Madeleine McCann

Redlambs said:
Certainly not enough to leave that sort of trace wherever she goes. Surely?
Click to expand...


Sounds like this smell is pretty persistent once it's on something, which is why these dogs can smell it on items that have been through the wash. I imagine the police think that the smell has been explained by her coming into contact with it through work. I really don't see how these two have done anything apart from be completely careless in leaving their kids alone while they went out to eat.
 
fergieisold said:
Sounds like this smell is pretty persistent once it's on something, which is why these dogs can smell it on items that have been through the wash. I imagine the police think that the smell has been explained by her coming into contact with it through work. I really don't see how these two have done anything apart from be completely careless in leaving their kids alone while they went out to eat.
Click to expand...


But her work does not explain the scent being on Madeline's doll (I don't buy the fact that Kate took the doll to work with her - presumably that would have to be on the days she came into contact with the dead bodies...and would also have to have the toy with her at that moment, since the toy itself needed to have come into contact with the body(.

Also, that doesn't explain how the scent got into the hire car that they rented after Madeline had disappeared.

Also this doesn't even touch on the fact that they found traces of blood that could be a match for Madeline's in the apartment and in the hire car.
 
If it was attributed to her work, wouldn't the scent have been found all over the apartment/car rather than just a few specific places?
 
Dogs can detect smells for months later. There was a prog. about them which showed a dog being taken into a house and it was sniffing round where meat or something had been, and this was like six months later.

And the money raised has been used towards the search. I would imagine the Madeleine McCann fund is audited very thoroughly.

As for writing a book - well that would raise money, and I would imagine, be very therapeutic. Most mothers would do the same.
 
Livvie said:
Dogs can detect smells for months later. There was a prog. about them which showed a dog being taken into a house and it was sniffing round where meat or something had been, and this was like six months later.

And the money raised has been used towards the search. I would imagine the Madeleine McCann fund is audited very thoroughly.

As for writing a book - well that would raise money, and I would imagine, be very therapeutic. Most mothers would do the same.
Click to expand...


But this is specifically the smell of a chemical that is released by cadavers. And there were specific areas where the dog detected it - Kate's clothes, a couple of specific places in the apartment, a tee shirt of Madeline's, and their hire car.
 
Spanish Hectic said:
If it was attributed to her work, wouldn't the scent have been found all over the apartment/car rather than just a few specific places?
Click to expand...


In the article I posted they explained that for the scent to be transfered, the item must be in contact with the dead body for a set period of time. So its not as simple as it simply transferring from one item to the next on so on simply by brushing against one another.
 
swooshboy said:
But her work does not explain the scent being on Madeline's doll (I don't buy the fact that Kate took the doll to work with her - presumably that would have to be on the days she came into contact with the dead bodies...and would also have to have the toy with her at that moment, since the toy itself needed to have come into contact with the body(.

Also, that doesn't explain how the scent got into the hire car that they rented after Madeline had disappeared.

Also this doesn't even touch on the fact that they found traces of blood that could be a match for Madeline's in the apartment and in the hire car.
Click to expand...


Did they actually find any blood or was it just DNA from one of the officers at the scene? The site posted before (http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm) seems to be full of quotes attributed to the McCann's that either didn't exist or were from other people entirely. Anyone wanting to see how poor the above site is should visit this link http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main Page
 
fergieisold said:
Sounds like this smell is pretty persistent once it's on something, which is why these dogs can smell it on items that have been through the wash. I imagine the police think that the smell has been explained by her coming into contact with it through work. I really don't see how these two have done anything apart from be completely careless in leaving their kids alone while they went out to eat.
Click to expand...

Neglecting those kids and that being the cause of all this aside then, the fact is we really don't know anything do we? So as much as some people want to thinks it's the parents and others don't, neither side has any real info.

The police certainly won't have ruled them out.
 
fergieisold said:
Did they actually find any blood or was it just DNA from one of the officers at the scene? The site posted before (http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm) seems to be full of quotes attributed to the McCann's that either didn't exist or were from other people entirely. Anyone wanting to see how poor the above site is should visit this link http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w
fergieisold said:
Did they actually find any blood or was it just DNA from one of the officers at the scene? The site posted before (http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm) seems to be full of quotes attributed to the McCann's that either didn't exist or were from other people entirely. Anyone wanting to see how poor the above site is should visit this link http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main Page
Click to expand...

/page/39076140/Main Page
Click to expand...


I visited their site, and read their new abduction theory:

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/55163729/Abduction Theories

Lots of guesses, approximations, suppositions in there.

Rather than purely looking to rebut evidence that may suggest the involvement of the McCann's, maybe they should spend more time trying to find evidence that supports the course of events that they believe happened.

I have asked numerous times, but would like to see the evidence that suggests that Madeline was actually abducted - aside from the testimony of her parents.
 
Redlambs said:
Neglecting those kids and that being the cause of all this aside then, the fact is we really don't know anything do we? So as much as some people want to thinks it's the parents and others don't, neither side has any real info.

The police certainly won't have ruled them out.
Click to expand...


I think one of the sites I posted above presents factual information sourced mainly from police files while the other has simply dug up rumours or quotes from newspapers before twisting them to make the McCann's looks guilty.
 
fergieisold said:
I think one of the sites I posted above presents factual information sourced mainly from police files while the other has simply dug up rumours or quotes from newspapers before twisting them to make the McCann's looks guilty.
Click to expand...

What factual police files will have been released on an ongoing investigation?

Let me ask you this, do you think this is a standard abduction (i.e clear cut) and the police won't be investigating the parents still?
 
Redlambs said:
And how are people to know that site is right?

I've only quickly looked at it on my phone so that's a genuine question. I can't see any police files linked.
Click to expand...

Because they include the police sources in their rebuttals with extracts from said sources/files in each one. Haven't a load of the police files been made public now?
 
Redlambs said:
If those files are public, why doesn't the rebuttal site link to them?
Click to expand...

They have the extracts from the relevant files for each rebuttal highlighted with sources below/above.
 
fergieisold said:
That's because the article has been designed to be just that, although they've had to make a lot of it up to give the impression the parents are guilty.
Click to expand...


Yeah just reading through the link Hectic posted.

I'm not sure about their legitimacy of either webpage to be honest.
 
fergieisold said:
I think one of the sites I posted above presents factual information sourced mainly from police files while the other has simply dug up rumours or quotes from newspapers before twisting them to make the McCann's looks guilty.
Click to expand...

Any site can be painted anyway you like.

It is clear you believe them to be innocent. I am unconvinced by the abduction angle as there does not appear to be very much evidence to support it.

I also think that the statements and actions of Kate and Gerry McCann seem extremely odd to me:

How did Kate know immediately that Madeline had been abducted, after not finding her in her bed? Why did she not search every room in the house? Why did she not check on her other kids who were sleeping through all of this? Why did she run to tell her friends that she had been abducted before doing anything else?

How did Kate know it was impossible that Madeline had not simply walked out of the apartment?

Why would Gerry McCann not actually check on Madeline when he checked the apartment? Why only check on his other kids? Especially when he noticed that the door was more open than before - which suggest that either someone had gone in, or Madeline had come out?

No idea if the police dogs are 100% reliable, or 75% reliable or whatever. But the fact remains that they picked up the scent of a chemical released by a cadaver on a number of objects within the apartment, including Kate's clothes, and Madeline's tee shirt and cuddly toy. If the dogs are not something that can be trusted, why did the McCann's not state this, rather than try and explain the evidence by saying that Kate had come into contact with a number of dead bodies in the week leading up to the holiday. Oh, and that she took her daughters favourite toy to work with her and, presumably was carrying it each time she came into contact with a dead body. This convoluted explanation does not explain the scent that was found in the car, or on the car keys that Gerry used.

The main focus until recently has been on Jane Tanner's sighting of someone who may have been the abductor. Her testimony has been shown to be inconsistent already. But more significantly to me, if she saw someone carrying a girl who looked like Madeline on the night she disappeared...why would she wait until the next day before mentioning this kind of important fact to the McCanns?

Why did none of the Tapas 7 help search for Madeline that night?

The sighting by the Smith family of a man carrying a child of Madeline's age seems significant to me - particularly as it was seeing how Gerry McCann carried their other child and his particular gait that triggered the memory.

Why does the second new efit look like Gerry McCann?

These are just some thoughts from off the top of my head, and certainly not all of the issues I have with that proposed course of events.
 
ShadesOfTomato said:
Yeah just reading through the link Hectic posted.

I'm not sure about their legitimacy of either webpage to be honest.
Click to expand...


I think both need to be treated with caution. I posted the original links because I think they raised valid questions in my mind.

One example - the rebuttal site can say what they want about the dogs and their level of accuracy, for example. But the McCann's themselves never questioned the validity of the fact that the dogs picked up the cadaver scent on her clothes and on Madeline's toy. Instead they offered an explanation as to how this scent could have gotten on the clothes and toy. An explanation that, in my mind, is extremely shaky.
 
Yeah I wouldn't take either as concrete on anything, but the second link clearly seems to be more reliable.
 
fergieisold said:
Did they actually find any blood or was it just DNA from one of the officers at the scene? The site posted before (http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm) seems to be full of quotes attributed to the McCann's that either didn't exist or were from other people entirely. Anyone wanting to see how poor the above site is should visit this link http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main Page
Click to expand...


One minor detail, the link you posted is actually a rebuttal to this site:
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t1...se-that-the-british-media-are-not-telling-you

It is NOT a rebuttal to the one I posted.

Given that you said the following:

That's because the article has been designed to be just that, although they've had to make a lot of it up to give the impression the parents are guilty.
Click to expand...

Maybe its best not to give the wrong impression about a site you posted?​
 
Spanish Hectic said:
Yeah I wouldn't take either as concrete on anything, but the second link clearly seems to be more reliable.
Click to expand...


But it is rebutting the 'facts' given by a totally different website - it has no relation to the one that I posted and it is disingenuous to position it as such.
 
Ah, sorry swoosh, I thought I read on here that it was a rebuttal against that site directly, my mistake.
 
Spanish Hectic said:
Ah, sorry swoosh, I thought I read on here that it was a rebuttal against that site directly, my mistake.
Click to expand...


No need for an apology - This was the comment from fergieisold:

The site posted before (http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm) seems to be full of quotes attributed to the McCann's that either didn't exist or were from other people entirely. Anyone wanting to see how poor the above site is should visit this link http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39076140/Main Page
Click to expand...

So it does give the impression that it is indeed related.
 
swooshboy said:
One minor detail, the link you posted is actually a rebuttal to this site:
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t1...se-that-the-british-media-are-not-telling-you

It is NOT a rebuttal to the one I posted.

Given that you said the following:


​
​
Maybe its best not to give the wrong impression about a site you posted?​
Click to expand...


I've got mixed up with websites somewhere along the way. Not even sure how! The dangers of speed reading. Anyway, the site you posted also represents the same misleading information.
 
Basically both sites use some questionable 'facts' and it's hard to distinguish between the truth and fabrication. It's even more difficult when you realise that one author has made his mind up about McCanns being guilty with absolute certainty and the other is quick to dismiss the possibility of them being involved.

Blood being found in the trunk of the hired car nearly a month later is pretty inconclusive, whereabouts of the cadaver during the time hole would be impossible to determine and it's hard to comprehend how they'd have been able to dispose of it after a month.
 
This thread has gone full retard I see.

Only on the Internet could the fact that 2 separate investigations and a libel case didnt find substatial evidence against them be grounds for suspicion.

As for the dog, seems people are prepared to believe whatever suits them 'oh they're brilliant you know, but not good enough to smell death because the parent might have been in contact with bodies previously.... that would be ridiculous.
 
Eyepopper said:
This thread has gone full retard I see.

Only on the Internet could the fact that 2 separate investigations and a libel case didnt find substatial evidence against them be grounds for suspicion.

As for the dog, seems people are prepared to believe whatever suits them 'oh they're brilliant you know, but not good enough to smell death because the parent might have been in contact with bodies previously.... that would be ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Yes - the fullest of full.
 
Eyepopper said:
This thread has gone full retard I see.

Only on the Internet could the fact that 2 separate investigations and a libel case didnt find substatial evidence against them be grounds for suspicion.

As for the dog, seems people are prepared to believe whatever suits them 'oh they're brilliant you know, but not good enough to smell death because the parent might have been in contact with bodies previously.... that would be ridiculous.
Click to expand...
The dogs are good, and if they'd only picked up the scent from her clothing, I'd tend to agree, but picking the scent up from specific areas around the apartment, as well as on the toy and the hire car etc, are different from what you've posted. They didn't just sniff her clothes, smell the scent of death which can be explained away by "I wore these clothes at work with dead bodies, I'm a doctor you see". The dog found the scent of death in the same area that the other dog, separately, picked up the scent of blood. In the apartment. They later picked out the McCanns hire car, from a lot with other cars in, and picked up the scent of death there. They didn't just sniff a skirt she'd wore in work and brought with her.
 
The stuff about their hire car is what makes me take all this with a pinch of salt. It'd have been virtually impossible for them to hide a decomposing body of a child inside it a month after she's been reported missing without anyone seeing anything.
 
I looked up those dogs and from what I've read this "dogs are 100% accurate" line came from their handler, is backed up by no documentary evidence and is based solely on his recollection and/or assessment of working with them.

If that's true then there has to be serious doubts about them.
 
I'm sure my dog walks into my bedroom on a regular basis and thinks "christ, something must've died in here"....
 
From a legal perspective, what weight would the 'findings' of these dogs have in a court?
 
The Neviller said:
The dogs are good, and if they'd only picked up the scent from her clothing, I'd tend to agree, but picking the scent up from specific areas around the apartment, as well as on the toy and the hire car etc, are different from what you've posted. They didn't just sniff her clothes, smell the scent of death which can be explained away by "I wore these clothes at work with dead bodies, I'm a doctor you see". The dog found the scent of death in the same area that the other dog, separately, picked up the scent of blood. In the apartment. They later picked out the McCanns hire car, from a lot with other cars in, and picked up the scent of death there. They didn't just sniff a skirt she'd wore in work and brought with her.
Click to expand...

What's the timescale of these scents dispersing anyway? It's an appartment they rented for the two weeks or so isn't it? The scent of blood in the apartment could have been there before they even arrived. The same goes for the scent of death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.