There has been alot of eyebrow raising in the UK about the appointment of this woman who left her three babies for five consecutive nights alone whilst she was out wining and dining 150 metres away and one of them went *missing* and then failed to cooperate with the police or answer their questions, as some ambassador for missing people. its quite the oxymoron at best.
Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26
- Thread starter colomom
- Start date
- Status
There has been alot of eyebrow raising in the UK about the appointment of this woman who left her three babies for five consecutive nights alone whilst she was out wining and dining 150 metres away and one of them went *missing* and then failed to cooperate with the police or answer their questions, as some ambassador for missing people. its quite the oxymoron at best.
joedotnet
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2009
- Messages
- 443
- Reaction score
- 3
Lots of kids that go missing suddenly "have nosebleeds" when families are confronted with blood evidence.
Sent from my SGH-i937 using Board Express
I was just saying if it was something innocent like a nosebleed why
Go to all that effort to discredit the dogs LOL and lets face it many have gone out of their way to discredit these dogs, the handler, what are they they trying to hide? LOL
Its pretty simple, they are discrediting everything and anyone who evem hints at Made,eines demise, that rings massive alarm bells and only says one thing, we are guilty but have to drown the facts out in any which way we can
Cadaver dogs are trained on dead bodies, they dont alert to coconit shells vegetables, pizza, bad breath, rotting teeth the other ridiculous things the apologists hope they do to
And especially in a flat from where a chikd has gone missing slam dunk here, eddie alerted to madeleines dead body scent, very sad
SapphireSteel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2012
- Messages
- 6,788
- Reaction score
- 112
Then you would know the inherent difficulties in working with low copy DNA? You would also be aware that FSS Ltd carries NO CERTIFICATION, adheres to NO INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS, and further is a private company with links to the McCann Corporation.
They did the tests, they got the results, but they chose to publish those results in such a way as the lay-man would believe they are NOT indicative of Madeline's bodily fluids, when in fact, THEY ARE.
You keep saying the results could match with anyone...this is misleading in the extreme. If you take a general sample of the population you may get SOME matches...but the general population are not suspected to be either behind the sofa in 5a, nor in the boot of the rental car!
So we have two options, as a "DNA Scientist" you will be able to confirm - either the results are completely unreadable (common with low copy DNA) or they are open to interpretation (also common with low copy DNA) therefore cannot be used (as you are) TO CONFIRM IT IS NOT MADELINES BODY FLUID, EITHER.
Going by your assertions, the DNA proves exactly NOTHING, either way, so why do you insist it clears them?
SapphireSteel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2012
- Messages
- 6,788
- Reaction score
- 112
And the sequence is what is missing in Low copy DNA... it must be "built" in a laboratory environment, and is open to a massive margin of error. You would know this as a "Scientist who works with DNA" yet you are ignoring it - worse still, using junk science to prove a point which is THE OPPOSITE of scientific behaviour and training.
:banghead:
why do you keep on insisting that the FSS is a private company that holds no international standards or certifications -
Firstly the FSS doesnt exist anymore - the goverment due to cost cutting closed it down this year.
Back in 2007 it was a GOVERMENT agency and carried out all forensic work for the UK law enforcement It had every credential and certification needed including BSI for goodness sake it was at the forefront of DNA analysis throughout the world.
To claim that it was some shady private company that had " links 2 to the Mccaans is wrong and actualy ludicrous
It is excatly this type of nonsence that has spread around the past 5 years .
No it is not double standards. Anyone who knows about DNA (try reading Genes V), would not find this odd.
The material on the key fob comes from one person, and the FSS said it matched Gerry McCann. They did not say the components matched anyone else which they did with the other DNA. As the material is from one person the chances of it coming from anyone but Gerry are very very small, remember he will have a lot of components that madeleine will not have.
But the material that had Madleeines components in was from three to five people, and every single components she had is shared by her parents. If it was just from one person then the chances are it would have been hers, but given that it was from up to five people, and was found in a place that close relations had used, there is no reason to suspect it is hers at all. The FSS also said they could not tell what material the DNA was from.
With LC DNA, the sequence is present, just in very small amounts. Using PCR the sequence is replicated to create a larger amount of DNA. It does not build the sequence, as the sequence has to be there for PCR to take place, it replicates it by growing the chain. The only way the process is open to error is through human error like any other process.
I am not really sure what you mean about junk science. The fact is, you are 100% incorrect when you claim that finding 15 out of the 19 different components found in Madeleine's DNA from a mix of three to five people's DNA, is more or less positive it is hers. There is no way anyone can say the components are hers, and not her relatives. Remember there is not one component in her DNA that is not found in her parent's DNA.
You are wrong. There is no reason why the fact her parents are alive means their DNA would not be found in a car they used. Plus as I have said in other comments, 100% of her components are found in the DNA of her parents. Any DNA sample that contains DNA from Gerry and ate will have a large amount of madeleine's compoents in, if it was a larger and better sample, it would have had all of madeleine's components. There is also a huge chance that a mix of dna from her siblings would also contain a large amount of madeleines components.
If you are thinking of the cadaver dog, it barked to the car generally and the key fob, but it is also trained to alert to bodily fluids from living people (these decompose in the same way), and Keela also alerted here. So even if their alerts are correct, it does not mean there was a body there, just a bodily fluid that is breaking down. I posted a link earlier from the casey anthony trial, where the handler claimed her dogs would alert to nail clippings from a living person, the fss claim nail belonging to both kate and gerry were found in the car.
The Portuguese came to the conclusion there was no evidence against anyone who was an aguido. remember they also made Robert Murat an aguido before the Mccanns, and did not change his status until they also changed the mccanns status.
And seriously you think the British government are covering up a child's death to help a hospital doctor and GP locum from leicester?
First there are no official international standards. The FSS was a government agency, and met all certification required for the U and EU. It has no links to the McCanns.
And in a sample from five people that contained no indentifable profile, that was found in a place where the parents, siblings and at leats four other close relatives were found there is a very high chance that Madeleine's compoents were there. It would be mor eunlikely that they would not be present, given that her parents share 100% of her components. Anyone with a basic UG science degree would understand this. The only people trying to claim it must be madeleine's are lay people with no higher qualifications in science.
Try reading genes V, to get some more information.
SapphireSteel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2012
- Messages
- 6,788
- Reaction score
- 112
Lifted directly from Amaral's book, "The Truth of the Lie", Chapter 18 - please note there are TWO FSS reports, not just one.
PRELIMINARY RESULTS
PREPARATION FOR THE INTERROGATIONS
Analyses of the residues collected following the visit by the dogs is entrusted to the English Forensic Science Service laboratory. To avoid any leaks of information, Stuart Prior, a senior officer with Leicestershire police, is responsible for liaison between the laboratory and José Freitas of Scotland Yard. The latter, who is with us, in Portimão, is passing on any relevant reports.
We confidently wait for the evaluation reports from FSS. A few days after the samples are sent, we are informed that the DNA of the blood found in the boot of the McCanns’ car shows a significant match – 50% – with Gerald’s, which means that it is definitely the blood of one of his children. We telephone the public minister to pass on this initial result and wait for the follow-up to the analyses and definite conclusions But the laboratory takes its time.
At the beginning of September, shortly before the McCann couple are placed under investigation, Superintendent Stuart Prior travels to Portimão to present the first of the two preliminary reports from the laboratory and to discuss the progress of the investigation.
At a meeting in our office, with the Portuguese and the English investigation team, Stuart expresses his disappointment over the test results. This is where the saga of the FSS reports begins. We read the part of the report dealing with the traces of blood lifted from the floor of apartment 5A, from behind the sofa and in the boot of the McCanns’ car and we don’t agree with Stuart’s disappointment We talk about blood traces because the CSI dog is trained to find only that bodily fluid. The reports that support that decision are clear: the CSI dog was used to detect human blood. Low Copy Number, the technique used to determine the DNA of the samples, does not identify the nature of the bodily fluid they are derived from. But we know it’s definitely traces of blood and not other bodily fluids since the CSI dog is trained to detect only human blood.
[/B]In the first case, the laboratory considers that the result of the analysis is inconclusive because the samples gathered provide very little information when the DNA comes from more than one person. But all the confirmed DNA components match with the corresponding components in Madeleine’s DNA profile!.
As for the second case, after an explanation about the DNA components in Madeleine’s genetic profile, it concludes that 15 out of 19 markers in Madeleine’s profile are present in the sample examined. Only 4 short of 100% reliability. The FSS specialists qualify the results as, “complex,” and state that these 15 markers are not enough to conclude with certainty that it’s definitely Madeleine’s DNA profile, especially as Low Copy Number picked out a total of 37 in the sample. That means that at least three individuals contributed to this result.
But there was more in this first preliminary report. In the same report, the scientist went further and explained that in the profiles of many of the lab experts, elements from the DNA profile of Madeleine are present. This means that a major part of the DNA profile of any given person can be built by three donors. That is understandable. Two questions arose immediately. The first one: what good is a DNA profile in terms of criminal evidence, if it can be the combination of three or more donors? Another question was simple: why did the DNA profile from those three donors contribute to Madeleine’s DNA profile and not to that of any other person, like the scientist who carried out the test? But the surprises from the preliminary reports were not to end there.
On the very day that interrogation of the McCann couple starts, a second preliminary report reaches us. Contrary to the first report, it accords more importance to the DNA profile of the blood lifted from the floor of the apartment. In that sample, the DNA came from more than one donor, but the confirmed DNA components match the corresponding components of Madeleine’s DNA profile.
As for the samples lifted from the boot of the car, there is no further mention of the 15 markers, as if they had never existed.
Suddenly, light was starting to be cast on the issue:either this LCN technique is not reliable or it’s simply much easier to explain the presence of Madeleine’s DNA in the apartment than in the boot of a car hired 24 days after her disappearance.
At our insistence, Stuart contacts the FSS and asks them if they think the Portuguese are idiots. We hear him saying: “With a lot less than that, we would have already arrested someone in England.” I look at my colleagues and see that they are as stupified as I am. In fact, in Portugal, it’s not so easy to arrest someone. We explain to Stuart that the McCanns interrogations would not result in detention. According to Portuguese law, the crimes of concealment of a corpse and simulating an abduction are not liable to remanding in custody.
WHAT THE LABORATORY REPORTS BRING TO LIGHT
The preliminary results from FSS were enlightening in a way, and confirmed the information given by the EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and the CSI dog.
- The CSI dog, Keela, signaled the presence of human blood where Eddie, the EVRD dog, marked the presence of cadaver odour – on the floor tiles behind the sofa in the lounge, on the key and in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was used by the McCanns from May 27th onwards.
- the bodily fluids, according to the FSS, contain markers from Madeleine’s DNA profile.
These elements do not constitute concrete proof but simply clues to be added to those we already possess. In itself, the definition of a DNA profile from LCN is not considered as evidence in a criminal investigation. In his report, the English scientist says that he cannot give answers to the following questions: when was the DNA deposited? In what way? What bodily fluid does the DNA come from? Has a crime been committed?
The scientific evidence is not enough and it has to be accompanied by other types of material, documented and testimonial evidence. It is only in this way that the entire puzzle can be reconstructed and certainties can be achieved, for the material truth to be established.
The FSS has still not provided the result of the technical analysis of the hair found in the boot of the car. Once more, Stuart has to contact the laboratory. Nothing has been done. We want to know two things: if the hair is indeed Madeleine’s, and if it comes from a living or a dead person. The FSS can only answer the first question. English colleagues present at the meeting raise the possibility of the hair being sent to other European laboratories which have the resources to clear up the second point for us: hair from a living or a dead person. But the FSS does not seem to want to part with the hair. They claim that using a colour comparison test they can establish if the hair belongs to Madeleine and in a second stage, identify the DNA profile. None of that will happen. We never find out if the hair was Madeleine’s or her parents’ or her brother’s or her sister’s, even though the laboratory has the DNA profiles of each member of the family.
Let’s remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine’s DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance.
http://truthofthelie.com/the-book/chapter-18/
PRELIMINARY RESULTS
PREPARATION FOR THE INTERROGATIONS
Analyses of the residues collected following the visit by the dogs is entrusted to the English Forensic Science Service laboratory. To avoid any leaks of information, Stuart Prior, a senior officer with Leicestershire police, is responsible for liaison between the laboratory and José Freitas of Scotland Yard. The latter, who is with us, in Portimão, is passing on any relevant reports.
We confidently wait for the evaluation reports from FSS. A few days after the samples are sent, we are informed that the DNA of the blood found in the boot of the McCanns’ car shows a significant match – 50% – with Gerald’s, which means that it is definitely the blood of one of his children. We telephone the public minister to pass on this initial result and wait for the follow-up to the analyses and definite conclusions But the laboratory takes its time.
At the beginning of September, shortly before the McCann couple are placed under investigation, Superintendent Stuart Prior travels to Portimão to present the first of the two preliminary reports from the laboratory and to discuss the progress of the investigation.
At a meeting in our office, with the Portuguese and the English investigation team, Stuart expresses his disappointment over the test results. This is where the saga of the FSS reports begins. We read the part of the report dealing with the traces of blood lifted from the floor of apartment 5A, from behind the sofa and in the boot of the McCanns’ car and we don’t agree with Stuart’s disappointment We talk about blood traces because the CSI dog is trained to find only that bodily fluid. The reports that support that decision are clear: the CSI dog was used to detect human blood. Low Copy Number, the technique used to determine the DNA of the samples, does not identify the nature of the bodily fluid they are derived from. But we know it’s definitely traces of blood and not other bodily fluids since the CSI dog is trained to detect only human blood.
[/B]In the first case, the laboratory considers that the result of the analysis is inconclusive because the samples gathered provide very little information when the DNA comes from more than one person. But all the confirmed DNA components match with the corresponding components in Madeleine’s DNA profile!.
As for the second case, after an explanation about the DNA components in Madeleine’s genetic profile, it concludes that 15 out of 19 markers in Madeleine’s profile are present in the sample examined. Only 4 short of 100% reliability. The FSS specialists qualify the results as, “complex,” and state that these 15 markers are not enough to conclude with certainty that it’s definitely Madeleine’s DNA profile, especially as Low Copy Number picked out a total of 37 in the sample. That means that at least three individuals contributed to this result.
But there was more in this first preliminary report. In the same report, the scientist went further and explained that in the profiles of many of the lab experts, elements from the DNA profile of Madeleine are present. This means that a major part of the DNA profile of any given person can be built by three donors. That is understandable. Two questions arose immediately. The first one: what good is a DNA profile in terms of criminal evidence, if it can be the combination of three or more donors? Another question was simple: why did the DNA profile from those three donors contribute to Madeleine’s DNA profile and not to that of any other person, like the scientist who carried out the test? But the surprises from the preliminary reports were not to end there.
On the very day that interrogation of the McCann couple starts, a second preliminary report reaches us. Contrary to the first report, it accords more importance to the DNA profile of the blood lifted from the floor of the apartment. In that sample, the DNA came from more than one donor, but the confirmed DNA components match the corresponding components of Madeleine’s DNA profile.
As for the samples lifted from the boot of the car, there is no further mention of the 15 markers, as if they had never existed.
Suddenly, light was starting to be cast on the issue:either this LCN technique is not reliable or it’s simply much easier to explain the presence of Madeleine’s DNA in the apartment than in the boot of a car hired 24 days after her disappearance.
At our insistence, Stuart contacts the FSS and asks them if they think the Portuguese are idiots. We hear him saying: “With a lot less than that, we would have already arrested someone in England.” I look at my colleagues and see that they are as stupified as I am. In fact, in Portugal, it’s not so easy to arrest someone. We explain to Stuart that the McCanns interrogations would not result in detention. According to Portuguese law, the crimes of concealment of a corpse and simulating an abduction are not liable to remanding in custody.
WHAT THE LABORATORY REPORTS BRING TO LIGHT
The preliminary results from FSS were enlightening in a way, and confirmed the information given by the EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and the CSI dog.
- The CSI dog, Keela, signaled the presence of human blood where Eddie, the EVRD dog, marked the presence of cadaver odour – on the floor tiles behind the sofa in the lounge, on the key and in the boot of the Renault Scenic that was used by the McCanns from May 27th onwards.
- the bodily fluids, according to the FSS, contain markers from Madeleine’s DNA profile.
These elements do not constitute concrete proof but simply clues to be added to those we already possess. In itself, the definition of a DNA profile from LCN is not considered as evidence in a criminal investigation. In his report, the English scientist says that he cannot give answers to the following questions: when was the DNA deposited? In what way? What bodily fluid does the DNA come from? Has a crime been committed?
The scientific evidence is not enough and it has to be accompanied by other types of material, documented and testimonial evidence. It is only in this way that the entire puzzle can be reconstructed and certainties can be achieved, for the material truth to be established.
The FSS has still not provided the result of the technical analysis of the hair found in the boot of the car. Once more, Stuart has to contact the laboratory. Nothing has been done. We want to know two things: if the hair is indeed Madeleine’s, and if it comes from a living or a dead person. The FSS can only answer the first question. English colleagues present at the meeting raise the possibility of the hair being sent to other European laboratories which have the resources to clear up the second point for us: hair from a living or a dead person. But the FSS does not seem to want to part with the hair. They claim that using a colour comparison test they can establish if the hair belongs to Madeleine and in a second stage, identify the DNA profile. None of that will happen. We never find out if the hair was Madeleine’s or her parents’ or her brother’s or her sister’s, even though the laboratory has the DNA profiles of each member of the family.
Let’s remember: it is totally logical to find Madeleine’s DNA in the home, but absolutely not in a car rented more than twenty days after her disappearance.
http://truthofthelie.com/the-book/chapter-18/
No wonder Amaral, who has a criminal conviction for falsyifying evidence in a criminal case, is being sued for libel. To be honest this is a gift to those who do not like him. he makes it clear that unless he is lying, he does not udnerstand how DNA works in anyway and actually requested that the FSS were telephoned and accused of thinking the Portuguese were idiots when the evidence did not implicate the McCanns.
SapphireSteel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2012
- Messages
- 6,788
- Reaction score
- 112
SapphireSteel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2012
- Messages
- 6,788
- Reaction score
- 112
You know, I wish I had your faith.
These people have muddied the water and flug the mud soooo far that it can never be cleaned up, imo.
Unless of course, they find her...
I sincerely hope karma exists for people like this.
sapphire,
in the thread you have made a few statements which are 100% incorrect, among them "You would also be aware that FSS Ltd carries NO CERTIFICATION, adheres to NO INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS, and further is a private company with links to the McCann Corporation." and that the Mccanns flat was 120m away.
Both of these are 100% untrue, the flat was just over 50m directly, and just over 75m to wal on the pavement. The FSS (which is now closed) was an executive agency of the government until 2005, and then a government owned agency until its closure. It was never privatly owned, and as the government agency in chage of forensic examinations it must certainly did have permission to practice and examine DNA, and followed all UK and EU protocol with regards to DNA handling.
You also stated that finding 15 components out of an individuel's 19 different components from a sample of 37 components donated by up to five individuels, found in a place where the first individuel's close relatives used meant that it was more or less a psoitive id of madeleine's DNA. This again is 100% incorrect.
Can I just ask where you are getting this misinformation, I am assuming it is not you yourself coming up with it, so where are you finding it as it would be quite interesting to see who is spreading these lies.
I also do not know why you are accusing others of muddying the water, when you have posted such misinformation. If you do not want to muddy the waters, then posting things which are such fabrications is not helping you do this.
in the thread you have made a few statements which are 100% incorrect, among them "You would also be aware that FSS Ltd carries NO CERTIFICATION, adheres to NO INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS, and further is a private company with links to the McCann Corporation." and that the Mccanns flat was 120m away.
Both of these are 100% untrue, the flat was just over 50m directly, and just over 75m to wal on the pavement. The FSS (which is now closed) was an executive agency of the government until 2005, and then a government owned agency until its closure. It was never privatly owned, and as the government agency in chage of forensic examinations it must certainly did have permission to practice and examine DNA, and followed all UK and EU protocol with regards to DNA handling.
You also stated that finding 15 components out of an individuel's 19 different components from a sample of 37 components donated by up to five individuels, found in a place where the first individuel's close relatives used meant that it was more or less a psoitive id of madeleine's DNA. This again is 100% incorrect.
Can I just ask where you are getting this misinformation, I am assuming it is not you yourself coming up with it, so where are you finding it as it would be quite interesting to see who is spreading these lies.
I also do not know why you are accusing others of muddying the water, when you have posted such misinformation. If you do not want to muddy the waters, then posting things which are such fabrications is not helping you do this.
the muddying of the waters started from the very beginning with the false spreading of the shutters were jemmied, broken, smashed and the rest is history. And yes, everything and everyone is wrong, bad, evil, untrue, mistranslated, misunderstood, and those two are just victims, saints.......
with millions of pounds though not accounted for
Well the rumours about the shutters being jemmied was nto put about by the mccanns. the media may have stated it, but that is not the mccanns fault.
And the madeleine fund has to by law provide accoutns jus like any company, or charity, so if you think they are falsifying their accounts, take your evidence to the police.
But the biggest falsehoods are those being spread by people like debbie butler and Tony bennett. the fact that bennett has been unable to prove his claims in court demonstrates they are not true.
On this thread alone we have had people claiming that the FSS had questionable ownership with links to the mccanns.
The media did not make up stories quoting verbatim their friends and relatives saying the shutters were tampered with, smashed or broken.
their friends and relatives went on tv to state this and the story is also in one of their relatives police statement. Once again your version is untrue and just your opinion not borne out by actual facts. As to the rest of your rant, I have no idea what it is about.
- Status