Re: Jenny Murat on Kate McCanns book

by Tombraider 27.12.12 1:40

parapono wrote:Right, hair samples of the twins, nope.
Instead they "managed to 'squeeze in' a hair-cut for the twins, Gerry McCann wrote in his blog.
Snipping off possible evidence of sedation... Who knows..

parapono

And this could be why they didn't get hair samples, I believe KM has made reference to it in her book and stated that she did allow their own forensic team to take hair samples from the twins months later.

by **PeterMac** 27.12.12 7:59

p. 274-5 " I asked for samples of my own hair to be taken as well simply because I was fed up with the constant insinuations that I took tranquillisers, sleeping pills or any medication, for that matter. The process seemed to take ages and we all lost loads of hair. I couldn’t believe they had to take so much. The scientist cut chunks of it from Sean and Amelie’s heads while they were sleeping. I cried as I heard the scissors in their baby-blond hair. I felt angry that the children had to go through this further insult. As for me, I looked as if I had alopecia. "

Q: How many hairs are required for laboratory testing?
A: Approximately 40-50 strands cut from the scalp line at the crown (or when bundled, about the diameter of a shoelace tip).

Q: What time period does the HairConfirm™ test cover?
A: HairConfirm™ will detect drugs for a period of 90 days. The test requires a hair sample of 1.5 inches in length. Each 0.5 inch represents 30 days. The hair sample must be cut as close to the scalp as possible and only the most recent 1.5 inches are tested.

Laboratories advertise their ability for analyse for a period of 90 days. The McCanns’ samples were not taken until 24th September, almost six months = 144 days later. Although it is possible at that stage to test for continuous drug use, it is not believed in any event that a single dose of a drug, given in the amount appropriate to a 2 year old would be sufficient for successful identification on analysis.

by Guest 27.12.12 9:55

I can literally hear Kate's whining accent with that quote about hair samples. How dreadful for her to be treated the same as any obvious suspects in a criminal case, instead of with the reverence and awe she expects.

Jenny Murat on Kate McCanns book - Page 3 3247107148

Jenny Murat on Kate McCanns book - Page 3 3247107148

Respect is a two-way street - if you give none, you receive none.

by Woofer 27.12.12 10:14

It never ceases to amaze me how this woman really must think everyone in the world is stupid. Its more than arrogance, its some form of mental dysfunction IMO.

by **PeterMac** 27.12.12 11:11

Particularly strange when you consider that what she or her ghost writer put in the book must have been pored over by C-R, amongst others.
They left in so much that was capable of independent verification, or in this case 'falsification' (in the Popper sense) that it makes one wonder whether it was not a cry for help, a plea to be found out, a last attempt for someone to release her from her private hell, and to bring the truth into the open.

by Guest 27.12.12 12:36

PeterMac wrote:Particularly strange when you consider that what she or her ghost writer put in the book must have been pored over by C-R, amongst others.
They left in so much that was capable of independent verification, or in this case 'falsification' (in the Popper sense) that it makes one wonder whether it was not a cry for help, a plea to be found out, a last attempt for someone to release her from her private hell, and to bring the truth into the open.

thanks PeterMac

parapono

by Tombraider 27.12.12 12:48

I think we can safely say then that for whatever reason, the investigation didn't obtain reference hair samples from the twins. Whether this was because the McCann’s wouldn't allow samples to be taken or whether it wasn't seen as necessary by the authorities at the time is something we don’t know. What I think is certain though is that without reference samples from the twins and also possibly the other children who were on the same holiday with them, it wouldn't be possible to identify any hairs found at the crime scenes which were thought to have originated from a child.

It would also prevent any tests discovering chemicals / sedatives.

by joyce1938 28.12.12 10:11

i also read somewhere that a lot of samples were destroyed along with others ,if not sure if it had to be macs or solicitor ,but soeone had to ask for them to be kept ,its just a bit of memory i have ,dont take it as gospel,incase i have got it muddled,i bet others will remember joyce1938

by **PeterMac** 28.12.12 10:20

Tombraider wrote:I think we can safely say then that for whatever reason, the investigation didn't obtain reference hair samples from the twins. Whether this was because the McCann’s wouldn't allow samples to be taken or whether it wasn't seen as necessary by the authorities at the time is something we don’t know. What I think is certain though is that without reference samples from the twins and also possibly the other children who were on the same holiday with them, it wouldn't be possible to identify any hairs found at the crime scenes which were thought to have originated from a child.
It would also prevent any tests discovering chemicals / sedatives.

Gonçalo Amaral in Amsterdam, 05 May 2009 http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

Q: Do you think the children were sedated?
A: There is no doubt. (Here he told an anecdote: that Kate called a colleague of Gonçalo Amaral's in the PJ, in August, to ask them to check the twins for traces of sedation. Apparently Kate was alone when she called, and a bit upset. That same afternoon, Gerry called and cancelled the request.)

by **tigger** 28.12.12 11:58

joyce1938 wrote:i also read somewhere that a lot of samples were destroyed along with others ,if not sure if it had to be macs or solicitor ,but soeone had to ask for them to be kept ,its just a bit of memory i have ,dont take it as gospel,incase i have got it muddled,i bet others will remember joyce1938

No, you're quite right. All the samples were destroyed by the FSS as 'they were contaminated'. As big a load of rubbish I've ever heard, same idea again, that contaminated DNA cannot be separated into different individuals.
Samples of decades back have brought murderers to justice, such as the killers of Stephen Lawrence.

Samples are kept even if contaminated because future technology and science may be able to analyse them. The FSS destroying the samples is a huge red flag to me.

Imo they weren't contaminated at all, they just provided the wrong result. I believe Gordon Brown visited the FSS personally, soon after the samples were ditched.

by Guest 28.12.12 13:00

On another forum a poster called beachy has repeatedly been outraged that none of the hairs found in the rented car had been checked for corpse banding ...

by Guest 28.12.12 13:11

Interview with Goncalo Amaral on the hairs found at the bottom of this piece on Joana's site.........

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2012/03/maddie-case-goncalo-amaral-returns-to.html

by Tombraider 28.12.12 13:38

PeterMac wrote:
Tombraider wrote:I think we can safely say then that for whatever reason, the investigation didn't obtain reference hair samples from the twins. Whether this was because the McCann’s wouldn't allow samples to be taken or whether it wasn't seen as necessary by the authorities at the time is something we don’t know. What I think is certain though is that without reference samples from the twins and also possibly the other children who were on the same holiday with them, it wouldn't be possible to identify any hairs found at the crime scenes which were thought to have originated from a child.
It would also prevent any tests discovering chemicals / sedatives.
Gonçalo Amaral in Amsterdam, 05 May 2009 http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

Q: Do you think the children were sedated?
A: There is no doubt. (Here he told an anecdote: that Kate called a colleague of Gonçalo Amaral's in the PJ, in August, to ask them to check the twins for traces of sedation. Apparently Kate was alone when she called, and a bit upset. That same afternoon, Gerry called and cancelled the request.)

Thanks PeterMac, Confirmation then that the Portuguese Police / forensics couldn't have had reference samples of the twins hair in order to be used for earlier comparison testing (along with the other hair samples taken) against any other hairs found which were thought to have originated from a child.

by Tombraider 28.12.12 13:42

tigger wrote:
joyce1938 wrote:i also read somewhere that a lot of samples were destroyed along with others ,if not sure if it had to be macs or solicitor ,but soeone had to ask for them to be kept ,its just a bit of memory i have ,dont take it as gospel,incase i have got it muddled,i bet others will remember joyce1938

No, you're quite right. All the samples were destroyed by the FSS as 'they were contaminated'. As big a load of rubbish I've ever heard, same idea again, that contaminated DNA cannot be separated into different individuals.
Samples of decades back have brought murderers to justice, such as the killers of Stephen Lawrence.

Samples are kept even if contaminated because future technology and science may be able to analyse them. The FSS destroying the samples is a huge red flag to me.

Imo they weren't contaminated at all, they just provided the wrong result. I believe Gordon Brown visited the FSS personally, soon after the samples were ditched.

I agree - Big Red flag.

Weren't some of the samples sent to labs in Lisbon?

by **Nina** 28.12.12 15:14

candyfloss wrote:Interview with Goncalo Amaral on the hairs found at the bottom of this piece on Joana's site.........

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2012/03/maddie-case-goncalo-amaral-returns-to.html

I urge everyone to read this link.

by happychick 28.12.12 15:29

Nina wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Interview with Goncalo Amaral on the hairs found at the bottom of this piece on Joana's site.........

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2012/03/maddie-case-goncalo-amaral-returns-to.html

I urge everyone to read this link.

This bit is disturbing

GA: I was about to explain that. The FSS stated that due to the hair tone, they belonged to Madeleine McCann, but that they couldn’t extract the DNA because the hairs did not have any roots.

by Guest 28.12.12 16:37

IIRC Rebelo asked FSS to look for corpse banding, but never got a reply. It must be somewhere in the PJ files. Will look later for it. But maybe someone else can find it before me ...?

Off to prepare light meal for dear old sick Maman :-(

by **tigger** 28.12.12 17:42

happychick wrote:
Nina wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Interview with Goncalo Amaral on the hairs found at the bottom of this piece on Joana's site.........

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2012/03/maddie-case-goncalo-amaral-returns-to.html

I urge everyone to read this link.

This bit is disturbing

GA: I was about to explain that. The FSS stated that due to the hair tone, they belonged to Madeleine McCann, but that they couldn’t extract the DNA because the hairs did not have any roots.

Yes, but that only serves to illuminate the fact that they were not retained. As GA said, these days DNA can be extracted from hairs without roots.
A few years ago, guilt of a murderer was confirmed after 40 years!

From Wiki: 1962, 4 April: James Hanratty at Bedford after a controversial rape-murder trial. In 2002 Hanratty's body was exhumed and the Court of Appeal upheld his conviction after Hanratty's DNA was linked to crime scene samples.

by happychick 28.12.12 18:01

tigger wrote:
happychick wrote:
Nina wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Interview with Goncalo Amaral on the hairs found at the bottom of this piece on Joana's site.........

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2012/03/maddie-case-goncalo-amaral-returns-to.html

I urge everyone to read this link.

This bit is disturbing

GA: I was about to explain that. The FSS stated that due to the hair tone, they belonged to Madeleine McCann, but that they couldn’t extract the DNA because the hairs did not have any roots.

Yes, but that only serves to illuminate the fact that they were not retained. As GA said, these days DNA can be extracted from hairs without roots.
A few years ago, guilt of a murderer was confirmed after 40 years!

From Wiki: 1962, 4 April: James Hanratty at Bedford after a controversial rape-murder trial. In 2002 Hanratty's body was exhumed and the Court of Appeal upheld his conviction after Hanratty's DNA was linked to crime scene samples.

What I found disturbing, if we are to believe the police that the McCann's had something to do with concealing Madeleine's cadaver, is why Madeleine's hair was even cut before she was disposed of.

eta: I appreciate it's to do with the issue of sedation but to cut her hair must mean they expected Madeleine's cadaver to be found somewhere? And if so why hasn't it be found yet?

by **tigger** 28.12.12 18:24

I've not read much on the question of hair. But GA mentions hair found in the car, that might simply have come off, not been cut. Although Maddie was 'advertised' as blonde, she wasn't imo. I can't work out how the FSS could tell it was her hair by the colour alone. Her hair is different colours in different photographs.

When the PJ asked for articles to extract Maddie's DNA, sandals, toothbrush, hairbrush etc. they were told all these things were shared. The clothes were all washed, so I can't see how the McCanns would have left a sizeable number of hairs around.
No hair mentioned when DNA was extracted from a pillow in Rothley either.

GA (not in this interview) mentioned one hair which still had a root on it, which was with the FSS and about which the PJ never heard again.

Your last sentence is intriguing, it does seem she was not meant to be found, so why worry about the hair?

by Tombraider 28.12.12 18:42

tigger wrote:I've not read much on the question of hair. But GA mentions hair found in the car, that might simply have come off, not been cut. Although Maddie was 'advertised' as blonde, she wasn't imo. I can't work out how the FSS could tell it was her hair by the colour alone. Her hair is different colours in different photographs.

When the PJ asked for articles to extract Maddie's DNA, sandals, toothbrush, hairbrush etc. they were told all these things were shared. The clothes were all washed, so I can't see how the McCanns would have left a sizeable number of hairs around.
No hair mentioned when DNA was extracted from a pillow in Rothley either.

GA (not in this interview) mentioned one hair which still had a root on it, which was with the FSS and about which the PJ never heard again.

Your last sentence is intriguing, it does seem she was not meant to be found, so why worry about the hair?

" I can't work out how the FSS could tell it was her hair by the colour
alone. Her hair is different colours in different photographs."

They couldn't, there is no way anyone can compare hair samples to photo's and be certain the samples came from the same person in a photo.

Did you know the very same hairs they attempted to compare to photo's, which according to the report, weren't seen as definite / genuine samples from Madeleine were used as reference samples.

This is why they needed reference samples specifically from the twins and ideally the other children with that group. There was no way of identifying any hairs found at the crime scenes without either a definite sample belonging to Madeleine which they didn't possess or having reference samples from all the other children, especially the twins. If they had those then it should have been simple to find a sample of hair that came from Madeleine - and realistically there should have been plenty of her hairs around.

by Liz Eagles 28.12.12 18:55

I wonder how SY will report on the forensic tests. It was UK FSS who carried them out.

Possibly a silly question but wouldn't Madeleine's dna still be present somewhere in the Rothley house?

by **Nina** 28.12.12 20:09

aquila wrote:I wonder how SY will report on the forensic tests. It was UK FSS who carried them out.

Possibly a silly question but wouldn't Madeleine's dna still be present somewhere in the Rothley house?

Yes I am sure that it will unless they had the whole house steam cleaned/fumigated. In the corners of drawers and cupboards, between the pages/spine of her books and other difficult to clean places.

by Liz Eagles 28.12.12 20:31

Nina wrote:
aquila wrote:I wonder how SY will report on the forensic tests. It was UK FSS who carried them out.

Possibly a silly question but wouldn't Madeleine's dna still be present somewhere in the Rothley house?

Yes I am sure that it will unless they had the whole house steam cleaned/fumigated. In the corners of drawers and cupboards, between the pages/spine of her books and other difficult to clean places.

That's what I thought Nina and if that is the case there is no reason why Portuguese and UK police should not now have her dna on record. The UK 'review' is supposedly impartial which to my mind includes every aspect of the disappearance of Madeleine and the removal of suspects. The Portuguese investigation has been maligned and criticised. Surely Madeleine's dna is a matter of the greatest importance to both. It's too late to say whether the children were given sedatives or not but Madeleine's dna has to be in some authority's possession. Or am I being naiive?

by **Nina** 28.12.12 20:36

aquila wrote:
Nina wrote:
aquila wrote:I wonder how SY will report on the forensic tests. It was UK FSS who carried them out.

Possibly a silly question but wouldn't Madeleine's dna still be present somewhere in the Rothley house?

Yes I am sure that it will unless they had the whole house steam cleaned/fumigated. In the corners of drawers and cupboards, between the pages/spine of her books and other difficult to clean places.

That's what I thought Nina and if that is the case there is no reason why Portuguese and UK police should not now have her dna on record. The UK 'review' is supposedly impartial which to my mind includes every aspect of the disappearance of Madeleine and the removal of suspects. The Portuguese investigation has been maligned and criticised. Surely Madeleine's dna is a matter of the greatest importance to both. It's too late to say whether the children were given sedatives or not but Madeleine's dna has to be in some authority's possession. Or am I being naiive?

No you certainly are not being naive it is what they do with it though that is the question.

by joyce1938 28.12.12 23:10

yes there were dna samples said to belong to maddie,one lot from her pillowcase at home ,and there seems to have been a sample that is taken at birth from all babiesin UK,it arrived to portugal sealed and mr amaral seemed to think it could be kosher and it did match the pillow case one ,if memory serves me right joyce1938 ps i dont think this is the same as banding from hair ?

by Guest 28.12.12 23:15

Joyce, good evening :-)
Corpse banding is a fine, but easily detectable under a microscope, dark line in a hair, indicating that it comes from a dead person ...

by IKNOWWHATHAPPENED 29.12.12 1:08

Greetings, Obviously the Murats know more than what they have revealed, as do Sergei Malinka and to a lesser extent Michelle. The money Murat was paid was simply to buy his silence. However, imo, none of them were directly responsible for her death. Sure the half the 16 role players had a common purpose, the others were just dragged along for artistic purposes.
Child abuse is at the root of this conundrum imo I'm afraid.
A homosexual singer that rose to prominance in the 50's, described by some as a saint . WPP, CR, MS, and a string of colourful characters and entities became involved. The ongoing battle for media regulation at the moment has, and will continue to use the McCanns as a football for there own means. When you take a strange course of action and sell your daughters memory to 'the forces of darkness' masters of the 'dark arts' if you like, how can you ever really sleep at night..
The friends still have a purpose for you, but when you have served your purpose you can always wave your diplomatic immunity card.....or can you ?
****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

by IKNOWWHATHAPPENED 29.12.12 1:32

The hair was probably mixed with the hair of others.
The Portugese actually kept some of the hair anyway.

by Inspectorfrost 29.12.12 18:27

Châtelaine wrote:Joyce, good evening :-)
Corpse banding is a fine, but easily detectable under a microscope, dark line in a hair, indicating that it comes from a dead person ...

And Rebelo asked for corpse banding tests, there is nothing in the files to say they were done