Martin Grime facts and explanations

lj wrote:
IIRC there were up to 4 cuddlecats.
Maybe they were cheaper by the dozen.

The Met. should look into this at once. Clearly 2 catii cuddleorum have been abducted.
I know. So you must believe it. And I have written it in italic, so it must be true. Just like in the book.
[p. 73, line 1-2]
p. 73 " ...said, "Let's check the apartment. "I'd done that, and I knew, I
knew, that Madeleine had been abducted."

Strong, and probably compelling evidence indeed for one of the most serious crimes imaginable. The sort of overwhelming evidence which in former times, uncorroborated by anything else, would have sent a man to the gallows. Just ponder on the force of that.
She wrote it in ITALIC. !!!!!

lj wrote:

Stella wrote:

That was my first thoughts too Hotlipshealy, a wooden toy, but I have never seen this mentioned before or a photo of it.

I did find this photo, which appears to have a green band of some kind around it's neck.

And a wooden rosary.......

Oh, is that what the wooden bit was referring to. It makes sense now, thanks lj.

PeterMac wrote: .....................
Strong, and probably compelling evidence indeed for one of the most serious crimes imaginable. The sort of overwhelming evidence which in former times, uncorroborated by anything else, would have sent a man to the gallows. Just ponder on the force of that.
She wrote it in ITALIC. !!!!!

Now don't be unfair PeterMac

There is more: she knows, because she was there!!

Not only that, also because she knows more that you (and I) do!


Now the last one I don't doubt.

lj wrote:
Not only that, also because she knows more that you (and I) do!
Now the last one I don't doubt.

I agree. Katey told us that the book would be only a "Version of the truth" and never said it would be the "Whole truth".
p. 5 "As our investigation is still ongoing, and for legal reasons, some opinions or episodes canot be shared until Madeleine is found."

Quite so. Like the details of the alleged incident on the alleged night in question.

littlepixie wrote:Does it mean the religious paraphenalia that is around cuddlecats neck? I have always had an uneasy feeling about the interest in Fatima. When I researched the shrine it details what is child abuse.

"According to Lúcia's account, Mary exhorted the children to do penance
to save sinners. They wore tight cords around their waists to cause
pain, abstained from drinking water on hot days, and other works of
penance.

I think that's exactly what it is ... I'm not Catholic but in rosary terms 'The Third Glorious Mystery' is connected with Our Lady of Fatima.

Rosaries are made out of all sorts of material (I have one that I inherited that was carved from animal bones during WW1) ... but this one is wood

LittleMissMolly wrote:

littlepixie wrote:Does it mean the religious paraphenalia that is around cuddlecats neck? I have always had an uneasy feeling about the interest in Fatima. When I researched the shrine it details what is child abuse.

"According to Lúcia's account, Mary exhorted the children to do penance
to save sinners. They wore tight cords around their waists to cause
pain, abstained from drinking water on hot days, and other works of
penance.

I think that's exactly what it is ... I'm not Catholic but in rosary terms 'The Third Glorious Mystery' is connected with Our Lady of Fatima.

Rosaries are made out of all sorts of material (I have one that I inherited that was carved from animal bones during WW1) ... but this one is wood

I visited both Lourdes and Fatima several times, huge difference in "ambiance". I was explained by a real catholic that Lourdes is for the "healing", also meant in spiritual sense, Fatima is for penance.

an update to the report on page 1 :

Eddie the cadaver dog also signalled to the fire bucket, that contained the hidden key-card which was buried in sand.

Stella wrote:an update to the report on page 1 :

Eddie the cadaver dog also signalled to the fire bucket, that contained the hidden key-card which was buried in sand.

And here's confirmation.................

At 04h50, a new inspection was performed by Eddy on the parking level -4 where the above car
key was concealed in an area far distant from the vehicle.
At 04h51, it was verified that the dog 'marked' the area of a sandbox [bucket of sand] of the Fire
System where the car key had been concealed beneath the sand.
... the present document has been duly signed:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm

Here, Martin Grime confirms that Eddie has been alerting to the scent of cadaver, during his inspections:

“My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant”.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm#mg2473

More on this subject can be read here in our library
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2043-evrd-and-csi-dogs


As a reminder for myself. The basic difference between a dog alerting to blood and a dog alerting to cadaver, is;

One will freeze on the spot, with their nose as close to the source of the blood as possible, but not touching. (Keela)

The other by barking when alerting to the scent of cadaver. (Eddie)

Stella wrote:More on this subject can be read here in our library
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2043-evrd-and-csi-dogs


As a reminder for myself. The basic difference between a dog alerting to blood and a dog alerting to cadaver, is;

One will freeze on the spot, with their nose as close to the source of the blood as possible, but not touching. (Keela)

The other by barking when alerting to the scent of cadaver. (Eddie)

You say Eddie alerts to both blood and cadaver....... so does that mean Eddie alerts to blood by freezing on the spot the same as Keela, so that his alerts can be differentiated, or does he just bark regardless of blood or cadaver?

AskTheDogs wrote:

Stella wrote:More on this subject can be read here in our library
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2043-evrd-and-csi-dogs


As a reminder for myself. The basic difference between a dog alerting to blood and a dog alerting to cadaver, is;

One will freeze on the spot, with their nose as close to the source of the blood as possible, but not touching. (Keela)

The other by barking when alerting to the scent of cadaver. (Eddie)

You say Eddie alerts to both blood and cadaver....... so does that mean Eddie alerts to blood by freezing on the spot the same as Keela, so that his alerts can be differentiated, or does he just bark regardless of blood or cadaver?

My understanding is that he freezes for blood - just as Keela does - and barks for cadaver odour

Just a thought from reading another forum.

The DNA which was tested by FSS, when was it collected from the apartment? It wasn't tested until August, was it collected in August or around 4/5th May?

Hi Me,

From the ticker running across the top of this forum it looks like August

."...PJ Case Files: "Between 15h00 on August 4th 2007 and 06h30 on August 5th 2007, the following samples were recovered in the living room of apartment 5A at the OCEAN CLUB where a murder probably took place.".....

I think those DNA samples taken in August (i.e blood specks and blood under tiles) were after the dogs went in. Earlier samples must have been taken when the forensice team went in on 4th May. Will have a look.

Just been reading this report, and find it unbelievable that samples were destroyed - how come then in cases years old, the police are able to dig out samples a match up DNA on clothes, hairs and other fluids etc. How come these are kept. You can see cases every day, where they have had DNA ie. blood or semen etc., that have been solved years later, (sometimes 30 plus years later) because in those days there was no such thing as DNA and yet samples have been kept.


09- Processo 09 IX Page 2282 also Outros Apensos VolI Page 97
09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2282

Date 2007.08.21

Letter from the FSS

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.



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

candyfloss wrote:Hi Me,

From the ticker running across the top of this forum it looks like August

."...PJ Case Files: "Between 15h00 on August 4th 2007 and 06h30 on August 5th 2007, the following samples were recovered in the living room of apartment 5A at the OCEAN CLUB where a murder probably took place.".....

Hi Candy

Well that's what i thought so i wondered if we had anything in the files from an earlier recovery.

To be fair it's not unreasonable to suggest that there wouldn't be much DNA in that room 3 months later after cleaners, new guests etc had been in the apartment - which appears to be a defence of the "pros" and a fair one actually!

However if we have some report about forensic materials found (or not as the case may be) on the 4th of May then that's a different story.

I think most of us are assuming there was no DNA found of Maddie, which if true based on a search in August some 3 months later is not unreasonable.

However if we have no DNA found on the 4th May before cleaners / new guests had been in there then it is clealry very suspicious.

There is a request in the files from the PJ not to let that apartment back out. Will see if I can find it sometime.

Whoooo, I'm on fire today..


Processos Vol XVI
Page 4133

PJ 4th Brigade
From Inspector Joao Carlos

On 19th February 2008, I record in the process files that upon the request of the Ocean Club resort, made by the maintenance director Silvia Baptista, on the 11th of this month, we proceeded to return the key to the apartment G5A where the facts occurred. This apartment, although under the administration of the resort, is private and its owners have requested its use.

This apartment was made available by this police force, after instruction by the magistrate Dr Magalhaes Menezes, once the examinations and forensics to be carried out were completed, it no longer being necessary to occupy the space.

And therefore, it was tacitly agreed that in case it would be necessary to use the apartment for future inquiries, whether forensic or technical, it would immediately be made available.

19th February 2008

Signed

Inspector Joao Carlos

Thanks for that, so do you think it's safe to assume that no one used that apartment since 3rd May and that no resort cleaners had been in there to clean it after the events of the 3rd May?

So there can be no argument that the lack of DNA found was as a result of the apartment being used or by being cleaned?

I seem to remember that claims were made that the apartment had been let back out, but I cannot see how that can be true.

If you remember, the Dispatches team confirmed on their program that they were denied access to 5A to film, which might suggest that this was denied by the PJ as I cannot see any property owner turning down good money when they have been receiving nothing for quite a few months somehow.

I think it must have had one good clean just after forensics released the apartment, to clean up all the dragon's blood they used at every window and door. But back then in May 2007, they would not have been focusing on the floor tiles under the sofa, that was located under the living room window. I also cannot believe that the walls were washed down or repainted either, as some tried to suggest at the time.

Me wrote:

So there can be no argument that the lack of DNA found was as a result of the apartment being used or by being cleaned?

The lack of DNA came after the forensic sweep that took place on the 4th May. So we can 100% guarantee that the apartment did not go through a 'known clean', after the alarm was raised and before forensics arrived.

So given we're assuming the apartment wasnt cleaned and givne the lack of DNA, have the PJ ever commented on how strange it is to have an apartment with no DNA in it of the people staying there?

Has the question ever been put to the McCann's?

I think that part of the questioning has been witheld, I've never seen it.

But if you look at the Portuguese Forensic Report, you will see they identified hairs found from all the tapas men and Kate only. Fiona claimes she was consoling Kate in there for ages, yet nothing was found from her. How strange? The report does not identify any of the McCann or any other children's hair. How strange? Which can only mean they didn't find one single strand or if all of the McCann children hade been made a WOC, they may not be able to name them in the report.

Goncalo Amaral refers to their being no trace of them in the apartment, so I am assuming they did not find anything at all.

Stella wrote:I think that part of the questioning has been witheld, I've never seen it.

But if you look at the Portuguese Forensic Report, you will see they identified hairs found from all the tapas men and Kate only. Fiona claimes she was consoling Kate in there for ages, yet nothing was found from her. How strange? The report does not identify any of the McCann or any other children's hair. How strange? Which can only mean they didn't find one single strand or if all of the McCann children hade been made a WOC, they may not be able to name them in the report.

Goncalo Amaral refers to their being no trace of them in the apartment, so I am assuming they did not find anything at all.

I hadn't seen the Portugese forensic report in the files. Do you have a link to it? Perhaps it might be worth adding that report to the research library as it debunks the defence that no evidence was found of them in the apartment due to the time elapsed between 3rd May and the assumed August sweep after the dogs went in.