they think paedophiles will be doing to Maddie if she were alive?)
Now, if Maddie was still alive as alleged, what kate would and should have said if she was innocent of any involvement is:

“Police don’t want AN ABDUCTION in Portugal".
An abduction is what was alleged to have happened and would be at the forefront of kate's mind.

Since she has already told us there is evidence to show Maddie is dead and that the Police are framing her with said evidence, the next expected statement would be:

“Police don’t want a DEATH/CHILD'S DEATH in Portugal"

This allows her to admit Maddie is dead and that evidence exists proving such.
It allows for her to claim it was an accidental death, a death allowed for by Dr. Goncalo Amaral.

This could be that she fell off the sofa after being sedated, banged her head or broke her neck or whatever and died.

They found Maddie dead, panicked because of what an autopsy would reveal (long term sedation or signs of abuse of some kind) and concocted a plan to fake an abduction.

An autopsy would reveal things they didn't want revealed, things that could result in loss of the twins, loss of their medical licenses, their jobs, their home, their friends and status.

Better to admit to a lesser crime and, if needs be try and wangle a plea deal than have the truth come out.
Reputations though damaged would eventually be repaired, they would be just another footnote in the pages of history.
Forgotten by the public in the next big story involving a child, more so the more years that pass.
Perhaps a passing mention in future media stories decades down the line..

However kate didn't say that.

Kate leaked the truth of what really happened.

Kate told the world it was a MURDER.
Not manslaughter.
Not negligent homicide.
Not a death caused by accident, such as kate and gerry having yet another row and when it got physical (remember all the bruising on kate's wrist and arms?) and Maddie just didn't get out the way quick enough, was hit, punched or roughly shoved resulting in her falling and banging her head or breaking her neck.

MURDER.

We don't know if this murder was preplanned, especially given the demeaning language when referring to Maddie.
The distancing language by apparently the family and extended families.
This would provide a motive.
Maddie was no longer wanted, no longer considered a apart of the family.
She was perhaps considered a burden,
The fact that Maddie's body had to be disposed of.
The fact that kate refused to answer the question about handing Maddie's care to another family member.
Or.
If her murder was a direct result of another crime being committed against her such as physical or sexual abuse.
Perhaps kate had simply had enough of a demanding, attention seeking Maddie, a child who may have pressed one of kate's buttons once too often and kate lost it and lashed out in the temper we know she has.

We know Maddie was a victim of murder, of a homicide, whether deliberate or accidental for kate has told us so.

"all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they’re blaming us.”

Their laws are lax, this is a given, however the UK also has a dubious track record for dealing with paedophiles, especially high ranking ones such a politicians, celebs, sports stars, the media and such like.
Kate has to blame it on Portugal in order for the abduction claim to have any chance of being believed.
The mccanns have to blame anyone except themselves and members of the tapas 7.
The publicity strangely enough has pretty much all come the mccann camp.
We were being responsible parents by allegedly leaving our toddlers home alone in an unlocked apartment and it was Portugal's poor laws that allowed a paedophile to get into our unsecured apartment and abduct Maddie.
It is all Portugal's fault not ours.

So is used to explain something was said or done.
Here she is blaming the Portuguese for what happened to Maddie rather than accepting any kind of responsibility.
Responsibility is something neither of the mccanns nor their chums have accepted or admitted to.
The mccanns even claimed they were advised that they were being responsible parents.
They have, to date, declined to tell just which esteemed and expert personage told them this.

Perhaps they shopped around until they found someone who, given enough incentive, said what they wanted.
Kate is preempting the question she thinks is coming, she is using words thought by the mind a microsecond before being spoken.
Here she is thinking paedophile laws and how lax they are and why the Portuguese are blaming herself and gerry and possibly the rest of the tapas 7.

Perhaps this is why Portugal was chosen for the vacation, the very early season where there wouldn't be too many tourists around sticky beaking into private business and what was not their concern.

Whatever happened to Maddie, kate has admitted Maddie is dead, that it was a murder.
It is worth noting the pronouns kate uses.
I and ME in relation to lying and being framed thus taking ownership.It is first person singular.

Note the change in pronoun though when it comes to the publicity about not having paedophile laws.
Here the pronoun changes to US.
Here she indicates unity and shared cooperation.
It is a first person plural pronoun.
It shows the spreading around and sharing of involvement or guilt.
Often seen with children and teenagers when caught and they say we all did it or everybody was doing it.It minimises their own personal involvement whilst implicating others.
It minimises her own personal involvement whilst implicating others.

Is this perhaps the reason for the choice of location, the time of year and the people invited to share the vacation with them?

Every time one of them speaks, they leak more marbles of truth.

I wonder if sometimes kate leaks deliberately in order to hasten the end of all the stress, the lies and to allow her to grieve openly and publicly as Maddie then gets her dignified burial.

Even though she is involved, she can begin the process of healing as can the twins, who will have to deal with the emotional fallout of knowing their were lied to for the last 9 years by their parents, their extended family, those they trusted

I hope all concerned accept the help that is offered.
It is the first step to healing.
The first step in the process of being allowed to finally grieve.
It is the first step in finally accepting responsibility for their actions and accepting the consequences.
It is the first step in beginning a new future.

tania cadogan at 3/10/2016 06:02:00 PM

http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/kates-accidental-leak-of-what-really.html?m=1

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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by Verdi 28.11.22 15:44

That's me done!

I've watched, I've listened and I've read but my opinion on the subject remains unaltered.

Tenuous to say the least.  

That aside, a lot of this text is taken from press articles or second hand information or hearsay - how can you forensically analyze a press report or hearsay?

A lot of words spoken or written that add up to little or nothing.

Evidence is the only way forward.

Carry on!

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

Posts : 29329
Activity : 36482
Likes received : 5911
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by crusader 28.11.22 15:57

I think it's being analysed to death, we all know the McCann's know what happened.

The McCann's have been analysed by the so called best in their field and up to now, we have learned nothing that we didn't already know.

Peter Hyatt said they make an "embedded confession" in their statements, but until they make one to the police, we are still where we are.
crusader
crusader

Posts : 3106
Activity : 3388
Likes received : 272
Join date : 2019-03-12

Tony Bennett, onehand and CaKeLoveR like this post

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by BrentM 28.11.22 16:42

crusader wrote:When Mrs Fenn said "Oh I see" when Kate said she told her Madeleine was missing, she thought Mrs Fenn's reaction should have been more concerned, so the remark  likening it to a can of beans falling off the shelf, is a sarcastic remark.
Thats what Kate says using her own words 'fall, can, beans kitchen'. it wasn't Mrs Fenn who said it. Therefore, statement analysis can be applied to Kates own words.

 I dont believe thats how the conversation went though. Firstly, the throw away remark attributed to Mrs Fenn talking to Kate is uncorroborated.
Secondly, it is more likely, due to the known and documented fact that Mrs Fenn was distressed about one of the children the night before crying and calling for daddy for over one and a half hours the night before (she's no insensitive unconcerned neighbour), that the comment was made  by Mrs Fenn during her conversation she had with Gerry on the night of the disappearance.

One version on record is
PF: whats the commotion ?(upon hearing the commotion going on outside her apartment)
GM: some child has gone missing (note not MY child, or Maddie)
PF: oh, I see

I think Kate either was fed a chinese whisper by Gerry and incorporated it into her story, or just plain made it up.
BrentM
BrentM

Posts : 11
Activity : 12
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2022-11-24

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by crusader 28.11.22 16:56

Mrs Fenn said "Oh I see" isn't that what I said, I didn't say Mrs Fenn made the comment about beans.

Kates sarcastic reply about the beans was a reply to Mrs Fenn's reaction.

We only have Kate's word for that, because it was Gerry who said he spoke to Mrs Fenn.

The only time the beans are mentioned is in Kate's  book.
crusader
crusader

Posts : 3106
Activity : 3388
Likes received : 272
Join date : 2019-03-12

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by BrentM 28.11.22 17:12

crusader wrote:Mrs Fenn said "Oh I see" isn't that what I said, I didn't say Mrs Fenn made the comment about beans.

Kates sarcastic reply about the beans was a reply to Mrs Fenn's reaction.
I will try to spell it out. Statement analysis is about analysing the persons own statements. i didn't say you said it was mrs Fenn who said it either. Whats your point? I can read for myself, and i have the very page open as i write, so i think i can detect sarcasm with as i read Kates own words, just..

Im trying to be analytical about it, Kates own words, and hence query what you added to the discussion.

i have to be blunt because the discussion is about analysis, not, 'she said she said' semantics and what we say or think someone said about what we said commenting on what they said.

uh....!
BrentM
BrentM

Posts : 11
Activity : 12
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2022-11-24

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by BrentM 28.11.22 17:24

Following on from the kitchen words, i came across an extended video on the dog searches of buildings.

Apart from the very worrying evidence that Kate's fathers' medicine was taken with them on holiday (or did he go out to meet them?), there is evidence that Eddie signaled in the kitchen, unfortunately off camera.
Im not sure what that could mean, but I'm just 'following my nose' about 'kitchen, fall, beans' in relation to Maddie. It could just mean it was fresh in Kates memory when writing the book, why would be interesting.
see for yourself
at  14:10
search for"Madeleine mccann eddie and keel cadavar dogs' (im unable yet to post links )yes, cadaver is spelt incorrectly (for us english) in video title.

p.s. Does anyone know if Martin Grimes is contactable?
BrentM
BrentM

Posts : 11
Activity : 12
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2022-11-24

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by crusader 28.11.22 18:17

Is this the one?



From memory, Kate's parents were staying with them at the villa they moved into after leaving the Ocean Club, this is where the medication was found.
It belonged to Kate's father.
crusader
crusader

Posts : 3106
Activity : 3388
Likes received : 272
Join date : 2019-03-12

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by BrentM 28.11.22 18:44

yes thats the one.
Eddie barked (once) in the kitchen of 5A (off camera but in the audio). Martin Grime was off camera too.
I wonder if that was missed or ignored by Martin.
BrentM
BrentM

Posts : 11
Activity : 12
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2022-11-24

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by onehand 28.11.22 20:09

there are pieces and pieces put together in a this video, if you eddy alerting at 4.36 in the video above, it is in the villa, not 5a, and that was to see if eddy would alert againd when cuddle cat was hidden.

there is another video that has that part better in view. one from hideho.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VKAFnG1E9E

the cuddle cat part start just after 1.07 to 1.12 , grime takes eddy out of his pattern, after he takes on cuddle cat, and not on screen cuddle cat is hidden in a closet, not the kitchen, but a kind of dining area. and let eddy rechecks. 

as far as i have seen the one from hideho is the most complete. part 1 is 5a, part two the cars and the last part is in the villa, the mccanns did rent after they left 4g.

if you look in the files there is far more work done with the dogs and grime, beach and the spot on a street, so there must be probably a lot more footage. hideho has the parts that have all alerts in it.
onehand
onehand

Posts : 433
Activity : 457
Likes received : 20
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : nl

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by BrentM 28.11.22 21:12

there is another video that has that part better in view. one from hideho.

youtube.com/watch?v=9VKAFnG1E9E

if you look in the files there is far more work done with the dogs and grime, beach and the spot on a street, so there must be probably a lot more footage. hideho has the parts that have all alerts in it.
Did you watch the part in the video i indicated at 14:10?
Why are you sending me to another video which is essentially the same  but in a different order?
did you watch and compare the two videos?
Did you look at the kitchen part in the video link you posted?
Have you made any assessment or have thoughts of the kitchen part in either video?

Please reply if and when you have something new or disagree with my observations.

Otherwise, I don't want to get distracted from my aims.

I will check out the files in due course. thank you.
BrentM
BrentM

Posts : 11
Activity : 12
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2022-11-24

Back to top Go down

Forensic Linguistics:  A fresh look at the evidence - Page 2 Empty Re: Forensic Linguistics: A fresh look at the evidence

Post by crusader 28.11.22 21:32

I don't  believe Eddie barked in the kitchen, he probably bumped into something.
He was trained to bark and stay where he was indicating, he did neither.
crusader
crusader

Posts : 3106
Activity : 3388
Likes received : 272
Join date : 2019-03-12

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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