DNA and BIOLOGICAL PARENTS of MADELEINE

It was recently pointed out that a huge question mark hangs over Kate's 2002/3 pregnancy, including proof of the date and hospital in which Madeleine was born. Probably 99% of proud mothers who gave birth in the UK in 2003, have photographs of them holding their newborn child in their arms. Are we to believe the McCanns fall into the 1% with no photos of their firstborn taken in the hospital with them or excited family members? Often the lack of evidence (in this case photos), can be the elusive ‘link’ to the truth.
 
With all the proven lies and deceit holding the 'disappearance of Madeleine' together, here is something upon which to ponder if Gerry and Kate are not Madeleine’s biological parents. When the Polish woman Julia Wendell believed she could be ‘Madeleine McCann’, her DNA was tested and showed her to be 100% from Poland with some Lithuanian and Romanian heritage. The candid tests and results were regarded as convincing enough to discard her claim.
 
Should the next ‘Madeleine McCann’ step forward or be found somewhere in the world, if DNA tests show her to be 100% British, with whom will her DNA be compared? Making use of Gerry and Kate’s DNA would serve no purpose if they are not Madeleine’s biological parents. Shockingly, if this is true, even if the ‘real’ 20-year old Madeleine is found, she can never be ‘linked’ to the grieving Gerry and Kate McCann.

In such an instance as a missing child, one of the first checks would be biological parentage, routine policing.

Following forensic examination, the Portuguese judiciary confirmed that Madeleine was the biological child of Gerry and Kate McCann, as were the twins.

I don't think there can be any doubt, although again the press made it a big deal of it back in September/October 2007.

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

A reminder that Britain was on the road to perdition as far back as 2007.

With family and friends watching over, you can't invent such a story for it to pass unnoticed. There is a lot of truth surrounding the McCanns history and indeed their account of events following - the plot begins on 28th April 2007, that's where the truth is to be found.

Try as you might, I don't think there is anything sinistre to be found by rummaging through their coffers.

No-one can explain the lack of any newborn photos of Madeleine ... how is this possible? And Kate speaks about "the hospital" many times in her book as well ... but has never once mentioned the name of the hospital. I'm not convinced. There's something else I'm looking at that might blow the lid off this ... maybe in a few days time!

Looking forward to it already .

Kate and Gerry were there to give a DNA sample , as were the twins , obviously Maddie wasn't there so a control sample was needed . 

How and exactly who collected the pillowcase from her bed in Rothley isn't clear , was it Gerry himself , did he wear gloves and have a sealed evidence bag to place it in , was it a police officer ? That  as far as I'm aware has never been made clear . 

Then we have the silly story that the children shared a toothbrush  ! Where did that come from ? 

Clothing would be unusable , if dirty they were as seen in the photos of the wardrobe bundled together ready to pack up for going home so contaminated , or they were sent to Ocean Club laundry on Saturday . 

I personally have no doubt Maddie was their natural child , you can see both parents in her photos . 

I'll look forward to what Bird131 shows us .

sandancer wrote:Kate and Gerry were there to give a DNA sample , as were the twins , obviously Maddie wasn't there so a control sample was needed . 

How and exactly who collected the pillowcase from her bed in Rothley isn't clear , was it Gerry himself , did he wear gloves and have a sealed evidence bag to place it in , was it a police officer ? That  as far as I'm aware has never been made clear . 

I've just replied to crusader on much the same lines, when I clicked send my post disappeared .

To add to what you say, records say Gerry McCann returned to Portugal with the pillow case, he was photographed at the time with only a backpack. From that I think it can be reasonably assumed the pillow case was in the backpack.

From recollection there is further documented evidence to confirm Madeleine being the biological child of Gerry and Kate McCann. I'll see if I can find something in due course, not so easy nowadays as most of the Madeleine McCann case dedicated fora and blogs have fizzled out.

pillowcase;

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

more pillowcase;

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

blood card;

On 12 October 2007, the Forensic Science Service(R) received a blood spot in a cardboard frame (object JRB/1) from Leicestershire Constabulary. That object was inside a sealed package.


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



Reference sample of blood

JRB/1 Madeleine McCann
From this sample was obtained a DNA reference sample that was different from those of her immediate family, described above. This DNA profile was the same as that obtained from possible spots of saliva existing on the pillowcase (SJM/1).


if you use control f for the search box put in it; JRB/1


both are in the same link.

nice error, it was no post, and the link still works, but i give it a second time;

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


let's do it the very old fashioned way:

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

crusader wrote:I've never seen new born baby photo's of Sean and Amalie either.

No you're not likely to either - why should the parents or family publicize photographs of their children's birth?

Frankly it's none of our business - an intrusion of privacy, if it's out there then fair game for discussion but respect the right to privacy.

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

Ignore the error alert - click on the box and it takes you to the source.

identification is still mostly done pretty old school. dna testing takes often to much time, you simply do not have, so first witness statements, a passport, in this case the booking form, and the video of the airport upon arrival in portugal. mt-dna could taken from kate and the twins. 

indeed there are also two sources with dna, the pillowcase, that was just tested in the uk, and the blood card much later, also in the uk. 

it did not help that all clothing already was washed with a little help of the ambassador, washing brakes down a lot of the dna because of the chemicals in it and even the so called bioactive substances, mostly a kind of enzymes, maybe even a powder or washing liquid with some chlorine in it. 
als you can never know how many other dna was around from others, so that would never be a unique source.

and dna is not even of great value in the home or other place the victim has a stay for a longer time. if you get it with the already taken samples and you have a control sample available you will use it in your file. 
but really in a surrounding with people who are part of the same household, and a possible perp is part of that household, dna is almost never of much use, each on can loose so much on a daily basis, and it does break down irregular, and it mixes, so that bring no clarity.

most useful when found in a place or space, or in a body, where common behaviour can not likely be the reason to find it there, can be the most to hope for.
and most value is when the perp is an outsider, without a common connection to the victim, dna from skincells and hair transports easily, but if your perp tells i was never ever insidethat room, and you do find a good sample, that tells something. dna from a unconnected person on a body can never have an easy explaining, so that is telling. 

but dna from the parent on a diaper that could be just a innocent transfer as the result of putting a diaper on. but if dna of the guy 3 doors down is found on it, it can hardly be having the same reason. 

for that point alone i always have a bit the idea, these bathing the children are a very good explanation if a body was found with dna of such persons. could be transferred when alive, but also after dead.  i do not like explanations given before you ask for them. 

and only in the movies the forensic service search the complete premises, in real investigation you simply never have a budget to do that, so you have to work a possible crime scene first  by looking what could have happened here, do i have to pay attention to one or more points of entry and exit, what is there that people do touch often, most even without knowing. you have to decide where fingerprints or glove traces are to be found, touching something with an arm leg or shoulder leavers more skin particles around. is there furniture that could have been used to hide behind or to step up on to look at high shelves or a wardrobe. 1001 and one little things to filter from the crime scene at hand, the crime scene dictates that. 

when you do the same on a complete house, even a room, you will usually thousands and much more fingerprints, mostly from people who have no connection to the crime. fingerprints can stay for years, the handyman who works on a furnace, leaves often great prints behind and a lot of good dna because of little scrappings on screws etc. so that will result in at least another 5 meters of material in maps and boxes, that never ever have been part of the crime , or the crime scene, and usually not a complete house is a crime scene, but much smaller parts.

why you still want dna from the victim in this case is because she is missing, and if you have it at hand, you do not have to use extra time to work from family dna profiles, and you can use it to be sure if a body ois found it is indeed the victim in that case. 
also before 1990 when dna became starting a thing in the world of crime, cases have been solved too, so as an extra it is a nice tool, but far less the great solution it often is told in tv series. 

the same with blood spatter patterns, there is absolutely no such thing on the walls behind the sofa, even with the very bad pictures of it, it is clear it is not from just one event, most houses have the same patterns, but are also more often get a new coating of wallpaper or paint over it. 

the blood found on and between the tiles , yes that is a scene that fits what is needed for an accident, if you find a body, that still have a good chance to be proven, when that was part of this case, only it is not a crime scene when accidental. 

the portuguese did above average in investigating 5a as if it was a crime scene, and it was already a crime area of nightmares, usually only existing in your training leaders and lecturers. to much people, with far to little bonding with the place , no roots at all. i think you not even get the question out, when you paint a sound and very experienced serious crime officer, when the story tells after the first few sentences, but on day 2 after the facts, 500 potential witnesses will take a plane to another country. they would just stare at you and say; listen you can use too much of your imagination, such things never do happen. well amaral knows it does happen. 

the same with house to house calls, you know the things never was done by mouth of jimmy g. , wel it was a new one for me, to see a block of apartments, and only two units had not been questioned at day 1, but all others had been interview in the police station, and could have a foot in the crime that happened, 2/3 of inhabitants is quite a record. and usually you go on day one not beyond the block itself, because you simply have to wait to get the juniors there. 

i understand why the portuguese are so awful correct and polite, the all do know how it was under the old regiem, and they do not want to act in that manner. they really had the idea that a witness would not telling lies, or that people would simply call in when they had seen something.

you always will make the wrong choice in doing things, usually you can redo a lot, and you yourself is the first to notice your own mistakes, and it is always the budget that decides what could be done, and when or if. 
only the number of dna tests that they did. if i read that, i can hear in my head my own team leader. and you do not get it all into okay when you solve a case. the budget always comes first. 

and there is still a lot of material stored in portugal and i do hope the adults in this case gets in to behaving like that, and just choose a portuguese team of experts, they have very good ones, and get a team of the brits out too, and snatch a team from belgium to do the job. they are excellent , in science really impartial, and their politics means they can not even agree about anything, so before they know what happens , the work is long done, so no fear of politics from just the next country. 

it is a nice offer to use that true allel thingy to separate the mixed samples results, but it would never solve anything at all. you do not have to prove madeleine did stay there in 5a, you have to prove how she got out of it, and you never prove that with her own dna inside 5a. 

why did we think the godfather of dna spoke up? that guy needs maybe under 5 minutes to tell how and why. all you need to understand is in this post. set your emotions aside, use your logical mind, and why a sample stick with a tip of about a square of 5 mm. in 5a is not very useful, to tell if this blood behind the sofa and in the car gives you the proof of being blood from madeleine and was left behind in relation to an event that could have a criminal element or was maybe just an accident. 

amaral asked the right questions, the uk lab could not deliver the answers.

if you do not get that, look with care the last video jill put up of search dogs. 

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

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

the dna of madeleine becomes only important and telling for identification of a body, or when you find dna on or around a third party, she never had legally or common access too. and it is in file, so no problems to expect on that end. 

you have to come with a very good explanation, not just a old rumour, that once only existed in the media. 
that is the big difference for the people who work a case, they can check, and they did check.

We know that Maddie is an IVF child. Could it be that Gerry's brother John McCann is Maddie's father?

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

She looked a lot like him.

I've always thought Maddie looked more like John than Gerry.

I’ve got a cousin who is the spit image of my parent,  it doesn’t make them the parent though,
Looking back at old photographs of my family history it’s amazing to see who close family and distant family resemble from them 
I find genetic’s and DNA fascinating although way over my head in analysing it

Maddie was supposedly 'abducted' and, therefore, could have been found at any moment...but John McCann gave up his job despite having a mortgage, wife and children to oversee The Fund.

Gerry just took leave from his job.

Yes it was extremely strange that he gave up his job,  with him being employed for a drug company, is there a possibility that he would have been given free samples of products?

If the above is a possible scenario could he have been let go?

pinkgladioli wrote:If the above is a possible scenario could he have been let go?

Re John McCann - The Telegraph, 20th September, 2007.

"He has taken an indefinite leave of absence from his job with drugs firm AstraZeneca".

Similar reports were in other newspapers such as The Guardian on the same date.

I sound pro-McCann  here!