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!

Terminally McCanned?

Page 5 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by kimHager on 17.03.14 19:23

Well if all the children or some were sedated the picture painted and scandal would be extreme.Here is several(?) not sure how many probably fairly respected doctors with credentials and possibly excellent reputation affiliated with hospitals in the UK and you see the headlines..not only would their reputations be ruined to the point of gutter trash but then the hospitals would be looked on and who knows how big the circle of accepted sedation might be...could be huge...and then a whole other can of worms opened.I believe IF ** sedation by some or all of them was being used the public would be seething wondering just what all their trusted doctors might have done to them also..so maybe thats another reason for all the backing by the bigger ppl. Alot of reasons and things it could be but im thinking more than TM was doing this,could account for sick children that night or maybe not? We wont know because of the testing that wasnt done which i believe the PJ had no reason at that point to suspect any other crimes might be being commited or if not crimes at least immoral conduct by sedation. Also these were doctors a big red flag should have gone up when Kate suggested sedation.where would or better yet why would an abductor go in and sedate 3 children, snatch only one and leave...dont make sense at all..what sedative would an abductor have...versus what sedative would any numberof doctors have at their disposal. I believe if the PJ would have had the twins tested and then all those involved searched for sedatives, a link would have possibly** been established and a different outcome.just my opinion

____________________
Kim
avatar
kimHager

Posts : 465
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-01-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Guest on 17.03.14 19:36

Châtelaine wrote:
Andrew77R wrote: [...]
I do think all the children including the tapas kids were sedated throughout the holiday.

I do not think the rest of the tapas kids were sedated on the 3rd.

I do think the twins were sedated on the 3rd.

I do think it provides sufficient motivation if they were all sedating the kids while they went on the lash.

I do think in the midst of all the panic, the persuasion from GM in particular, and to save their own skins, then they decided to assist in the cover up and go along with 'abduction theory'.

I do think there was no turning back once the PJ arrived hence the pact.

I do think in hindsight the rest of the tapas would of wished they came clean straight away and admitted neglect. 

All IMO.
***
IMO too: they still can do that. And I have a notion one or more of them will do or have done. Those who would have other involvement or interest, will hold their breath ...
Lets hope so Chatelaine. 

I'm certain that if one breaks ranks the rest will quickly follow.  

Jane Tanner for me is the obvious weak link and with 'Tannerman' now morphed into 'Innocent Crecheman' then i truly believe she has been having a few confidential chats with AR and his team. Hopefully a few of the others have been having a few private chats as well.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by AuldWan on 18.03.14 0:32

I work in the mining industry and am randomly tested for drugs and alcohol.  I have to declare whether I have taken any medication, such as neurofen plus within the last 10 days as this will show up immediately in a urine sample.

Sedating a child is pretty simple really, there are a few over the counter preparations that are easily bought.  In Ireland a  product called Dozal contains paracetamol and a sedative and is used for infants that are teething.

AuldWan

Posts : 6
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-25
Location : Perth WA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by comperedna on 18.03.14 12:00

That is NOT what most people mean by sedation.  Paracetamol, inproducts like capol does not 'sedate' children. Sedation means some very much stronger product NOt meant to be given to children at all, to ensure that they sleep deeply.

comperedna

Posts : 699
Reputation : 53
Join date : 2012-10-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Guest on 18.03.14 12:05

I agree - sedation is the term used for example to describe how dentists treat nervous patients.

An injection is given and patients remain conscious and able to respond to commands but they have no memory of anything.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by jeanmonroe on 18.03.14 12:34

AMANDA COXON (nanny)
.
"I was never present at any episode when Madeleine bled, other than a normal nose bleed"
----------------------------------

What EXACTLY does THAT mean?

'ANY' episode WHEN Madeleine 'bled'?

Reading that leads me, imo, to believe there WERE 'episodes' (but she wasn't present) when Madeleine 'bled'

WHAT would 'cause' that? (medically?)

Haemophilia?

A haemophiliac does not bleed more intensely than a person without it, but can bleed for a much longer time. In severe haemophiliacs even a minor injury can result in blood loss lasting days or weeks, or even never healing completely. In areas such as the brain or inside joints, this can be fatal or permanently debilitating.

Could possibly 'explain' GM CW statement 'she was born ALMOST perfect'

Couldn't it?

Didn't the McCanns at one time try to explain 'blood' FOUND in their apartment might have come from Madeleine's leg after her 'trip' on the plane steps? (airport video)

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Reputation : 1663
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Guest on 18.03.14 13:30

@jeanmonroe wrote:AMANDA COXON (nanny)
.
"I was never present at any episode when Madeleine bled, other than a normal nose bleed"
----------------------------------

What EXACTLY does THAT mean?

'ANY' episode WHEN Madeleine 'bled'?

Reading that leads me, imo, to believe there WERE 'episodes' (but she wasn't present) when Madeleine 'bled'

WHAT would 'cause' that? (medically?)

Haemophilia?

Jean, that is so strangely put. Surely one would be inclined to say "I can only recall witnessing Madeleine ever bleeding once, and that was when she stuck her finger up her nose". Many people would no doubt also add some identifying facts from the event, such as "It was the day we played such and such after lunch and the blood went on her green dress, or something". There is no identifying info regarding the context other than M stuck her finger up her nose. I am not sure sticking one's finger up your nose would cause 'a nosebleed' as such. Maybe a bit of a nail could catch and scratch the nose but a nosebleed, that is surely when someone has fallen or been knocked, eg by a ball. I also find that word 'bled' quite strong, because it suggests to me very much the image of flowing blood rather than just a small injury eg from a routine kid's knee scrape or something.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Guest on 18.03.14 13:32

@jeanmonroe wrote:

What EXACTLY does THAT mean?

'ANY' episode WHEN Madeleine 'bled'?

Reading that leads me, imo, to believe there WERE 'episodes' (but she wasn't present) when Madeleine 'bled'

WHAT would 'cause' that? (medically?)


Depends very much where she was bleeding from, doesn't it?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by PeterMac on 18.03.14 13:40

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I agree - sedation is the term used for example to describe how dentists treat nervous patients.
An injection is given and patients remain conscious and able to respond to commands but they have no memory of anything.

And the twins were "OUT", comatose, anaesthetised, not rousable for 10 HOURS !

____________________

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: Terminally McCanned?

Post by ultimaThule on 18.03.14 13:47

Benzodiazepines come to mind.  These are prescription only drugs which are given away in their thousands by pharmaceutical sales reps and a stash of these, and other freebies, can usually be found in most GP surgeries.
avatar
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Carried over from Missing MH370 THREAD

Post by Woofer on 18.03.14 16:36

Woofer wrote:
ultimaThule wrote:
Andrew77R wrote:Is there anything in the world that the ROTHSCHILD's don't control or own....
They don't control or own me.   Other than those which grace my table, I'm hard pressed to think of any pies that the Rothschilds and the Oppenheimers haven't got their fingers in.

Eta maybe this is the reason Kate was keen to make it known that she is descended from Ashkenazi jews via her father's family?

Did she ???   and is she ???   I know its off topic, but just a quickie.
 I'll try to put this reply on another thread which mentioned haemophilia - but -was Googling haemophilia and discovered that although the usual H A and H B strains of it are extremely rare in females, unless you have a H father and a H carrier mother, a strain of it was confined to Ashkenazic Jews.



 Post referring to haemophilia possibility is JeanMonroe's post, at 12.34 today, on "Terminally McCanned" thread.

ADMIN -I tried to move this to Terminally McCanned , but couldn't   would you be so kind as to move it for me? XX

Penfold
Posts: 135
Join date: 2013-07-02
Age: 65
Location: Manchester.

avatar
Woofer

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by j.rob on 18.03.14 17:50

I do think that sedation is one of the *keys* to the case. Kate writes about the possibility of Madeleine and the twins having been sedated on the evening that Madeleine 'disappeared' and also suggests that a stain she found on Madeleine's pajama top on Thursday may have been left after the 'abductor' had attempted to give Madeleine some kind of tranquilizer on the previous evening.  The implication being that the 'abductor' had attempted to steal Madeleine the previous evening by drugging her but had been thwarted and so had fled empty-handed only to return the following evening. (Possibly, according to Kate's theory, fleeing when Madeleine and Sean woke up and cried - 'why didn't you come when Sean and I cried last night.'

Everything in Kate's book is there for a reason. The reasons are different to those that Kate would wish to portray, but nevertheless they provide a strong paper trail of clues. 

Kate claims (page 273) "On the night Madeleine was taken, you may remember, Gerry and I had been very concerned that Sean and Amelie had hardly moved in their cots, let alone woken up, despite the commotion in the apartment. Since Madeleine was snatched apparently without making a sound, we had always suspected that all three children might have been sedated by the abductor."

"We mentioned this to the police that night and several more times in the following weeks, but no testing or urine, blood or hair, which could have revealed the presence of drugs, had ever been done."

So how come Kate hadn't insisted on tests being carried out on the twins in the days following Madeleine's 'disappearance'? She mentioned this to the police and then left it all up to them, right? Not much urgency, then.

Intriguingly, Kate asks (page 274) for samples of her and Sean and Amelie's hair to be  analyzed four months later. Isn't if funny how she didn't ask for the appropriate samples to be taken at an appropriate time when they might reveal extremely important information? This would need to be within three months, but obviously, given that both parents alleged that a paedophile had entered their children's bedroom (on at least one evening and possibly two) and succeeded in stealing Madeleine on the second occasion,  it is nothing short of wrecklessly negligent of the parents to not ensure that the twins were thoroughly examined for any signs of abuse/drug ingestion and so on.

Almost as recklessly negligent as leaving your children alone at night so that someone can steal them.

Still, as Kate writes on page 274: "All the hair sample produced negative results."

PHEW!! But then they would do, wouldn't they, if you make sure that the tests are delayed four months so that you can pretty much guarantee the results will be gloriously negative?

Still, as Kate writes: "While this didn't totally exclude the possibility that the children had been sedated, especially given the time that had elapsed, it mean nobody else (including the PJ and the media) could prove otherwise. It also confirmed that I didn't 'abuse' sedative medication. It is sad that we had to go to such great lengths to demonstrate this; sadder still that such tests weren't carried out at the time."

Notice how unbelievably cunning Kate is, imo. Breathtakingly so. Having deliberately delayed tests in order to avoid any incriminating evidence showing up on the twins, she then has the audacity to feign indignation that those lazy old Portugese police were so inept they didn't do their job properly.

And she weeps fake crocodile tears over the simplest, most non-invasive test imaginable, grossly distorting the facts (that a tiny sample of hair is needed) to suit her feigned victim hood: "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."

Can you believe this woman? The twins are fast asleep, a few strands of hair are taken from their heads (something that, if what she claims to believe happened is true, should have happened the day after Madeleine's disappearance) and she has turned it into a full-blown melodrama? 

Can you believe that a medically trained person would describe the taking of a tiny sample of her from her sleeping children's head as 'going to such great lengths'?

"As for me, I looked as though I had alopecia." 

Hmmm.

How she gets away with all this drivel is beyond astonishing. Unbearable, utterly unbearable.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by canada12 on 18.03.14 17:56

@j.rob wrote:And she weeps fake crocodile tears over the simplest, most non-invasive test imaginable, grossly distorting the facts (that a tiny sample of hair is needed) to suit her feigned victim hood: "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."

Can you believe this woman? The twins are fast asleep, a few strands of hair are taken from their heads (something that, if what she claims to believe happened is true, should have happened the day after Madeleine's disappearance) and she has turned it into a full-blown melodrama? 

Can you believe that a medically trained person would describe the taking of a tiny sample of her from her sleeping children's head as 'going to such great lengths'?

"As for me, I looked as though I had alopecia." 

Hmmm.

How she gets away with all this drivel is beyond astonishing. Unbearable, utterly unbearable.

God forbid she should ever have to subject the poor twins to something invasive like a blood test.

Oh dear me.

Perhaps The Bewk should really be categorized as Fiction, instead of Non-Fiction.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by aquila on 18.03.14 17:58

@canada12 wrote:
@j.rob wrote:And she weeps fake crocodile tears over the simplest, most non-invasive test imaginable, grossly distorting the facts (that a tiny sample of hair is needed) to suit her feigned victim hood: "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."

Can you believe this woman? The twins are fast asleep, a few strands of hair are taken from their heads (something that, if what she claims to believe happened is true, should have happened the day after Madeleine's disappearance) and she has turned it into a full-blown melodrama? 

Can you believe that a medically trained person would describe the taking of a tiny sample of her from her sleeping children's head as 'going to such great lengths'?

"As for me, I looked as though I had alopecia." 

Hmmm.

How she gets away with all this drivel is beyond astonishing. Unbearable, utterly unbearable.

God forbid she should ever have to subject the poor twins to something invasive like a blood test.

Oh dear me.

Perhaps The Bewk should really be categorized as Fiction, instead of Non-Fiction.
a couple of years ago on the forum there were comments about 'sightings' of the bewk in various outlets.

Hilarious. Asda was the best.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8704
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Doug D on 18.03.14 18:18

There was a photo on one of the FB sites not so long ago of a supply in one of the 'Pound' or 99p shops. Had to pay £1 for mine, plus postage of a couple of quid, on e-bay, but I suppose at least that meant they didn't get any royalties!

Doug D

Posts : 2464
Reputation : 847
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by aquila on 18.03.14 18:22

Whilst on the subject of the 'bewk' in my last post. Did you know (I didn't up until a few minutes ago) that there is another 'bewk' for sale on Amazon (not at the knock down price of Kate's bewk) but for £10.64 plus free delivery.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Madeleine-Investigation-Incompetence-Corruption-Madeleines/dp/1438957807/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1395166671&sr=1-8&keywords=madeleine+mccann

All proceeds apparently go to the fund and it's written by people on the following link

http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/

Pedro Silva figures high in this contribution as does the slagging off of Tony Bennett.

£10.64 for this book available on amazon. Kate's bewk available on amazon for peanuts.

How do you get a book published in the first place that maintains its price?
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8704
Reputation : 1687
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by onehand on 18.03.14 18:47

"All the hair sample produced negative results."
 
But against which drugs was it tested, there are lots of lab’s testing for drugs residue, but normally they test by a protocol of specific drugs, it is not a random test. Most to not test on taken medication drugs, but only work on drugs usual taken for abuse. 
 
I know from experience in other fields of use, it is not possible to test for everything on a sample, it could be done for forensic testing, but those are not widely in use in commercial labs.
 
First you could test for a certain time, standard on human hair is for most lab’s 90 days and that’s a strand of hair taken from root + 1,5 inches. You can test further in longer hair, to send in the additional hair length from 1,5 inches tot 3 inches.
 
You have to test against a known pattern of a substance. So you have to choose to test against which drugs/medications.substances you test and there must be a reading available for this substance.
A single low dose is not always detectable above the threshold of a sample
 
So it is easy to send in some hair samples after a chosen time, that is not standard for testing and if you don’t request for a second sample resulting from a older growth period, you could say negative proven, but against what and over which timescale?
 
Second you can influence the results to a negative by choosing a test protocol of drugs, you are certain of that would not be found. You only can find if you look for it!
 
So if you test on cocaine and the result is a negative, you could honestly state, i got a negative test, but it would say nothing about any other substances, so a negative without stating about what is negative, is rubbish! And doctors know this, cause this is just a usual thing in any testing.
 
Doctors do have knowledge of testing specimen, or know how to look for a test and sampling protocol, if you have questions for yourself, it is easy to find out how to take samples over a prolonged time and how to store them, and doctors could have easily access to a perfect storing facility,  just pick one from their network.
But you could send material to any lab by courier over the hole world nowadays.
 
The other thing is, for a hair test protocol they use strands of hairs without the roots, so you could not prove on a later date to who a sample belong. No dna.
 
So nice try, but it does not proof anything.
 

 
sorry for any blue background, can't get it go away.

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Guest on 18.03.14 19:00

No problem, onehand, I see NO blue background. It's O.K.
Thank you for an informed analysis.

Whilst we're on "hair". WHY were Madeleine's hairs never tested on "corpse banding"...?!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by canada12 on 18.03.14 19:17

@aquila wrote:Whilst on the subject of the 'bewk' in my last post. Did you know (I didn't up until a few minutes ago) that there is another 'bewk' for sale on Amazon (not at the knock down price of Kate's bewk) but for £10.64 plus free delivery.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Madeleine-Investigation-Incompetence-Corruption-Madeleines/dp/1438957807/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1395166671&sr=1-8&keywords=madeleine+mccann

All proceeds apparently go to the fund and it's written by people on the following link

http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/

Pedro Silva figures high in this contribution as does the slagging off of Tony Bennett.

£10.64 for this book available on amazon. Kate's bewk available on amazon for peanuts.

How do you get a book published in the first place that maintains its price?

The £10.64 bewk is published by AuthorHouse, which is a self-publishing company. They probably took up a collection to pay to get it published. It can be on sale for as long as they want it to be on sale. The author(s) set the price.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by onehand on 18.03.14 20:31

@ Châtelaine
 
As far as i have the knowledge, corps banding is only used if you have a corpse and specifically to assist in compelling a time of death. I know they also look for fungus and other signs like insect activity. It could be possible if you find a good strand of hair with residue of cells from the scalp.
 
For forensics it is normally used that there has to be first a identification of the material as belonging to a specific individual.
 
so in case of a hair this almost always would be dna samples from the root.
 
Hairs shed out from a living person won’t show what is named corpse banding, what is a result of decomposing.
 
There is not very much consensus about corpse banding , and because it is a result from decomposing when the hair is still on the body or body parts, time would influence this if the body is taken away before the banding could show up on a sample. I don’t have information about the exact timescale when this formed for you.
 
The pj had asked the brittish lab for possible signs of death on the material send in for forensic screening, but the answer that came back was stated that this was not possible.  It is in the mail contacts between the labs and the pj, anywhere  in the pj files. If this was also specific asked about the hairs, i can’t find at the moment.
 
Imo, the lab was not really engaged to the pj, the give only answers to the exact questions, but what i miss was an approach of suggesting other possibilities to get such answers. From my own field i had different experiences, when i asked for something stupid, there was mostly a suggestion which way to choose to get the answer i was looking for. Without asking for it. Maybe this happened because of the language difference or the distance. But over here forensic specialist almost never came up with only no or yes, can’t remember that such an answer was not followed by a but we maybe can try this or that.
 
There were around 200 hair samples or hairs send in, but from the outcome most was in poor state. Not even usable to detect enough dna for identifying an individual, only mitrochondial dna. Which only is about groups of people bonded anywhere in time via maternal route.
That could be a direct family line from mother to child, but it could also be sharing the same woman some ages ago.
 
Another matter in the use of forensic testing is, that it have to be accepted as a protocol for the use in a court in each country. This could be happening active, by accept it in a law protocol or because it is granted for use in a court by the judge.
The last makes most cps quite shy to use it a first time, as long as the science did not have a fair bit of consensus, you risk the complete case, such things could be nice as complement evidence, but better besides other hard evidence.
 

Some not full accredited tests could be used in a work hypothesis, but forensic work is not coming cheap. Its use is most before to decide to do more costly testing, but it almost never ends up in a court before it has enough credibility.

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Guest on 18.03.14 20:40

Thank you for a well-formulated and elaborate response :-)
Allow me, we've two different things here.
As you obviously know, only hairs with a ROOT would provide full DNA information.
Hairs, shed from a corpse though, might show corpse banding.
There may have been a corpse in the Renault Scenic, according to the dogs.
It might [would!] have been of interest to put any hair found there to be put under the microscope to check for corpse banding, whether or not it might have been able to extract DNA from them.

ETA quite not understandably the FSS disregarded numerous hairs, as their colour didn't match photographs of Madeleine ... a disgrace!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Monty Heck on 18.03.14 21:21

@kimHager wrote:Well if all the children or some were sedated the picture painted and scandal would be extreme.Here is several(?) not sure how many probably fairly respected doctors with credentials and possibly excellent reputation affiliated with hospitals in the UK and you see the headlines..not only would their reputations be ruined to the point of gutter trash but then the hospitals would be looked on and who knows how big the circle of accepted sedation might be...could be huge...and then a whole other can of worms opened.I believe IF ** sedation by some or all of them was being used the public would be seething wondering just what all their trusted doctors might have done to them also..so maybe thats another reason for all the backing by the bigger ppl. Alot of reasons and things it could be but im thinking more than TM was doing this,could account for sick children that night or maybe not? We wont know because of the testing that wasnt done which i believe the PJ had no reason at that point to suspect any other crimes might be being commited or if not crimes at least immoral conduct by sedation. Also these were doctors a big red flag should have gone up when Kate suggested sedation.where would or better yet why would an abductor go in and sedate 3 children, snatch only one and leave...dont make sense at all..what sedative would an abductor have...versus what sedative would any numberof doctors have at their disposal. I believe if the PJ would have had the twins tested and then all those involved searched for sedatives, a link would have possibly** been established and a different outcome.just my opinion
With you on this one.  The unvarnished truth that 6 NHS medics were leaving small children unattended to go out drinking required immediate and effective PR managment which was quickly to hand, not to mention high level Consular assistance.  Way back in the early days a group of nurses who were discussing the disappearance were bemused that nobody was looking into possible sedation, as medics were apparently notorious for finding ways of "helping" their offspring to sleep soundly when occasion demanded.  IMO where the cover up began - fight the PR fire first and foremost, worry about the implications later, if at all and even then continued denial would win the day.

Monty Heck

Posts : 470
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-09-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by Monty Heck on 18.03.14 21:37

@j.rob wrote:I do think that sedation is one of the *keys* to the case. Kate writes about the possibility of Madeleine and the twins having been sedated on the evening that Madeleine 'disappeared' and also suggests that a stain she found on Madeleine's pajama top on Thursday may have been left after the 'abductor' had attempted to give Madeleine some kind of tranquilizer on the previous evening.  The implication being that the 'abductor' had attempted to steal Madeleine the previous evening by drugging her but had been thwarted and so had fled empty-handed only to return the following evening. (Possibly, according to Kate's theory, fleeing when Madeleine and Sean woke up and cried - 'why didn't you come when Sean and I cried last night.'

Everything in Kate's book is there for a reason. The reasons are different to those that Kate would wish to portray, but nevertheless they provide a strong paper trail of clues. 

Kate claims (page 273) "On the night Madeleine was taken, you may remember, Gerry and I had been very concerned that Sean and Amelie had hardly moved in their cots, let alone woken up, despite the commotion in the apartment. Since Madeleine was snatched apparently without making a sound, we had always suspected that all three children might have been sedated by the abductor."

"We mentioned this to the police that night and several more times in the following weeks, but no testing or urine, blood or hair, which could have revealed the presence of drugs, had ever been done."

So how come Kate hadn't insisted on tests being carried out on the twins in the days following Madeleine's 'disappearance'? She mentioned this to the police and then left it all up to them, right? Not much urgency, then.

Intriguingly, Kate asks (page 274) for samples of her and Sean and Amelie's hair to be  analyzed four months later. Isn't if funny how she didn't ask for the appropriate samples to be taken at an appropriate time when they might reveal extremely important information? This would need to be within three months, but obviously, given that both parents alleged that a paedophile had entered their children's bedroom (on at least one evening and possibly two) and succeeded in stealing Madeleine on the second occasion,  it is nothing short of wrecklessly negligent of the parents to not ensure that the twins were thoroughly examined for any signs of abuse/drug ingestion and so on.

Almost as recklessly negligent as leaving your children alone at night so that someone can steal them.

Still, as Kate writes on page 274: "All the hair sample produced negative results."

PHEW!! But then they would do, wouldn't they, if you make sure that the tests are delayed four months so that you can pretty much guarantee the results will be gloriously negative?

Still, as Kate writes: "While this didn't totally exclude the possibility that the children had been sedated, especially given the time that had elapsed, it mean nobody else (including the PJ and the media) could prove otherwise. It also confirmed that I didn't 'abuse' sedative medication. It is sad that we had to go to such great lengths to demonstrate this; sadder still that such tests weren't carried out at the time."

Notice how unbelievably cunning Kate is, imo. Breathtakingly so. Having deliberately delayed tests in order to avoid any incriminating evidence showing up on the twins, she then has the audacity to feign indignation that those lazy old Portugese police were so inept they didn't do their job properly.

And she weeps fake crocodile tears over the simplest, most non-invasive test imaginable, grossly distorting the facts (that a tiny sample of hair is needed) to suit her feigned victim hood: "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."

Can you believe this woman? The twins are fast asleep, a few strands of hair are taken from their heads (something that, if what she claims to believe happened is true, should have happened the day after Madeleine's disappearance) and she has turned it into a full-blown melodrama? 

Can you believe that a medically trained person would describe the taking of a tiny sample of her from her sleeping children's head as 'going to such great lengths'?

"As for me, I looked as though I had alopecia." 

Hmmm.

How she gets away with all this drivel is beyond astonishing. Unbearable, utterly unbearable.
Compared with how proactively the couple launched a media campaign and set up a fund with rounds of public appeals in those early days, their lack of action regarding such a simple medical matter as testing is astounding.  And in view of the evidence of drive to get what it is they wanted in so many other areas, why no insistence or demands that the children be tested.  It is hard to imagine parents without detailed medical knowledge suspecting stranger sedation of their children to prevaricate for months before taking matters into their own hands and arranging tests.  As John (in)Deed has mentioned, the tests KMcC wrote about were very much of the day late, dollar short variety, and would only prove that there was no evidence of any particular drug/s at that particular time.  The trump card is knowing that neither can the PJ prove evidence of administration of partucular drug/s at the relevant time.  Does anyone recall whether there is any evidence in the files which confirms that the McCs requested drug testing, as claimed in the book?

Monty Heck

Posts : 470
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-09-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Terminally McCanned?

Post by PeterMac on 18.03.14 21:50

Some strange goings on.
3 May 2007   (NOTE:  this information not released until May 2011)
p.  75  “Had Madeleine been given some kind of sedative to keep her quiet ?  Had the twins, too ?”   [3.1]

5 May 2007       (NOTE:  statement dated 25 April 2008)
“They also wanted to know whether the PJ had any evidence that would suggest that the person who took Madeleine had used any substance to facilitate the abduction.”   [3.2]

3 August 2007   (NOTE:  this information not released until June 2008)
“due to which she now presumes that they were under the effect of some sedative drug that a presumed abductor had administered to the three children in order to be able to abduct Madeleine, a situation which Kate refers to being possible . .”  

August 2007
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.)   [3.4]

First denials that the parents had used sedation

August 2007
See previous entry. “That same afternoon, Gerry called and cancelled the request.” [3.5]

10 August 2007  ( or thereabouts)
Gerry:  “you know we’re not gonna comment, on anything but you know there is absolutely no way we use any sedative drugs or anything like that an’ you know we we have co-operated with the police we’ll answer any queries ermm …any tests that they want to do. . . “  [3.6]

Implied acceptance of possibility

24 September 2007
Forensic scientist from Control Risks take hair samples from Kate and the twins at the McCanns’ own request  
It is also striking that we are never told of the laboratory which performed the analysis on the hair samples, we are never shown the results, and in fact we have to turn to an Indian newspaper to find these details.  Here it is stated that a company called TrichoTest performed the analysis. [3.17]  [3.18]

And yet even then we have this strange passage,
“All the hair samples produced negative results. While this didn’t totally exclude the possibility that the children had been sedated, especially given the time that had elapsed, it meant nobody else (including the PJ and the media) could prove otherwise.”  [3.19]

The emphasis is not on the twins’ welfare or whether some noxious substance had been administered. Kate is purely concerned with whether there is sufficient “proof” against the parents.   But at the same time she is by implication admitting that the twins might have been sedated.

There are other bizarre aspects of the hair analysis. Laboratories advertise their ability for analyse for a period of 90 days.    The McCanns’s 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 that a single dose of a drug, given in the amount approriate to a 2 year old would be sufficient for sucessful identifcation on analysis.

Kate describes the process as leaving her looking as it she had alopaecia. [3.19] The laboratories state they need one sample taken from close to the scalp, no larger than “a shoelace tip”  [3.20]

This may simply be “|ournalistic licence” to evoke sympathy from the reader, or to add some human interest, and that could be accepted if the book were not described as “very truthful”.

____________________

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: Terminally McCanned?

Post by onehand on 18.03.14 22:13

[size=16.363636016845703]@ [/size][size=16.363636016845703]Châtelaine[/size]

the hair in the car, would be useless as evidence for a court without dna profile, but for a working hypothesis it could had is use as a lead. 

[size=12.727272033691406]in most cases you could have quite a lot of different leads, the don't always count as evidence or even circumstantial evidence, but enough to guide you to the line or lines were you could look for such. [/size]
those don't usually end up in the official files, but are kept in the personal notes of the officer in question. 
but you always had to remember that leads are weak and also could be false and steer you away from where you want to be.

it is always a fine line in making choices in a investigation and a fine line with limitations by the boundaries of the law and internal guidelines came in. (remember the dutch van traa inquiry)

there is always a chance you had to tell before the court how you gathered your evidence and if the judge decides this is to far out of criminal procedures, it could break the case completely. 

maybe hairs with corpse banding could help as first lead to also change your investigation to a dead person, but you have to investigate further until you found enough evidence that is coupled to a specific person in this case with enough other evidence.
you could say, hairs with a corpse banding gives a lead that at ant time before a dead body could have be present. but you won't know that it was the person you are looking fore, it could be there from some odd way of contamination. 

the same way like the use of the dogs, they bring leads, but the evidence have to come from confirming evidence, like forensics. 

loose hairs will get easily damaged and often there is no usable dna left to conclude to whom it belong. in forensics they would almost never use a full dna pattern, most is done on screening on specific bands of alleles in the dna. it depends on the national guidelines how much bands of alleles are needed for confirmation, fatherhood asked usually less then a murder case would.

it is a shame the medical files of madeleine were not given to the pj, maybe there was useful information to find of blood or tissue testing before, lots of hospitals and laps store blood samples for ages and those are fairly often of good quality and with some luck, madeleine had her own specific small mutation anywhere on her dna,  it could be enough to get the proof needed in this case.
maybe not for a conviction, but to get extra tools and room in what can be used in the investigation.


but dna is a different option from hair then hair testing for substances. 

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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