Re: Jenny Murat on Kate McCanns book

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

by Guest 29.12.12 18:41

Inspectorfrost wrote:
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

***
Indeed. Either they weren't done or they're mentioned in withheld files, though the latter doesn't make sense to me as it would be an all exclusive proof of a dead person in the rented car ...

by Inspectorfrost 29.12.12 18:50

Châtelaine wrote:
Inspectorfrost wrote:
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
***

Indeed. Either they weren't done or they're mentioned in withheld files, though the latter doesn't make sense to me as it would be an all exclusive proof of a dead person in the rented car ...

Exactly. I think they were not done. Shameful at best. Wickedly corrupt and a perversion of the course of justice at worst.

by Guest 31.12.12 9:16

"yeah but yeah but no"

The find alone of a corpse banded hair in the car is not the all exclusive proof that a dead body was in that car.
It is the evidence that a hair of an already deceased person ended up in that car. Which might in itself be just as important.

Amaral writes something like ' they (uk officers) seem to be in no hurry' .
IMO in this case all moments and opportunities to solve at least a little of the riddle were missed, omitted or aborted.

Still much can be done. And I sincerely hope SY will look into all information available.
Unlike those hair samples, that must have been destroyed by now there are records still existing that could be checked. For instance Gerry's 2nd UK visit, his stolen and returned wallet, only mentioned by the McCanns.

His bank details, requested by the PJ and denied by the HO, must still exist.
It would be interesting to know if any unusual transaction was made on any of his accounts in that particular period... A story to cover the possible detection of such transactions.. by faking 'they had taken it''.

Still hoping the truth will come out one day

parapono

'what you sow, you'll harvest'

by mank 31.12.12 23:45

I agree, the truth needs to be out now, A very happy New Year to everyone on the forum, and a wish that 2013 will bring that,hopefully through the libel trial

by whmon 07.04.13 1:13

Justicemm wrote:
ShuBob wrote:According to Clarence Mitchell, the undisclosed payment made to Kate for the unauthorised publication of her diary by NoTW was £125,000. Interestingly, Kate then went on to choose the Sun- of all the papers in the UK- to serialize her book.

The Sun of all the newspapers she could have used . And she's supposed to be a Scouser !

I am sorry if I appear snobbish here as I am not snobbish by any means but it was just your 'Scouser' remark. When the story first unfolded and it became apparent that the parents were both doctors I felt that they were totally innocent, Then, they were on tv and I became aware that they were simply working class individuals who had 'made good' by going to university (same as me.) What is all the 'they are middle class therefore they are blameless' stance about?

They have come up- kicking and squealing on the dirty working class streets. Nothing wrong with that, I did that myself (and at a damned good university I may add), but WHY do people assume that doctors or anybody else for that matter who have undergone a period of university study have higher morals than anybody who has not gone to university?

by plebgate 07.04.13 7:59

I think the scouser remark was because of the way the Sun reported on the Hillsborough disaster and a real/true scouser would never ever again buy the Sun newspaper let alone take money from it????