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

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

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

Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

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

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Woofer on 19.10.12 16:57

candyfloss wrote:
@Woofer wrote:In reply to cath2756 - "Why would they train a dog to alert to both cadaver and blood" >

Maybe because you can`t have cadaver without blood.

But you can have blood without cadaver.

Eh? Why not. If a body is not injured in any way at all, lies somewhere for just a couple of hours or so, without any decompostion, then yes, cadaver without a trace of blood.

But the blood is still there - maybe not showing externally but trickling into nasal, ear, mouth and other cavities.

candyfloss - I`m not sure about this, just pondering.
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Nina on 19.10.12 17:00

candyfloss wrote:
@Woofer wrote:In reply to cath2756 - "Why would they train a dog to alert to both cadaver and blood" >

Maybe because you can`t have cadaver without blood.

But you can have blood without cadaver.

Eh? Why not. If a body is not injured in any way at all, lies somewhere for just a couple of hours or so, without any decompostion, then yes, cadaver without a trace of blood.

The blood is within the body of an undamaged cadaver.
Many years ago when I was a nurse whilst giving last offices to a dead patient all the body orifices were packed to prevent seepage of body fluids, I understand that now this no longer occurs. I do wonder though about a head injury where fluid could escape from the ears and the nose and mouth and depending how near to one of the cracks in the grouting of the tiles this seepage could have drained down between the tiles. And even after a thorough cleaning of the surface of the tile there remains under the tile the residue.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.
avatar
Nina

Posts : 2861
Reputation : 334
Join date : 2011-06-16
Age : 74

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by PeterMac on 19.10.12 17:10

Bleeding from the ear is very common following head injury. It is one of the things we looked for at an RTA.

____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 174
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Guest on 19.10.12 17:14

I was speaking generally. Like my mom who died, massive heart attack, and lay there for a while, till ambulance came, but too late. Then of course, doctor has to come to check, and then finally the undertakers come. Takes quite a long time. No blood.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by bobbin on 19.10.12 17:20

candyfloss wrote:
@bobbin wrote:I also tried to add to my last post, but it got lost in the ether....namely that Kate, under oath at the Leveson Enquiry, stated that no liquids/blood (not verbatim) were found in the boot.
They also claimed some way back, that they had had their own private forensic analysis of the boot done (with the help of the older English man in the Algarve [name?]) and absolutely nothing was found.
Well, that's their word only, and would the PJ have left anything to be found and analysed anyway. I rather doubt it.
Clearly the McCs have gone to the greatest length possible to disparage the dogs, to put doubt on their 'signalling' to lie under oath about the Official Investigation findings, which Lord Justice Leveson can easily check out.
This dog/boot information must represent a very serious threat to them, and yes, with the upcoming Bennett case, one must wonder if they have any regrets about having taken Tony Bennett and Goncalo Amaral on, to try to silence both of them, the amount of force and threat being used, being "extreme", to say the least.

bobbin, I seem to recall a conversation, and it may have been Mr Amaral, though I would not like to say for definite, anyway, one of the investigation team, when it was mentioned that they (the McCanns) had had their own tests done, something about the mat in the wheel well had been changed for an identical one, and the PJ had the real one. I can remember reading or seeing it on video. Way back now, on 3a's or Mirror forum. Can't prove it though.

I really can't see how they would give the car back if there was forensic evidence in the boot, so that would make sense. I don't think I imagined it anyway, not trying to start a forum myth.

I had written, but deleted, that I wondered if the car given back was the same make, etc. but with the number plates changed over, so that the PJ could keep the original evidence, but then there's the speedometer to consider, and maybe other little things, so probably not the case.
However, I also remember a comment similar to the above and thought, canny, and I cannot really believe any police outfit being daft enough to let evidence go back into circulation if they were not absolutely certain that they had got everything valid from it.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by cath2756 on 19.10.12 17:22

@Woofer wrote:In reply to cath2756 - "Why would they train a dog to alert to both cadaver and blood" >

Maybe because you can`t have cadaver without blood.

But you can have blood without cadaver.

I understand that but surely it would make more sense to train one dog just in cadaver. I am not dismissing the dogs and up until now I have had no questions at all on their accuracy but somewhere I think we are all getting confused at the min. It may be, as (can't remember who) said that there are things held back in the files. I have the YouTube video of the dogs alerting and it is very impressive.

Up until now I have always thought that dogs were trained to detect certain things, i.e. a cadaver dog would only alert to cadaver scent and a blood dog would only alert to blood. I am still not too convinced that we are getting tied up at the min in logistics.

In between writing this and trying to post there were other replies re bleeding from orifices (sp?) Eddie alerted to car, clothes etc. which is taken to mean there was a cadaver or frozen remnants. Gerry took a fridge/freezer to the dump. Reasons, according to him for cadaver scent were rotting meat, dirty nappies etc. Even if bleeding were to take place from a fresh corpse that wouldn't alert a cadaver dog and bleeding would quickly stop post mortem?? I think I am right saying this but please feel free to correct me if I am wrong

BTW I owned and rented out villas in Florida and if one of my guests decided to dispose of my fridge/freezer I would be furious and keep their security deposit back

cath2756

Posts : 95
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-07-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Woofer on 19.10.12 17:25

I`m not totally sure about this - I, too, wish Martin Grimes could come and explain. I suppose it all depends on how and what he trained them with. I think he used cadaver from the Body Farm in USA, but once the process of decomposition starts, surely any residue blood is mixed up with the other organs as tissue breaks down. I don`t see how Martin could have trained Eddie to just respond to cadaver. I will try and do some more research.

____________________
The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear - Jiddu Krishnamurti
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by bobbin on 19.10.12 17:32

@bobbin wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
@bobbin wrote:I also tried to add to my last post, but it got lost in the ether....namely that Kate, under oath at the Leveson Enquiry, stated that no liquids/blood (not verbatim) were found in the boot.
They also claimed some way back, that they had had their own private forensic analysis of the boot done (with the help of the older English man in the Algarve [name?]) and absolutely nothing was found.
Well, that's their word only, and would the PJ have left anything to be found and analysed anyway. I rather doubt it.
Clearly the McCs have gone to the greatest length possible to disparage the dogs, to put doubt on their 'signalling' to lie under oath about the Official Investigation findings, which Lord Justice Leveson can easily check out.
This dog/boot information must represent a very serious threat to them, and yes, with the upcoming Bennett case, one must wonder if they have any regrets about having taken Tony Bennett and Goncalo Amaral on, to try to silence both of them, the amount of force and threat being used, being "extreme", to say the least.

bobbin, I seem to recall a conversation, and it may have been Mr Amaral, though I would not like to say for definite, anyway, one of the investigation team, when it was mentioned that they (the McCanns) had had their own tests done, something about the mat in the wheel well had been changed for an identical one, and the PJ had the real one. I can remember reading or seeing it on video. Way back now, on 3a's or Mirror forum. Can't prove it though.

I really can't see how they would give the car back if there was forensic evidence in the boot, so that would make sense. I don't think I imagined it anyway, not trying to start a forum myth.

I had written, but deleted, that I wondered if the car given back was the same make, etc. but with the number plates changed over, so that the PJ could keep the original evidence, but then there's the speedometer to consider, and maybe other little things, so probably not the case.
However, I also remember a comment similar to the above and thought, canny, and I cannot really believe any police outfit being daft enough to let evidence go back into circulation if they were not absolutely certain that they had got everything valid from it.

Just musing over the last two posts. Suppose you wanted to keep a car as evidence to determine if any dust/dirt under wheel arches, around the engine, in the air vents etc. or mud, stones in tyres etc. might match up to any samples known as geographically identifiable in a more distant zone, say where phone pings might have occurred and/or where excess mileage would indicate that a journey may have been made.
In which case, swapping car number plates and keeping the original car, would merit changing the speedometer/mileometer which could easily be fixed by any 'competent/ savvy' garage mechanic.
Perhaps more info has been held back than we originally imagined.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by ShuBob on 19.10.12 17:42

@Woofer wrote:I`m not totally sure about this - I, too, wish Martin Grimes could come and explain. I suppose it all depends on how and what he trained them with. I think he used cadaver from the Body Farm in USA, but once the process of decomposition starts, surely any residue blood is mixed up with the other organs as tissue breaks down. I don`t see how Martin could have trained Eddie to just respond to cadaver. I will try and do some more research.

If the dogs evidence in the cases of Suzanne Pilley and Kate Prout which have both been settled in UK courts are publicly available, that may be a source to check for Grime's explanation.

ShuBob

Posts : 1896
Reputation : 67
Join date : 2012-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by cath2756 on 19.10.12 17:46

@bobbin wrote:
@bobbin wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
@bobbin wrote:I also tried to add to my last post, but it got lost in the ether....namely that Kate, under oath at the Leveson Enquiry, stated that no liquids/blood (not verbatim) were found in the boot.
They also claimed some way back, that they had had their own private forensic analysis of the boot done (with the help of the older English man in the Algarve [name?]) and absolutely nothing was found.
Well, that's their word only, and would the PJ have left anything to be found and analysed anyway. I rather doubt it.
Clearly the McCs have gone to the greatest length possible to disparage the dogs, to put doubt on their 'signalling' to lie under oath about the Official Investigation findings, which Lord Justice Leveson can easily check out.
This dog/boot information must represent a very serious threat to them, and yes, with the upcoming Bennett case, one must wonder if they have any regrets about having taken Tony Bennett and Goncalo Amaral on, to try to silence both of them, the amount of force and threat being used, being "extreme", to say the least.

bobbin, I seem to recall a conversation, and it may have been Mr Amaral, though I would not like to say for definite, anyway, one of the investigation team, when it was mentioned that they (the McCanns) had had their own tests done, something about the mat in the wheel well had been changed for an identical one, and the PJ had the real one. I can remember reading or seeing it on video. Way back now, on 3a's or Mirror forum. Can't prove it though.

Am I wrong in saying that originally it was said Murat had rented the car before them? Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong

I really can't see how they would give the car back if there was forensic evidence in the boot, so that would make sense. I don't think I imagined it anyway, not trying to start a forum myth.

I had written, but deleted, that I wondered if the car given back was the same make, etc. but with the number plates changed over, so that the PJ could keep the original evidence, but then there's the speedometer to consider, and maybe other little things, so probably not the case.
However, I also remember a comment similar to the above and thought, canny, and I cannot really believe any police outfit being daft enough to let evidence go back into circulation if they were not absolutely certain that they had got everything valid from it.

Just musing over the last two posts. Suppose you wanted to keep a car as evidence to determine if any dust/dirt under wheel arches, around the engine, in the air vents etc. or mud, stones in tyres etc. might match up to any samples known as geographically identifiable in a more distant zone, say where phone pings might have occurred and/or where excess mileage would indicate that a journey may have been made.
In which case, swapping car number plates and keeping the original car, would merit changing the speedometer/mileometer which could easily be fixed by any 'competent/ savvy' garage mechanic.
Perhaps more info has been held back than we originally imagined.

cath2756

Posts : 95
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-07-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Nina on 19.10.12 17:52

candyfloss wrote:I was speaking generally. Like my mom who died, massive heart attack, and lay there for a while, till ambulance came, but too late. Then of course, doctor has to come to check, and then finally the undertakers come. Takes quite a long time. No blood.

empathy candyfloss I didn't mean to argue or offend was just saying that without any external injury that the blood is there but contained except for say a head injury where it can seep out.
Yes it does seem to take forever when some one dies and you are waiting for all the relevant people. roses

____________________
Not one more cent from me.
avatar
Nina

Posts : 2861
Reputation : 334
Join date : 2011-06-16
Age : 74

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Guest on 19.10.12 18:11

@Nina wrote:
candyfloss wrote:I was speaking generally. Like my mom who died, massive heart attack, and lay there for a while, till ambulance came, but too late. Then of course, doctor has to come to check, and then finally the undertakers come. Takes quite a long time. No blood.

candyfloss I didn't mean to argue or offend was just saying that without any external injury that the blood is there but contained except for say a head injury where it can seep out.
Yes it does seem to take forever when some one dies and you are waiting for all the relevant people.

Oh gosh Nina, you didn't offend me at all or argue. I'm sorry if you thought that. I am feeling a bit poorly, and tired, only 2 hours sleep last night, so perhaps my post didn't come out the way it was intended Plus, doing so much typing lately, I noticed myself, my posts consist of short snappy sentences,
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Nina on 19.10.12 18:16

candyfloss wrote:
@Nina wrote:
candyfloss wrote:I was speaking generally. Like my mom who died, massive heart attack, and lay there for a while, till ambulance came, but too late. Then of course, doctor has to come to check, and then finally the undertakers come. Takes quite a long time. No blood.

candyfloss I didn't mean to argue or offend was just saying that without any external injury that the blood is there but contained except for say a head injury where it can seep out.
Yes it does seem to take forever when some one dies and you are waiting for all the relevant people.

Oh gosh Nina, you didn't offend me at all or argue. I'm sorry if you thought that. I am feeling a bit poorly, and tired, only 2 hours sleep last night, so perhaps my post didn't come out the way it was intended Plus, doing so much typing lately, I noticed myself, my posts consist of short snappy sentences,

Eh no sweat, I did tell you to turn out the lights and go to bed. Don't let this forum affect your health and well being.

____________________
Not one more cent from me.
avatar
Nina

Posts : 2861
Reputation : 334
Join date : 2011-06-16
Age : 74

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Guest on 19.10.12 18:28

Don't let the pitter-patter of troll feet get you down either!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by tigger on 19.10.12 18:32

Jean wrote:Don't let the pitter-patter of troll feet get you down either!
I always find them more of a 'flip-flop' Size 12s... winkwink

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 48
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Woofer on 19.10.12 19:00

@ShuBob wrote:
@Woofer wrote:I`m not totally sure about this - I, too, wish Martin Grimes could come and explain. I suppose it all depends on how and what he trained them with. I think he used cadaver from the Body Farm in USA, but once the process of decomposition starts, surely any residue blood is mixed up with the other organs as tissue breaks down. I don`t see how Martin could have trained Eddie to just respond to cadaver. I will try and do some more research.

If the dogs evidence in the cases of Suzanne Pilley and Kate Prout which have both been settled in UK courts are publicly available, that may be a source to check for Grime's explanation.

Thanks ShuBob.
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Ciawoman on 19.10.12 19:09

I remember watching a programme on BBC Northern Ireland called In Cold Blood, the case of Attracta Harron. Not only did the dogs find traces of blood in a burned out car they also lead the police to her body in a shallow grave some distance away from the car. Thats when I became really impressed by these dogs.
avatar
Ciawoman

Posts : 62
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2012-06-02
Age : 50
Location : Belfast

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by saltnpepper on 19.10.12 20:17

is cuddlecat in a bin? or is it in the prop box along with the rosemary beads & good quality wristbands etc
avatar
saltnpepper

Posts : 154
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-04-30
Location : wales

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Nina on 19.10.12 20:21

@saltnpepper wrote:is cuddlecat in a bin? or is it in the prop box along with the rosemary beads & good quality wristbands etc

A cuddlecat was in the bin, or near it, couldn't actually see if it was in it. Then there was a shrine to Madeleine, looked like Kates side of the bed, on hubby Gerry's side it was light reading matter yes

____________________
Not one more cent from me.
avatar
Nina

Posts : 2861
Reputation : 334
Join date : 2011-06-16
Age : 74

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by stumo on 19.10.12 20:45

@bobbin wrote:
Just musing over the last two posts. Suppose you wanted to keep a car as evidence to determine if any dust/dirt under wheel arches, around the engine, in the air vents etc. or mud, stones in tyres etc. might match up to any samples known as geographically identifiable in a more distant zone, say where phone pings might have occurred and/or where excess mileage would indicate that a journey may have been made.
In which case, swapping car number plates and keeping the original car, would merit changing the speedometer/mileometer which could easily be fixed by any 'competent/ savvy' garage mechanic.
Perhaps more info has been held back than we originally imagined.


changing numberplates and speedometers is a fairly simple job, changing the VIN (Vehicle Identity Number...the Chassis Number) is a much more specialised job. If you've carried out the process of changing the number plate and VIN you have "ringed" the car, ie the car is a "ringer" to use the common term for them in the UK. If you HPI a car, the VIN and registration should match, you generally got no more information apart from if it's been in an accident, had a registration number change, any finance oweing on it etc etc

The VIN has to be, by Law, has to be stamped into the bodyshell which requires the body around the area to be cut out and refitted/welded to the "new" vehicle, secondly there is another set of numbers that is also has to be visable through the windscreen (that became law quite a few years ago) so the windscreen would have to be removed etc and the VIN also has to be on either a sticker (which is damaged upon removal) or on a plate, usually aluminium which is usually riveted onto the body.

Obviously doing it to a standard that would pass a complete inspection would be near impossible, that's the way most ringers are found.

If you really wanted to go to town you would also have to replace the engine (because of the number stamped into the block) and various other parts that are marked in such a way.

Infact, to pass a full forensic inspection would be near impossible due to the fact that virtually every part is date stamped during manufacture. This helps the manufacturer identify warranty problems and can usually pinpoint the manufacture of any part to a particular month.

hope that makes sense.
avatar
stumo

Posts : 153
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-03-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Ciawoman on 19.10.12 20:47

I found the light reading material a bit usual, when I'm upset I find it hard to relax and read. Though saying that about 5 years after something horrible happened to me I became obsessed with true crime, but that was 5 years after
avatar
Ciawoman

Posts : 62
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2012-06-02
Age : 50
Location : Belfast

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by fabpete on 20.10.12 9:29

Hi all
just been catching up on this thread and found it interesting regarding the Hire Car.
I never really thought about the claims that the McCanns had had the hire car stored by a "friend" in PdL until a poster mentioned it earlier on this thread.
As has already been pointed out, why would the PJ feel that they had to return the vehicle to who were then suspects?
the vehicle was a hire car after all, why did the PJ not just contact the hire company, inform them that the vehicle was evidence and impound it?, the Hire Company would then provide a different vehicle to the McCanns, the McCanns had no legal right to insist on the same vehicle and it seems very odd that the PJ would allow the vehicle to be back in the use of the people suspected of using that very vehicle in actions that were part of a potential court case?

I wonder if there is some pink spin that has been put on the hire car story?

fabpete

Posts : 37
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-07-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by bobbin on 20.10.12 9:46

@fabpete wrote:Hi all
just been catching up on this thread and found it interesting regarding the Hire Car.
I never really thought about the claims that the McCanns had had the hire car stored by a "friend" in PdL until a poster mentioned it earlier on this thread.
As has already been pointed out, why would the PJ feel that they had to return the vehicle to who were then suspects?
the vehicle was a hire car after all, why did the PJ not just contact the hire company, inform them that the vehicle was evidence and impound it?, the Hire Company would then provide a different vehicle to the McCanns, the McCanns had no legal right to insist on the same vehicle and it seems very odd that the PJ would allow the vehicle to be back in the use of the people suspected of using that very vehicle in actions that were part of a potential court case?

I wonder if there is some pink spin that has been put on the hire car story?

Just had a sudden thought. Given that I know from a recent French investigation that phone lines are tapped and calls intercepted so that the police can follow information trails /networks, I wonder if the car returned might have had some 'tracer' on it to see where the vehicle went etc.

bobbin

Posts : 2052
Reputation : 142
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by fabpete on 20.10.12 10:29

@bobbin wrote:
@fabpete wrote:Hi all
just been catching up on this thread and found it interesting regarding the Hire Car.
I never really thought about the claims that the McCanns had had the hire car stored by a "friend" in PdL until a poster mentioned it earlier on this thread.
As has already been pointed out, why would the PJ feel that they had to return the vehicle to who were then suspects?
the vehicle was a hire car after all, why did the PJ not just contact the hire company, inform them that the vehicle was evidence and impound it?, the Hire Company would then provide a different vehicle to the McCanns, the McCanns had no legal right to insist on the same vehicle and it seems very odd that the PJ would allow the vehicle to be back in the use of the people suspected of using that very vehicle in actions that were part of a potential court case?

I wonder if there is some pink spin that has been put on the hire car story?

Just had a sudden thought. Given that I know from a recent French investigation that phone lines are tapped and calls intercepted so that the police can follow information trails /networks, I wonder if the car returned might have had some 'tracer' on it to see where the vehicle went etc.

That would make sense of the returning the same hire car issue, but I suppose they could have replaced the original vehicle with any other hire car and put some kind of tracking device on that one?
It just doesnt seem to make sense to have given the same vehicle back, the PJ didnt allow the family back in apartment 5A, they retained Cuddle Cat, yet return a vehicle that is not even belonging to the then suspects, that could have been classed as a crime scene.

The more I think about it, the stranger it becomes, having said that, one rule of thumb does seem to be if the McCanns make a statement about anything, there is usually a completely different truth involved, perhaps this is another case of that?

fabpete

Posts : 37
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-07-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Why was the Cuddlecat toy in a bin?

Post by Guest on 20.10.12 10:38

@fabpete wrote:It just doesnt seem to make sense to have given the same vehicle back, the PJ didnt allow the family back in apartment 5A, they retained Cuddle Cat, yet return a vehicle that is not even belonging to the then suspects, that could have been classed as a crime scene.

And, of course, the PJ even let Kate have her stinky cadaver pants back too cos she was wearing them when they arrived back in the UK.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/the-mccanns-return-to-britain-13385009.html
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

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

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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