"Damning Proof Found"

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
LOL, Heather that could take forever with all the info you alone have posted:D

Gosh, I guess that is true huh? I didn't think about that...

Ok, just posts within the last week. It has been since we moved into our nice big new house (our own forum).

I must look like such a :loser: if all I ever do is post here....:D
 
Hi Gord,

I just responded to that post on the other thread. I expressed my belief that the article you reference for the 7PM time of last sighting is full of discrepancies and is very biased. I could pick it apart for DAYS...

I do not believe the 7PM last time of sighting...

I do not believe that the last time Maddie was seen alive has been proven or stated as fact anywhere. This is still a big question in this case.

Also, I have posted numerous times about the scenario of the hours leading up to Kate's declaration of Maddie's abduction and I have offered plenty of information that works with a very small window of time allowing for her to be hidden in a very short period of time.

Please search posts under my username and read about the area around the resort and the possible methods of a quick disposal.

I agree, in the middle of night, up to 45 mins. is ample time to dispose of a body. In a quiet resort, full of children and numerous quests going to dinner and drinking would sleep right through ANYTHING!
 
The biggest question we've had about Madeleine- from the very start back in May- is: when was the last time someone besides a family member saw her? 131 days later, we still don't know.
 
from the SkyNews article:

The sample was taken from the boot, where the spare tyre is kept.

I heard Van Sandt on msnbc saying the blood was found in the trunk of the car, in the depression on the floor that holds a spare tire.

Was the spare tire in the trunk when they found the sample?
And if it was, was it in the depression with the blood? Or somewhere else in the trunk?
 
from the SkyNews article:

The sample was taken from the boot, where the spare tyre is kept.

I heard Van Sandt on msnbc saying the blood was found in the trunk of the car, in the depression on the floor that holds a spare tire.

Was the spare tire in the trunk when they found the sample?
And if it was, was it in the depression with the blood? Or somewhere else in the trunk?

not sure about the tire, but it is a perfect spot to hide a 4 yr old!UGH!:mad:
 
from the SkyNews article:

The sample was taken from the boot, where the spare tyre is kept.

I heard Van Sandt on msnbc saying the blood was found in the trunk of the car, in the depression on the floor that holds a spare tire.

Was the spare tire in the trunk when they found the sample?
And if it was, was it in the depression with the blood? Or somewhere else in the trunk?

Sounds like they removed the spare tire and placed Maddie's body in that compartment where the tire should be...and then covered her over with the boot mat.
 
I have to ask the obvious question here. How do they know this is Maddies blood? What are they comparing it with?

Didn't I read somewhere that they don't have all the genetic markers to prove conclusively that it is from Maddie and only Maddie? IOW it is from someone in the family, but not necessarily a perfect match for Maddie.

I may have missed something though.
 
I have to ask the obvious question here. How do they know this is Maddies blood? What are they comparing it with?

Didn't I read somewhere that they don't have all the genetic markers to prove conclusively that it is from Maddie and only Maddie? IOW it is from someone in the family, but not necessarily a perfect match for Maddie.

I may have missed something though.

Check here:

http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53216&page=5 (post #108)

Tell me if it makes sense...
 
I really don't understand your logic here. Perhaps you don't understand what a cadaver dog is trained to do. They don't just locate dead remains, They find the scent of dead remains in the air and follow that scent to its most concentrated point... which may result in a body being found or may result in a place where that body was before it was removed, which in turn may reveal evidence that points to a suspect.

For example, say a dead body was taken out of the trunk of a car and dragged or carried to a spot in a field where it was left, but later the person who dumped that body got nervous the body would be discovered, so they went back to the body, and threw it back in the trunk to be moved elsewhere. The dog would find the scent "cone" in the air and track it to the spot where the body was dumped. The dog insists this is where the body was, so the search team digs thinking the body must be in the ground... but find no body. This doesn't mean the body wasn't there, only that it HAD BEEN there but moved in such a way that the scent couldn't be followed. What the dog found was the most concentrated area of scent. The dog handler knowing this is the most conentrated area of scent knows by the dog's reaction that the body WAS there but had been moved. So the team checks around the area and finds tire tracks that may lead to identification of the car used to transport the body. Or in the dirt they find tiny scraps of decomposed material like skin or blood. They can take samples of the dirt and find that there is a high concentration of decomposed material that proves a body lay in that spot decomposing. Now they have other leads they can use like checking the shoes of certain people to see if they can match dirt or other seeds/grasses that show a certain person was in that field. They can also check whatever is on the shoes to see if there is any decomposed dead body material in the dirt or other seeds/grasses on the shoes which would identify who it was that dumped the body and/or retrieved it again to dump somewhere else.

This is how ALL dogs scent whether they're tracking prey, live fugitives on the run, dead remains, or whatever. But specialty trained dogs are dogs that have a highly developed scenting ability plus the desire to follow a particular scent without being distracted or giving up. The rest is pretty much just the training to respond to signals from and handler and give the handler signals of a find.
I don't doubt for a minute that the
properly trained dog can do all the things you suggest. What I do doubt is that we don't know in each case how the dog was trained and the accuracy of said dog. I am skeptical of dog scents until it has been properly vetted by a court of law.
 
I have to ask the obvious question here. How do they know this is Maddies blood? What are they comparing it with?

Didn't I read somewhere that they don't have all the genetic markers to prove conclusively that it is from Maddie and only Maddie? IOW it is from someone in the family, but not necessarily a perfect match for Maddie.

I may have missed something though.

Empty suits and dresses say LE has an 88% DNA match. Human DNA is a 98% match to chimpanzee DNA. I wonder what DNA percentage humans match to LE and empty suits and dresses?
 
Empty suits and dresses say LE has an 88% DNA match. Human DNA is a 98% match to chimpanzee DNA. I wonder what DNA percentage humans match to LE and empty suits and dresses?

I hate cryptic...what exactly are you trying to say?
 
Empty suits and dresses say LE has an 88% DNA match. Human DNA is a 98% match to chimpanzee DNA. I wonder what DNA percentage humans match to LE and empty suits and dresses?


I think you are misunderstanding the process by which they do DNA testing for identification purposes.

Human DNA is 98% similar to chimpanzee DNA (i haven't looked this up to verify but know its a high number, so will use your numbers) - meaning that 98% of the DNA is in common.

When they do DNA testing to determine if DNA came from a person, the don't look at the whole DNA, of course, they look at specific markers which have a wide variety of diversity in humans to determine the likelihood that the DNA came from this person. Sometimes some of the markers have degraded (as in this case) and aren't able to be determined.
 
Oh, [sigh!], I can't believe you and I are on the same side, Wudge! I was going to wring your neck in the Peterson case!

But making a leap to connect the dots with the DNA evidence worries me. That's what happened in the West Memphis Three case, and that damage is just starting to be undone now, a decade later.
 
I think you are misunderstanding the process by which they do DNA testing for identification purposes.

Human DNA is 98% similar to chimpanzee DNA (i haven't looked this up to verify but know its a high number, so will use your numbers) - meaning that 98% of the DNA is in common.

When they do DNA testing to determine if DNA came from a person, the don't look at the whole DNA, of course, they look at specific markers which have a wide variety of diversity in humans to determine the likelihood that the DNA came from this person. Sometimes some of the markers have degraded (as in this case) and aren't able to be determined.

Wudge is fairly knowledgeable about these things. I'd prefer to hear from them about the mitochondrial DNA comparison because from what I understand this is pretty clear comparision, even using degraded samples. Aren't they able to reproduce the markers if there is a too-small sample or if its degraded?
 
Oh, [sigh!], I can't believe you and I are on the same side, Wudge! I was going to wring your neck in the Peterson case!

But making a leap to connect the dots with the DNA evidence worries me. That's what happened in the West Memphis Three case, and that damage is just starting to be undone now, a decade later.


Amen to that.. and that's from someone who was 'there' when it happened.
 
[/B]

Amen to that.. and that's from someone who was 'there' when it happened.

Now they want to subpoena Kate's diary.....?????

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1016265_judge_asked_to_seize_kates_diary

PROSECUTORS in the Madeleine McCann case want to examine her mother’s private diary for clues, sources close to the investigation said today.

Police passed their 4,000-page dossier of evidence against Kate (pictured) and Gerry McCann to Algarve-based public prosecutor Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses yesterday.


Do you think she wrote in there what happened?? ha!
 
Pretty stupid if she did.
 
What would be the point of sleuthing then??

Sleuth=detective...to detect...to figure out the truth...

If you have the facts then you have the truth!!

I kinda sorta agree w/both of you. We need the facts, and I agree with Wudge we should deal with the facts....I also agree we should be sleuthing, but IMO you have to sleuth where the FACTS take you, not speculation, theories, guessing.

In chat last night I asked about a dozen times for every one to come forth with actual evidence we are SURE of, then we take the facts and work from there. I couldn't get anything.

In other cases we have 'worked' on we get snapsnots of docs, warrants, statements, actual press releases from reliable people involved in case....to date, I haven't seen any thing that has been FACT. The newspapers we can not rely on.

I think the parents were involved, don't get me wrong..I just think we should be sleuthing the FACTS. Doing otherwise is just making us walk around in circles guessing. IMO.

Now this does however make for a great discussion, but if you want to sleuth it, JMHO, we should sleuth with FACTS. There is a theories thread for theories, polls for guesses, where are the FACTS? (I speak of mostly evidence, we have timelines, etc, this scenario I speak of evidence)
 
Now they want to subpoena Kate's diary.....?????

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1016265_judge_asked_to_seize_kates_diary

PROSECUTORS in the Madeleine McCann case want to examine her mother’s private diary for clues, sources close to the investigation said today.

Police passed their 4,000-page dossier of evidence against Kate (pictured) and Gerry McCann to Algarve-based public prosecutor Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses yesterday.

Do you think she wrote in there what happened?? ha!

In her picture she's reaching for her neck again, just like Patsy did ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
58
Guests online
185
Total visitors
243

Forum statistics

Threads
609,408
Messages
18,253,662
Members
234,649
Latest member
sharag
Back
Top