Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26

[fabgod]

Just wondering out loud if the PJ sent every tile from the apartment 5a floor for testing,
Just wondering if they sent every potential hair, particle of DNA that they could find in an apartment that had been rented out hundreds of time
Just wondering if they took every sample they could possibly find in the hire car
or did they send off the items that were alerted to by the apparently useless dogs?
you know, just wondering!

 

[gord]

with low copy DNA techiques they have now I have read that if you meet someone in the street and shake hands - and they then go onto comitt a crime that day - your DNA could be found at the scene !! -

One of the reasons that you have to be so carefull ...... There has been a few high profile cases where LCNDNA analysis was chucked out at trial teh Omah Bombing for one

 

[brit1981]

Just wondering out loud if the PJ sent every tile from the apartment 5a floor for testing,
Just wondering if they sent every potential hair, particle of DNA that they could find in an apartment that had been rented out hundreds of time
Just wondering if they took every sample they could possibly find in the hire car
or did they send off the items that were alerted to by the apparently useless dogs?
you know, just wondering!

I am not saying the dogs are useless justthat they are not proof, hence they are not used as evidence. The EVRD alerts to bodily fluids too, so all you can say is that even if he did alert correctly there could be bodily fluids in the flat. That is as specific as one can get.

But the dog did make an alert in jersey, no bodies were found, just bodily fluids.

The PJ did send a large amount of material off including material that turned out to belong to their own officer. But I still do not know why you think DNA that was from two peopel and too small to interpret is interesting. What is interesting about it to you? What do you think it is indicitive of?

 

[brit1981]

with low copy DNA techiques they have now I have read that if you meet someone in the street and shake hands - and they then go onto comitt a crime that day - your DNA could be found at the scene !! -

One of the reasons that you have to be so carefull ...... There has been a few high profile cases where LCNDNA analysis was chucked out at trial teh Omah Bombing for one

But these samples were too small for even PCR to be of use and for them different profiles to be extracted.

 

[SapphireSteel]

But these samples were too small for even PCR to be of use and for them different profiles to be extracted.

Therefore cannot exclude the possibility that it is, indeed, Madeleine's blood.

 

[brit1981]

The sample that was found but was inconclusive cannot be excluded as belonging to any two people who have ever come into contact with the car, nor can the material be excluded as blood or any other bodily fluid.
As for the other sample. This had 37 components in all, 15 of which Madeleine shared. However, every single component of madeleines would be found in the DNA of her parents, and the dna of her grandparents, and woudl have a large percentage in common with other relatives, and would have also had a very small amount of components in common with strangers. So whilst madeleine could nto be excluded, the chances of it being hers are very remote. There is no way to tell if the components came from 1,2,3,4 or 5 people, and who those people were. ny mix of kate and Gerry's DNA would have contained madeleine's components, even 100% of madeleine's components would not indicate it was hers in such a mixed sample found where her relatives where.
So basicly we have a car that has been hired to a large number of people, and which witness put the mccanns in for several weeks. We then have a tiny DNA sample from two people which could belong to any two people who have ever come into contact with the car (even through transfer via other people), and then we have another sample from three to five people that coudl have come from any number of the mccanns seen usning the car, but from which it cannot be excluded that madeleine was a donor, but no witness puts her anywhere near the car.

 

[Donjeta]

I think we can forget about the sample that was too tiny to be analyzed. It will never be of any use because as long as they can't analyze it it could be from anybody, and because it was such a tiny amount it could have been touch transfer from some of the stuff belonging to the family even if it was Madeleine's.
It proves nothing except that some DNA was at some point in contact with that car one way or another and I think that is true about 99,999% of all cars in the world.

 

[fabgod]

Important to note here, that the UK police only discovered Tia's body when they brought in cadaver dogs. If they had brought them in earlier, without doubt they would have found her earlier.

In Madeleine's case they were eventually brought in too, only to alert in ONE SINGLE APARTMENT in the entire Ocean Club complex.

Yet some are dismissing the dogs as though they are junk science....

:banghead:

Sapphire,
Sorry I missed your post here, can I make it clear that I completely believe in specialist dogs without question.
My belief is that the dogs are incapable of lying, they alert to their training and that any doubts that are cast, come from the processing of such alerts in that the dog alerts to an area mostly, it is the job of the investigators to locate the items or area of interest properly.
The dog does its job, if it alerts, there is something in that area worth investigating 100%

I was using the line you bolded as a reference to the missed searches and how the same thought could be applied to the Robert Murat residence
Thanks

 

[redheadedgal]

to preface this comment i want to say that i do not believe maddy is alive sadly, but i was absolutely shocked last week when i saw her missing poster in the middle of no where southern saskatechewan, canada in the local walmart... i stopped and stared. i've never seen one here in canada before...

 

[fabgod]

to preface this comment i want to say that i do not believe maddy is alive sadly, but i was absolutely shocked last week when i saw her missing poster in the middle of no where southern saskatechewan, canada in the local walmart... i stopped and stared. i've never seen one here in canada before...

Hi
I just looked on google earth, that is amazing. I suppose that proves that awareness campaigns work doesn't it? Can I ask, was it an old picture of Madeleine or an age progressed one?
Thanks

 

[brit1981]

it is not true that tia sharp was only found because of victim recovery dogs. the dogs were brought in on the wednesday and did not find anything. tia was found on the friday. the dogs failed on the wednesday.

dogs also alerted in the shannon mathews home and she was alive and well.

the dog used in the mccann case also alerted in a case in jersey, and it turned out there were no bodies and no murders. at the time though the dog was no longer licensed to work in the uk.

the dogs are not actually cadaver dogs. they are recovery dogs they are not meant to be used to say where a body has been.

also the dog used in the mccann case was trained to alert to all bodily fluids not just dead bodies, so assuming his alert is correct it cannot be said anything more than a bodily fluid was there. It is believed this is why the dog alerted in jersey.

They also checked very few flats in the complex. As grimes has written in his report the dog alerts to bodily fluids, it is up to him and the previous occupants of the other flats to explain why the dogs did not alert in the other flats.

 

[fabgod]

it is not true that tia sharp was only found because of victim recovery dogs. the dogs were brought in on the wednesday and did not find anything. tia was found on the friday. the dogs failed on the wednesday.

dogs also alerted in the shannon mathews home and she was alive and well.

the dog used in the mccann case also alerted in a case in jersey, and it turned out there were no bodies and no murders. at the time though the dog was no longer licensed to work in the uk.

the dogs are not actually cadaver dogs. they are recovery dogs they are not meant to be used to say where a body has been.

also the dog used in the mccann case was trained to alert to all bodily fluids not just dead bodies, so assuming his alert is correct it cannot be said anything more than a bodily fluid was there. It is believed this is why the dog alerted in jersey.

They also checked very few flats in the complex. As grimes has written in his report the dog alerts to bodily fluids, it is up to him and the previous occupants of the other flats to explain why the dogs did not alert in the other flats.

Tia Sharpe
url]http://content.met.police.uk/News/Statement-re-Tia-Sharp-investigation/1400010786599/1257246745756[/url]

snipped from the above
An early review has been conducted and it is now clear that human error delayed the discovery of the body within the house.

You learn something every day, I always thought that DOGS were ANIMALS?

Shannon Matthews,
the dogs were correct in their alerts, try googling "Shannon Matthews dog alerted to furniture" see what you find!

Jersey namely Haute de la Garenne,
The dog alerted to various items, some people seem to be desperate to put the "coconut" find in to peoples minds, can I suggest again a google search (as I cannot be sure as to if it is acceptable to post a direct link to the site) google "Exclusive Footage of "Eddie" Cadaver Dog at HDLG."

The dog alerted to the correct areas, contrary to certain posters claims, human bone has been found, upwards of 50 teeth have been found and various samples were submitted for analysis.
There is no doubt that Haute de la Garenne has been the centre of abuse in the past, whether there was more than abuse and whether there was a cover up of goings on there, hopefully will be revealed in time.

So,
Tia Sharp, Shannon Matthews, Jersey (Haute de la Garenne) the dogs did their job, they were correct, there is no doubt
Madeleine McCann? The dogs have always been correct, they have always alerted correctly, what they alert to is down to Human experts to identify.

The dogs are correct, disinformation is fine, but the truth will find a way!

 

[Cappuccino]

I followed your suggestion and googled "Shannon Matthews dog alerted to furniture" and found this....

http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.ie/2011/12/beware-of-misinformant.html

It was very informative and helpful, thanks for the suggestion.

 

[brit1981]

The EVRD alerts to bodily fluids according to Grimes so even if it was correct it means nothing except bodily fluids were present.

In the report grimes submitted to the PJ he claims the EVRD alerts to bodily fluids including blood. This means that the dog's alerts cannot be assumed to do with anything other than bodily fluids as the dog cannot tell you the specifics of what he is alerting to.

Anyone who claims that the dogs do not alert to bodily fluids is accusing Grimes of putting in false information into his report as it is Grimes who has made this claim, and I really cannot see why you would accuse him of disinformation.

The dogs are not in charge of the case. If the dogs do not alert, and the police assume they are correct and no longer search then the error is human. It is down to human interpretation.

Cdr Neil Basu made a public statement saying dogs were used to search the property over two days before Tia was actually found. The wednesday search with dogs failed to find a body. But if you have evidence Basu is lying then you need to make a formal complaint, or if you have evidence that the dogs did find the body and the police let it lie there for over two days then again you need to make a complaint.

In the shannon mathews case the dogs alerted and shannon was alive and well. It was suggested that because second hand furniture had been used it may have been in contact with a dead body previously, but this was never confirmed. All this case says that if dogs alert in the home of a missing person they cannot be used as evidence that a person missing is in fact dead. If you are certain the furniture was contaminated then how can you be sure where the furnture in the flat 5a came from, we cannot discount the same thing happened witht he mccann flat can we?

As for jersey, no body parts were discovered this claim was discounted. I knwo people are now claiming this is a huge cover -up but so far no body parts or evidence of murder have been discovered.

The dogs used in these cases were victim reovery dogs, they are meant to recover victims in not one of these cases did the dogs do their jobs as they failed to recover any victims.

I just find it strange that in one breath people are claiming that the dog alerts mean that there had been a body in the flat and Grimes is lying about the bodily fluids, whilst in the next breath claiming that second hand furniture may cause an alert and a body never has to have been near the home or its occupants.

 

[brit1981]

I followed your suggestion and googled "Shannon Matthews dog alerted to furniture" and found this....

http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.ie/2011/12/beware-of-misinformant.html

It was very informative and helpful, thanks for the suggestion.

Thanks, very informative.
I really do not get why people are claiming Grimes is wrong when he says they laert to historic material and bodily fluids. Surely if he is wrong about that, then it cannot be taken he is right about anything else to do with the dogs. The fact is he claims the dogs alert to bodily fluids, and anyone who says they do not are going against his report.

 

[fabgod]

The EVRD alerts to bodily fluids according to Grimes so even if it was correct it means nothing except bodily fluids were present.

In the report grimes submitted to the PJ he claims the EVRD alerts to bodily fluids including blood. This means that the dog's alerts cannot be assumed to do with anything other than bodily fluids as the dog cannot tell you the specifics of what he is alerting to.

Anyone who claims that the dogs do not alert to bodily fluids is accusing Grimes of putting in false information into his report as it is Grimes who has made this claim, and I really cannot see why you would accuse him of disinformation.

The dogs are not in charge of the case. If the dogs do not alert, and the police assume they are correct and no longer search then the error is human. It is down to human interpretation.

Cdr Neil Basu made a public statement saying dogs were used to search the property over two days before Tia was actually found. The wednesday search with dogs failed to find a body. But if you have evidence Basu is lying then you need to make a formal complaint, or if you have evidence that the dogs did find the body and the police let it lie there for over two days then again you need to make a complaint.

In the shannon mathews case the dogs alerted and shannon was alive and well. It was suggested that because second hand furniture had been used it may have been in contact with a dead body previously, but this was never confirmed. All this case says that if dogs alert in the home of a missing person they cannot be used as evidence that a person missing is in fact dead. If you are certain the furniture was contaminated then how can you be sure where the furnture in the flat 5a came from, we cannot discount the same thing happened witht he mccann flat can we?

As for jersey, no body parts were discovered this claim was discounted. I knwo people are now claiming this is a huge cover -up but so far no body parts or evidence of murder have been discovered.

The dogs used in these cases were victim reovery dogs, they are meant to recover victims in not one of these cases did the dogs do their jobs as they failed to recover any victims.

I just find it strange that in one breath people are claiming that the dog alerts mean that there had been a body in the flat and Grimes is lying about the bodily fluids, whilst in the next breath claiming that second hand furniture may cause an alert and a body never has to have been near the home or its occupants.

Thats is a good argument, If I have evidence Commander Basu is lying?
If I am not mistaken, I am not the ones making outlandish claims around here.

I have proven the statement of Commander Basu, end of story!

Shannon Matthews, try having some basis to claims that are protrayed as fact, try not putting words in my mouth, show me and everyone else here, where I stated Shannon Matthews to be dead?

Its all in the previous posts, No ridiculous claims from myself, nothing but facts.

Show me where I claim that Dogs only find dead bodies, I will save you the time - I don't!

I'm tired of proving many of your claims to be baseless now let's move on.

 

[fabgod]

I followed your suggestion and googled "Shannon Matthews dog alerted to furniture" and found this....

http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.ie/2011/12/beware-of-misinformant.html

It was very informative and helpful, thanks for the suggestion.

No problem, glad to be actually helping unlike many.:takeabow:

 

[Cappuccino]

The claims that some are making on behalf of the dogs are way out of proportion to reality. So no evidence exists that Madeliene is dead, or that her corpse was ever in that apartment.

Yes, let's move on...

 

[imamaze]

This forum is for Madeleine, lets keep focused on her. If you feel a post is against TOS please alert on it by clicking on the exclamation mark in the top right corner. A mod will check it out.

Its fine to disagree, its not ok to attack someone for their opinion. If a post is upsetting to you then please alert, and move on. All opinons are welcome here as long as its within our term of service.

Thank you!

Ima

 

[fabgod]

As far as anyone knows,
Is there a way of finding out where somebody served a prison sentence in the UK, without having to go through the official channels and making requests?

It is to do with Madeleines case, Just trying to place certain offenders in a certain place at the same time
Thanks in advance