Re: Digging to start next week (continuation of automatically locked thread) - UPDATE... starting today 2/6/14

[Liz Eagles]

Hope you mean 'lone' not 'loan'  lol  

A freudian slip there.

[Praiaaa]

If you want to be put down as a numptie continue to ask the monkeys far be it from me to dissuade you, fossey, but should you wish to make enquiries of the organ grinders I suggest you call the offices of Theresa May and Bernard Hogan-Howe, or make contact with Keith Vaz on twitter or at the Houses of Parliament.  

I wouldn't make contact with Keith Vaz if I was being poisoned and he had the only antidote.

 I love the wit on this site - will miss it when the mystery is solved  

[Hicks]

Did anyone watch Question Time last night?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From about 20 mins.
 The discussion between Neil Watts and Maajid Nawaz, about costs of investigations. Nawaz manages to merge Milly Dowler and Madeleine McCann into one person, and then after being corrected goes on to say well they are both child sex cases, which is agreed with by Neil Wallis (ex Deputy Editor of NOW).

I couldn't believe my ears when I heard him say it. How on earth would Maajid Nawaz know that Madeleine's disappearance was connected to sexual abuse? Especially as the McCann's have constantly maintained that 'there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm'.

What does he know that we don't!

[Miraflores]

How on earth would Maajid Nawaz know that Madeleine's disappearance was connected to sexual abuse? Especially as the McCann's have constantly maintained that 'there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm'.

What does he know that we don't!

Gerry McCann said that his daughter had been abducted by paedophiles. It mystifies me why he then goes on to say that there is no evidence that she has come to any harm.

[jeanmonroe]

Finally!

That's where we, the PJ, Met and McCanns have been going 'wrong'!

We've all been 'looking/searching for' MADELEINE McCann when we should have been focussed on 'looking/searching for'.......... MILLY McCann.

"we have never called her Maddie, the name that the media have invented. We never called her anything like that, her name is MILLY" said a furious Kate Dowller or "Maddy, Maddeleine, Madline, Margaret, Madeline, but NEVER, EVER Maddie"

[Hicks]

How on earth would Maajid Nawaz know that Madeleine's disappearance was connected to sexual abuse? Especially as the McCann's have constantly maintained that 'there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm'.

What does he know that we don't!

Gerry McCann said that his daughter had been abducted by paedophiles. It mystifies me why he then goes on to say that there is no evidence that she has come to any harm.

Quite.
And then of course Kate told Yvonne Martin that she could not understand why a 'couple' had abducted her daughter.

During the Ophra Winfrey interview Kate said that she wondered whether the.....paedophile?.....was brushing Madeleine's teeth or rubbing her tummy if she was poorly. Yes, of course if you fear your child is being subjected to the worst kind of cruelty and depravity, your darkest fear would be about her teeth obviously.  But then again, perhaps Madeleine gave her tormentors her,  'tuppence worth'.

You the type words said and see them in black and white, yet still it is hard to fully comprehend.

[jozi]

Did anyone watch Question Time last night?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From about 20 mins.
 The discussion between Neil Watts and Maajid Nawaz, about costs of investigations. Nawaz manages to merge Milly Dowler and Madeleine McCann into one person, and then after being corrected goes on to say well they are both child sex cases, which is agreed with by Neil Wallis (ex Deputy Editor of NOW).

I couldn't believe my ears when I heard him say it. How on earth would Maajid Nawaz know that Madeleine's disappearance was connected to sexual abuse? Especially as the McCann's have constantly maintained that 'there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm'.


What does he know that we don't!

OMG is this true and it was shown on TV ??? Kate and Gerry will be FURIOUS !!!

[Hicks]

Did anyone watch Question Time last night?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From about 20 mins.
 The discussion between Neil Watts and Maajid Nawaz, about costs of investigations. Nawaz manages to merge Milly Dowler and Madeleine McCann into one person, and then after being corrected goes on to say well they are both child sex cases, which is agreed with by Neil Wallis (ex Deputy Editor of NOW).

I couldn't believe my ears when I heard him say it. How on earth would Maajid Nawaz know that Madeleine's disappearance was connected to sexual abuse? Especially as the McCann's have constantly maintained that 'there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm'.


What does he know that we don't!

OMG is this true and it was shown on TV ??? Kate and Gerry will be FURIOUS !!!

Yep. See link above.

[Newintown]

Did anyone watch Question Time last night?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From about 20 mins.
 The discussion between Neil Watts and Maajid Nawaz, about costs of investigations. Nawaz manages to merge Milly Dowler and Madeleine McCann into one person, and then after being corrected goes on to say well they are both child sex cases, which is agreed with by Neil Wallis (ex Deputy Editor of NOW).

I was watching QT last night and was so furious that Maajid Nawaz called Milly, Milly McCann that I switched off and went to bed.  I thought how can anyone sitting in a government position be so ignorant to mix the the Dowlers with the McCanns but I missed him mentioning about child sex cases which has made everyone sit up and repeat "what did he just say?"  So perhaps his time on QT wasn't wasted after all.

However, after looking up Maajid Nawaz on Wiki as I thought his ridiculous title - Executive Director of Quilliam for the Lib Dems, was a joke - I found out it is a counter-extremism think tank, perhaps he has other things on his mind, other than following the Milly Dowler and McCann cases as much as we do.

 

[jozi]

Did anyone watch Question Time last night?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From about 20 mins.
 The discussion between Neil Watts and Maajid Nawaz, about costs of investigations. Nawaz manages to merge Milly Dowler and Madeleine McCann into one person, and then after being corrected goes on to say well they are both child sex cases, which is agreed with by Neil Wallis (ex Deputy Editor of NOW).

I couldn't believe my ears when I heard him say it. How on earth would Maajid Nawaz know that Madeleine's disappearance was connected to sexual abuse? Especially as the McCann's have constantly maintained that 'there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm'.


What does he know that we don't!

OMG is this true and it was shown on TV ??? Kate and Gerry will be FURIOUS !!!

Yep. See link above.

Thanks Hicks but can only be seen in UK and I'm in Africa . 

[Newintown]

Did anyone watch Question Time last night?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From about 20 mins.
 The discussion between Neil Watts and Maajid Nawaz, about costs of investigations. Nawaz manages to merge Milly Dowler and Madeleine McCann into one person, and then after being corrected goes on to say well they are both child sex cases, which is agreed with by Neil Wallis (ex Deputy Editor of NOW).

I couldn't believe my ears when I heard him say it. How on earth would Maajid Nawaz know that Madeleine's disappearance was connected to sexual abuse? Especially as the McCann's have constantly maintained that 'there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm'.


What does he know that we don't!

OMG is this true and it was shown on TV ??? Kate and Gerry will be FURIOUS !!!

Yep. See link above.

Thanks Hicks but can only be seen in UK and I'm in Africa . 

I don't know if it's possible but perhaps a nice member of the forum could put the discussion between Neil Watts and MN on Youtube, although if it's from a BBC programme I'm not sure if it's legally allowable.  I haven't got any copying facilities for TV programmes, I still live in the dark ages, otherwise I would try to do it myself.

Just to add to my post...

I've looked up when QT is repeated, it will be on again this Sunday 29th June at 18.00 hrs on Channel 81 (Freeview) BBC Parliament, in between the channels no. 80 24 hours BBC rolling news and no. 82  SKY News if anyone can tape it for Jozi.

ETA: Neil Watts and NB's discussion is about 25 minutes into the programme.

[ultimaThule]

If you want to be put down as a numptie continue to ask the monkeys far be it from me to dissuade you, fossey, but should you wish to make enquiries of the organ grinders I suggest you call the offices of Theresa May and Bernard Hogan-Howe, or make contact with Keith Vaz on twitter or at the Houses of Parliament.  

I wouldn't make contact with Keith Vaz if I was being poisoned and he had the only antidote.

As I take the view that needs must when the devil drives, I recommend the use of a chemical hazard suit very long spoon when dealing with certain politicians, Clay.  

Incredible as it may seem, the fact is that Vaz has the power to put Home Secretaries and Police Commissioners on the naughty spot and, as such, he can't be disregarded by those who seek to change the system from within - or without, for that matter,.  I could add a few lines to the effect of 'more's the pity', but that would be as much a waste of my time as phoning Op Grange in the expectation that I'll be fully updated with regard to its progress and given inside information on its future direction which will enable me to confidently bet big on the outcome of any eventual trial.  

[HelenMeg]

Link to You Tube video - ABSOLUTELY EXCELLENT FOR REFRESHING YOUR MEMORY OVER THIS CASE -a must watch

[Newintown]

Link to You Tube video - ABSOLUTELY EXCELLENT FOR REFRESHING YOUR MEMORY OVER THIS CASE -a must watch

Linky is missing -    

[HelenMeg]

Link to You Tube video - ABSOLUTELY EXCELLENT FOR REFRESHING YOUR MEMORY OVER THIS CASE -a must watch

If anyone wishes to contact Clarence - here is a link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[HelenMeg]

Link to You Tube video - ABSOLUTELY EXCELLENT FOR REFRESHING YOUR MEMORY OVER THIS CASE -a must watch

Linky is missing -    

Hi sorry !!

It is a series of short videos from the early days through to more recent times  but really good ..I think possible put together by Joana Morais.
The link below takes you to where I am in watching it - you can scroll back through to the start.

I have seen many interesting clips of stuff Ive never seen before. Have a look when you've not got much to do..    

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[Newintown]

Link to You Tube video - ABSOLUTELY EXCELLENT FOR REFRESHING YOUR MEMORY OVER THIS CASE -a must watch

Linky is missing -    

Hi sorry !!

It is a series of short videos from the early days through to more recent times  but really good ..I think possible put together by Joana Morais.
The link below takes you to where I am in watching it - you can scroll back through to the start.

I have seen many interesting clips of stuff Ive never seen before. Have a look when you've not got much to do..    

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I got to 3.04 mninutes and wanted to throw up.  CM seems to reel words off without any emotion as if it's just a script he reads off time and time again, he doesn't seem to believe in anything he says and look absolutely terrible in the video clip, as if he hasn't slept for weeks.

I hope his pension earned off the back of Madeline's demise comes back to haunt him for many years to come.  How his family can live off the ill gotten gains of a missing 3 year old beggers belief, especially when the head of the family may have been covering for or misleading any attempt of the investigating forces to investigate the missing child.

[tiny]

Did anyone watch Question Time last night?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From about 20 mins.
 The discussion between Neil Watts and Maajid Nawaz, about costs of investigations. Nawaz manages to merge Milly Dowler and Madeleine McCann into one person, and then after being corrected goes on to say well they are both child sex cases, which is agreed with by Neil Wallis (ex Deputy Editor of NOW).

Interesting,this would tie in with DP and the gaspars statement

[NickE]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
From MET Police Facebook page  

[Praiaaa]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
From MET Police Facebook page  

[Guest]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
From MET Police Facebook page  

Not wishing to be a wet blanket, but are we certain it takes that long for cadaver scent to develop? I had also always believed this to be the case. However a few months back, another poster – Chatelaine – said that in fact cadaverine was believed to develop in a far shorter time, but that tests were not available to prove this. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I don't know how certain she is of this, or whether any other poster has information on the matter, but obviously if correct, it could affect the "window of opportunity".
What doesn't do is explain the lack of DNA or why any burglar would want to walk out of a flat in which they had left no trace of themselves carrying a child's corpse. But that is a separate matter.

[Guest]

Yes, it's indeed me, Châtelaine :-)

I started research, when I read that Martin Grimes, the dog handler for Eddie and Keela, mentioned that dogs would smell "death" within minutes. Unfortunately, I have so far not been able to find scientific proof. But that's mainly because there have been few documented tests. And ... for these tests, it's not been possible [yet, that I know of] to use scent of very recently [minutes] deceased ...

[PeterMac]

Not wishing to be a wet blanket, but are we certain it takes that long for cadaver scent to develop? I had also always believed this to be the case. However a few months back, another poster – Chatelaine – said that in fact cadaverine was believed to develop in a far shorter time, but that tests were not available to prove this.

We may be splitting hairs here.
As soon as vital functions cease then the process of decay begins.  
For some time that will not be detectable by anyone, or any dog.

But gradually it does become detectable, first to a dog, and then to a forensic scientist, and then to an average human.
The 90 minutes rule of thumb is the time we have been told it takes fro the time of death before a dog can detect the scent of human cadaverine.

And remember that death is not an event, it is a process.  It takes some time for everything to shut down completely. "Any fule doctor 'noes that"
Which adds time to the "time line" of falling of the back of the sofa, and makes it even less likely that death occurred on 3rd.

[Guest]

I agree with you on the timeline, Peter. I still think about May 2 evening/night and May 3 for cooking up another timeline ...

But for me, the possibility for dogs to recognise the scent of a recently deceased remains a possibility.

[DurhamGuy1967]

The sensitivity of a dogs nose are just starting to be understood, we now know dogs can recognise cancer in an undiagnosed patient.

There are cases that  seem to show it is possible with very ill dying people for dogs to detect the odour of death before death as the bodies vital organs start to shut down. There are many reports of animal behaviour changing a round people just prior to death.  This would of cause not be the case in a sudden or accidental death.

The trouble with all of this is how do you scientifically prove it all. There would be moral implications to a dog and handler in a hospice for a prolonged length of time.

(PM...by stating this doesn't mean I fully convinced of the idea of Madeleine dying in the apartment on the evening of the 3rd)

[Tony Bennett]

The sensitivity of a dogs nose are just starting to be understood, we now know dogs can recognise cancer in an undiagnosed patient.

There are cases that  seem to show it is possible with very ill dying people for dogs to detect the odour of death before death as the bodies vital organs start to shut down. There are many reports of animal behaviour changing a round people just prior to death.  This would of cause not be the case in a sudden or accidental death.

@ Chatelaine - of course, the longer the corpse has been dead, the more powerful is the odour of the cadaverine, and consequently the more likely it is that a dog would react with a strong alert, say, three montfhs later. 

There is more on this fascinating topic here, though I think it was written quite a few years ago - and the use of detection dogs has developed significantly in recent years:


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

CADAVER DETECTION

Human detection dogs can further specialize as cadaver dogs. These dogs are used for the detection of drowned, buried, or concealed human remains and are commonly used by law enforcement (Owsley, 1995).

Recent investigations in Canada demonstrated that cadaver dogs can be effective in detecting scattered partial human remains (Komar, 1999). This ability may be used in the detection of human remains following disasters as witnessed in the days and weeks following the tragedy of September 11, 2001.

Within 15 minutes following death, protein synthesis stops in the body and the microorganisms of the gut and skin begin to degrade the body. As a result of this, degradation odors such as putrescine and cadaverine are released. The concentration of these noxious smells will vary depending on the time of death and environmental conditions to which the body is exposed.

Dogs are generally trained to be cadaver dogs using human tissue or soil obtained from beneath a decomposing body. It is essential that dogs are trained to specifically respond to human remains and to not respond to animal remains.

The detection of drowned victims is possible because the skin cells and body oils of the victim will float to the water surface. The canines are generally worked from boats in a grid pattern across the water’s surface. When the dog passes through an area that contains human scent, the dog will alert the handler to that location. The handler will then move the dog back and forth across the scent until the highest concentration of scent is detected.

After taking into account areas of interest and the effect of the environmental and water conditions on the scent movement, efforts to recover the body can begin. In one search in Kentucky, a body was recovered in over 300 ft of water. The canine alerted handlers within 15 ft of where the body was located.

CANCER DETECTION

Williams and Pembroke (1989) reported that malignant tumors emit unique odors that could be detected by dogs. This observation was based on a female patient who sought medical attention after her dog became obsessed with a mole on her leg and eventually tried to bite the mole off. Following biopsy the mole was identified as cancerous.

Since that time chemical markers of melanoma have been reported in the blood and urine (Wakamatsu and Ito, 1990). Researchers at the University of Florida’s Department of Dermatology have subsequently evaluated two dogs trained in the detection of melanoma cells. These dogs demonstrated the ability to detect and accurately locate the presence of the cancerous cells in seven subjects (Pickell et al., 2001).

The potential application of dogs in the diagnosis of cancer is still in debate, particularly since confirmation and treatment would still require surgical procedures. One advantage might be if canine detection provided earlier diagnosis than traditional clinical procedures.

ACCELERANT DETECTION

The first trained accelerant detection dog was reportedly placed into service in 1986 by the Connecticut State Police. These animals are trained to search a fire scene for the presence of common flammable liquids used to start fires. In 1995 over 200 accelerant detection canines were located throughout the US (Tindall and Lothridge, 1995).

The dogs were able to improve evidence selection and arson detection by over 40% in some areas.

The dogs work by moving through the fire scene and alerting the handler to areas with residual flammable materials. Samples of the debris are then collected and sent to a forensic laboratory for confirmation. Problems occur when the detection limits of the analytical equipment are not as sensitive as the dog (Katz and Midkiff, 1997).

EXPLOSIVE DETECTION

Since World War II dogs have been utilized by the military to locate explosives. Unfortunately much of the data describing the detection ability of these dogs is not published in referred journals, but is found in trade publications and government reports.

A field study was conducted in 1975-1976 where dogs averaged over 90% accuracy in the detection of land mines (Nolan and Gravitte, 1977). The Department of Defense has approximately 500 explosive detection canines worldwide with a proficiency requirement of at least 95% (Hannum and Parmeter, 1998).

Currently analytical technologies are being developed to enhance or replace our dependence on explosive detection canines, but at the moment, these instruments still suffer from selectivity problems and the lack of an efficient sampling system. So the detector dogs still represent the fastest, most versatile, reliable, and cost effective real-time explosive detection system available (Furton and Myers, 2001).

[SchrodingersBody]

We know that the screaming banshee shill club seem to be working to a burden of proof that is not beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond any doubt whatsoever. Even if the scents picked up by the dogs do develop within sufficient timescales to construct a still technically possible abduction timeline. Which you can bet your house they will jump on. We still have the valid question of how those marker scents have appeared in hire cars, (with somewhat substantiating fluids), on clothing, and on a cuddle cat that was put on a mythical high shelf away from the body. even if they take less time to develop, they still take a "bit of time", did the burglars stop to admire the view, have a fag or brew up ??? You still have the question of how the scents miraculously jump to everything incriminating, and nothing that we know to be innocent.

We know for a fact that the parents are prepared to lie as they see fit, and some of their verbal testimony is not evidence, it's obfuscation. So the only explanation that genuinely fits the empirical evidence is that the parents, and probably some of the Tapas crew, know more than they are prepared to tell the police forces of both countries. The dog markers are evidence, irrefutable evidence (though they are trying), and they tell you that dead bodies were linked with those locations. Those dogs have in my mind confirmed the suspicions I had from day one. One needs look no further than that holidaying party to find the guilty party (whether that's the 9 or any secret ones). Somebody who knew that child knows what happened to her. I don't think theres many sane, informed people that don't accept that very generalised supposition. Proving which one(s) is the issue.
Then it comes down to a case of whether you believe in a conspiracy to protect, or a bandwagon that people jumped on, and police forces that can't sufficiently establish who to prosecute and what with.

[Guest]

I have only introduced myself before but am an avid reader of this forum and the work done by you all is fantastic as is your knowledge. 

I have 1 experience of the sensitivity of dogs and death... 3 years ago I nursed my mum at home during her final week and her dog displayed very interesting behaviour that made me 100% believe the dogs alerting to cadaver scent in the McCann's appartment.

The dog became more aloof as the week progressed and would often just go and stand at the bedroom door, refusing to go in the day before mum died. On the actual morning mum died at 8am and the dog refused to get out of her bed in the lounge. Once the undertaker had been and removed mum to the funeral parlour she had to be taken for a walk but would only go out of the patio door and through the garden, nothing would persuade her to walk into the hall and out past the ground floor bedroom. It was a week, and after a thorough clean and removal of bedding and and clothing that she would walk through the bungalow and a few weeks until she would enter the bedroom. 

I know she picked up on grief as mum was very well loved, but I am convinced she could smell death and cadaverine. Mum was there about 3 hours before going to the Funeral Parlour.