Kate and Dogs - all sorts

tigger wrote:Opening this (this is not just  about Eddie and Keela but about all other dogs) with page 86/87 of the Book:

4th May:
page 86
At about nine o’clock we all went out on to Rua Dr Agostinho da Silva
to find out what was going on and to look out for the PJ. The GNR patrol was still in evidence, although again, there didn’t seem to be much sense of urgency. So what had the police been doing? It was hard to tell. According to the PJ files, to which we did not have access until August 2008, two patrol dogs were brought to Praia da Luz at 2am on 4 May and four search-and-rescue dogs at 8am. I don’t remember seeing any police dogs until the morning, and if there were any specific police searches overnight, they were not apparent. The only searches I was aware of were those carried out by ourselves, fellow guests and the Mark Warner staff.
According to the files, the tracker dogs did not go out until 11pm on 4 May. At some point in the first twenty-four hours (I could not say when exactly, but probably that morning) I recall one of the GNR patrol officers asking us for some of Madeleine’s clothing or belongings to enable these dogs to identify her scent. I fetched the pink princess blanket she took to bed with her every night, which they took, and some of her clothes, which they didn’t.
unquote

This little gem is full of interest and contradiction.

According to the PJ files  - there were two patrol dogs  at 2. am.
Four search and rescue dogs  at 8. am.
Tracker dogs at 11.00 am.
It seems Kate doesn't count the first 2 or 6 dogs as being of any use. Does she mean that the patrol dogs patrolled and didn't sniff anything?
That the s and e dogs weren't the right ones either?
That only the Tracker dogs could do the business?  

Most interesting is the phrase 'and some of her clothes'. No way would I say that. I'd say 'and her little pink dress that she wore the day before, the pink hat she always wore - I would say which of her clothes I'd offered.
She also doesn't say why they didn't take the clothes.

tigger wrote:
The dog handler of Eddie and Keela who searched PdL for traces of Maddie is now employed by the FBI. US don't seem to have a problem with dogs.

Cristobell wrote:May God forgive that ghastly woman claiming the only ones searching were themselves, fellow Warners guests and staff.  An out and out lie, she and her equally bone idle husband stayed in the apartment while others searched.  What an absolute slap in the face to the PJ and people of PDL.  When Jez Wilkins went to say goodbye to them on 5th May, he found Gerry and Kate by the pool.  And why did they need their entire extended family out there with them, together with childhood friends, bridesmaids, distant cousins and the priest who married them?  And were Warners paying for it all?

AB1 wrote:


from Joana Morais site.

This is the Scenic which gave positive hits.
It appears KM is wearing the black and white trousers which the cadaver dog also indicated.

Be interesting to know when this picture was taking, and their movements that day... Oh for hindsight and a cartracking device!

Angelique wrote:Late arriving as usual - sorry.

I was oddly enough reading yesterday about Madeleine's clothes. I found a reference to what happened in an interview with Oprah here

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id226.html

Clip By Sara Nuwar
26/04/2009

 
"And Kate told how Amelie has taken to borrowing some of Madeleine's clothes-although the oufits last worn by her in Portugal are kept tucked away and untouched."

At least I was reading if not actually here at the same time!

Portia wrote:

Angelique wrote:Late arriving as usual - sorry.

I was oddly enough reading yesterday about Madeleine's clothes. I found a reference to what happened in an interview with Oprah here

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id226.html

Clip By Sara Nuwar
26/04/2009

 
"And Kate told how Amelie has taken to borrowing some of Madeleine's clothes-although the oufits last worn by her in Portugal are kept tucked away and untouched."

At least I was reading if not actually here at the same time!

Untouched as in: brimming with DNA materiel from the missing child? Now, that would be great news, wouldn't it?

tigger wrote:

Portia wrote:

Angelique wrote:Late arriving as usual - sorry.

I was oddly enough reading yesterday about Madeleine's clothes. I found a reference to what happened in an interview with Oprah here

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id226.html

Clip By Sara Nuwar
26/04/2009

 
"And Kate told how Amelie has taken to borrowing some of Madeleine's clothes-although the oufits last worn by her in Portugal are kept tucked away and untouched."

At least I was reading if not actually here at the same time!

Untouched as in: brimming with DNA materiel from the missing child? Now, that would be great news, wouldn't it?

So it's totally logical that the only DNA made available came from a pillowcase in Rothley. 
Which imo is not a 100% reliable sample. It could have been from Amelie.  I believe the wording  of Lowe's report does not exclude that possibility.

tigger wrote:Opening this (this is not just  about Eddie and Keela but about all other dogs) with page 86/87 of the Book:

4th May:
page 86
At about nine o’clock we all went out on to Rua Dr Agostinho da Silva
to find out what was going on and to look out for the PJ. The GNR patrol was still in evidence, although again, there didn’t seem to be much sense of urgency. So what had the police been doing? It was hard to tell. According to the PJ files, to which we did not have access until August 2008, two patrol dogs were brought to Praia da Luz at 2am on 4 May and four search-and-rescue dogs at 8am. I don’t remember seeing any police dogs until the morning, and if there were any specific police searches overnight, they were not apparent. The only searches I was aware of were those carried out by ourselves, fellow guests and the Mark Warner staff.
According to the files, the tracker dogs did not go out until 11pm on 4 May. At some point in the first twenty-four hours (I could not say when exactly, but probably that morning) I recall one of the GNR patrol officers asking us for some of Madeleine’s clothing or belongings to enable these dogs to identify her scent. I fetched the pink princess blanket she took to bed with her every night, which they took, and some of her clothes, which they didn’t.
unquote

This little gem is full of interest and contradiction.

According to the PJ files  - there were two patrol dogs  at 2. am.
Four search and rescue dogs  at 8. am.
Tracker dogs at 11.00 am.
It seems Kate doesn't count the first 2 or 6 dogs as being of any use. Does she mean that the patrol dogs patrolled and didn't sniff anything?
That the s and e dogs weren't the right ones either?
That only the Tracker dogs could do the business?  

Most interesting is the phrase 'and some of her clothes'. No way would I say that. I'd say 'and her little pink dress that she wore the day before, the pink hat she always wore - I would say which of her clothes I'd offered.
She also doesn't say why they didn't take the clothes.

According to the PJ files, [/b]to which we did not have access until August 2008, two patrol dogs were brought to Praia da Luz at 2am on 4 May and four search-and-rescue dogs at 8am. I don’t remember seeing any police dogs until the morning, and if there were any specific police searches overnight, they were not apparent.

Portia wrote:

Angelique wrote:Late arriving as usual - sorry.

I was oddly enough reading yesterday about Madeleine's clothes. I found a reference to what happened in an interview with Oprah here

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id226.html

Clip By Sara Nuwar
26/04/2009

 
"And Kate told how Amelie has taken to borrowing some of Madeleine's clothes-although the oufits last worn by her in Portugal are kept tucked away and untouched."

At least I was reading if not actually here at the same time!

Untouched as in: brimming with DNA materiel from the missing child? Now, that would be great news, wouldn't it?

tigger wrote:I meant  that the pillowcase from which the control sample was taken cannot be 100% certain to contain the DNA of Maddie. The wording of the Lowe report is ambiguous imo. 

As for Amelie wearing Maddie's clothes, Amelie was tiny at that time. It's also not the instinctive motherly behaviour to give the clothes of a lost or  deceased child to a sibling to wear. 
But I always got the impression that spending money on children's clothes and shoes wasn't a priority with the McCanns. Which is one of the many reasons the pretty clothes on the Donegal pictures stand out. Never seen in any other photo, a too large sun dress in the kitchen photo, the cheap tennis outfit, not at all new sandals. 

There should have been masses of  Maddie's DNA in  clothes and shoes in 5a. Also it's against any instinct to wash clothes from a child either abducted or deceased. 
I have a scarf which I gave to my dearest friend years ago. It's in a box, I will never wear it, but neither willi wash it.

lj wrote:

tigger wrote:I meant  that the pillowcase from which the control sample was taken cannot be 100% certain to contain the DNA of Maddie. The wording of the Lowe report is ambiguous imo. 

As for Amelie wearing Maddie's clothes, Amelie was tiny at that time. It's also not the instinctive motherly behaviour to give the clothes of a lost or  deceased child to a sibling to wear. 
But I always got the impression that spending money on children's clothes and shoes wasn't a priority with the McCanns. Which is one of the many reasons the pretty clothes on the Donegal pictures stand out. Never seen in any other photo, a too large sun dress in the kitchen photo, the cheap tennis outfit, not at all new sandals. 

There should have been masses of  Maddie's DNA in  clothes and shoes in 5a. Also it's against any instinct to wash clothes from a child either abducted or deceased. 
I have a scarf which I gave to my dearest friend years ago. It's in a box, I will never wear it, but neither willi wash it.

What fascinates me in the Operation StGrange is that  2.5 years and millions and millions of £s later, their is no word about all those controversial DNA samples. Nada.

Madeleine: McCanns consult American lawyers over 'cadaver dog' evidence
Last updated at 18:07 16 September 2007

Kate and Gerry McCann's legal team have consulted the lawyers of an American man accused of murdering his estranged wife in a case where cadaver dog evidence was key, a source said today.
Two British sniffer dogs, one capable of detecting blood and human remains, were brought to Portugal in early August.
The cadaver dog picked up a "scent of death" on everything from Mrs McCann's clothes to missing Madeleine's favourite soft toy Cuddle Cat, according to reports.

During police interviews the McCanns were shown a video of the animal "going crazy" when it approached their Renault Scenic hire car, newspapers have claimed.
Leaked reports from the investigation have suggested Madeleine's parents could have accidentally killed her and then disposed of her body using the car.
Although they do not know the full details of Portuguese prosecutors' case against them, the McCanns are concerned it may rest on the dog's reaction.
They want to highlight the judge's dismissal of cadaver dog evidence in the high-profile Eugene Zapata murder trial in Madison, Wisconsin.

Helpful hound: Eddie was also drafted to help in the search for Madeleine
The couple's lawyers have already contacted Zapata's defence team, who are now sending their large file on the matter to Britain.
Zapata's estranged wife, flight instructor Jeanette Zapata, was 37 when she vanished on October 11 1976 after seeing her three children off to school. Her body has never been found.
Detectives suspected Zapata of involvement in her disappearance but did not charge him because of a lack of evidence.
Police decided to conduct new searches using cadaver dogs, a new investigative technique, when an old friend of Mrs Zapata contacted them about the case in 2004.

Zapata, 68, was charged with first-degree murder last year after the dogs indicated they sniffed human remains in a small basement "crawl space" at the former family home in Madison and other properties linked to him.
But Dane County Judge Patrick Fiedler ruled last month that the evidence that led to the charge could not be put before the jury.
He said the dogs were too unreliable in detecting the odour of remains and noted that no remains were actually found.
The judge agreed with an analysis of the three dogs' track record by Zapata's defence team that found they were incorrect 78 per cent, 71 per cent and 62 per cent of the time.

According to the Wisconsin State Journal, Mr Fiedler told the court: "The state has failed to convince me that it's any more reliable than the flip of a coin." Zapata denies murder, and the jury in the case went out on Friday to start considering its verdict.
A source close to the McCanns' solicitors said: "The legal team are in touch with the lawyers who represented the defendant in the case.
"The court papers, giving the legal submissions, are on their way to the McCann team for consideration.
"At the moment there are no formal charges and therefore there is no formal allegation against which the McCann team can work. We are having to work a little bit in the dark.
"But given that we understand the central plank of what the police are alleging involves sniffer dogs - albeit British ones which are said to be particularly good - this is important and relevant, and will be raised with the police and brought to the judge's attention."

Châtelaine wrote:Peter, what else can they do, but dish the dogs?

Châtelaine wrote:I agree, Peter.
They do and they don't at the same time.
Should we wonder why? I don't think so.