Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #36

[mrjitty]

I think the reason why they dug was that they found subsoil and are trying to match it.

 

[mrjitty]

that's why I said they dug too deep in my opinion.

eta this area was supposedly covered with trees and shrubs, so difficult to have erosion there, much more possible to have deposition

Isn't it simply much more likely it was much the same 16 years ago and they found subsoil in his van - so that is why they are taking core samples?

 

[Monic]

But that will still not prove he killed Madeleine....

 

[Mex]

Interesting that they are doing soil sampling.
You only do that when tying a item, to a person or place or vice versa…

Perhaps HCW hasn’t been as transparent as we believe on the physical evidence front…

Good on him if he hasn't been. I think there can be very few (if any) successful prosecutions in which the suspect and his/her legal team have been kept in the loop every step of the way by investigators.

That has to wait till later in the process when all the evidence has been collected.

 

[Janosch]

I think they are looking in Arade for electronic devices such as usb sticks, memory cards, etc. (like was the case in the box factory).
Maybe they used some kind of "buried electronic device detector" and when it signaled "positive", they took all the soil to be carefully examined at the lab in Germany.

 

[Dave55]

Could the soil samples show if the soil in the van was from a hole...to show that CB had dug a hole of a certain depth at the site

 

[jbinator]

Yep

 

[RichardKimble]

I think the reason why they dug was that they found subsoil and are trying to match it.

But how far down, 16 yrs of leaf rot makes for a depth of what?

So just let's suppose German sources have nothing better to do on a weekend than brief the brit press on what may or not be looked for, shock horror they found soil samples, 30+ officers for that imo it's more than that along the lines of which Janosch has surmised.

 

[Lyall0814]

I reckon the dogs wouldn't be much help if you were there to take soil samples.

 

[mrjitty]

Could the soil samples show if the soil in the van was from a hole...to show that CB had dug a hole of a certain depth at the site

Yes.

e.g. my soil has layers not caused by accretion but by leaching - i.e water draining leaves bands in the soil where minerals are deposited. There is topsoil, then sand, then the "ironsand" about 1m down

So if you find the iron sand that is evidence of digging because it does not occur on the surface. It is formed by a physical process (water drainage)

Just a basic example that you can verify yourself if you dig down in a garden or yard

 

[mrjitty]

But how far down, 16 yrs of leaf rot makes for a depth of what?

So just let's suppose German sources have nothing better to do on a weekend than brief the brit press on what may or not be looked for, shock horror they found soil samples, 30+ officers for that imo it's more than that along the lines of which Janosch has surmised.

That layer does not build up significantly - as anyone who walks in a forest will verify. The bottoms of the trees are not buried in 1m of organics!

Accretion of sand would be visible in the form of drifts.

 

[RichardKimble]

Could the soil samples show if the soil in the van was from a hole...to show that CB had dug a hole of a certain depth at the site

How could a hole be identified has having being dug by one particular individual?

 

[mrjitty]

I think they are looking in Arade for electronic devices such as usb sticks, memory cards, etc. (like was the case in the box factory).
Maybe they used some kind of "buried electronic device detector" and when it signaled "positive", they took all the soil to be carefully examined at the lab in Germany.

Or maybe anything that had been buried?

 

[mrjitty]

How could a hole be identified has having being dug by one particular individual?

It can't obviously. But if subsoil was found in his van, which is of a similar type to their samples, it would provide evidence of digging to a certain depth.

 

[Lyall0814]

Possible evidence of the signs of decomposition is maybe what the soil samples are for, but that would imply (imo) that no such evidence was gathered from the van (or from any other CB-related site they've been to. Over the years they probably have been to more than we know about)

 

[RichardKimble]

It can't obviously. But if subsoil was found in his van, which is of a similar type to their samples, it would provide evidence of digging to a certain depth.

What am I missing here, soil at a certain depth would mean someone had dug a hole at that depth, how do you link it to a certain individual, the only way for this to happen is if another vechile used by CB and no one else since 2007 has been found and forensic analysis has turned something up.imo

 

[mrjitty]

What am I missing here, soil at a certain depth would mean someone had dug a hole at that depth, how do you link it to a certain individual, the only way for this to happen is if another vechile used by CB and no one else since 2007 has been found and forensic analysis has turned something up.imo

No way to know

It might just be an investigative step.

 

[Mex]

Possible evidence of the signs of decomposition is maybe what the soil samples are for, but that would imply (imo) that no such evidence was gathered from the van (or from any other CB-related site they've been to. Over the years they probably have been to more than we know about)

I think the only reason we know so much about this dig is because it had to take place in a foreign country and permission asked.
For example the PJ were able to search wells and no-one was any the wiser until after the event.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

It can't obviously. But if subsoil was found in his van, which is of a similar type to their samples, it would provide evidence of digging to a certain depth.

It could be in there from the person who had the van for 25 years before CB or the five years after… or anyone who borrowed it from him.

 

[Lyall0814]

I'm sure you're right, Mex, but the implication is (so far) they haven't found much, if anything, at more sites than we know about. I know we won't agree on that.