Further, there were questions asked about FSS Ltd, which although a British firm, carries NO official licence to test DNA, nor do they adhere to any recognised standards in testing. There are also questions as to the ownership of FSS Ltd and their connection to 3i, a company with links to the McCann Corporation.
I am sorry but I have to pick you up on this statement In 2007 the FSS was the goverment body for forensic science - it was owned by the state and was the body that all gioverment agencies worked with. It solved many cold cases - Antoni Imiela (the M25 rapist) and Ronald Castree (for the murder of Lesley Molseed in 1975 )
To say that it didnt have a licence to practise is just plain wrong The organisation pioneered the use of large scale DNA profiling for forensic identification and crime detection. It also set up the world's first DNA database, launched on 10 April 1995.It was highly respected throughout the world. Sure it had some problems as LCN profiling is fraught with problems and is not an exact science
The goverement closed it down in 2010 mainly because our country is broke and it was cost cutting ( a lot of state owned industries end up costing tax payers money )
All the work has been moved to the prvate sector. 3i is an independent investemebt company - a multi million pound organisation with shareholders around the world. what it has to do with the " Mccann Corporation as you call it " is simply beyond me .
I agree.
I find it shocking how many out and out lies are being told by the anti-mccanns. It makes me wonder if they are getting their information from Tony Bennett and Debbie Butler type sites as they have put about a lot of misinformation (and that is a generous way of putting it) for reasons best known to themselves.
The FSS was a government owned agency which at the time worked on nearly all UK cases. Saying it did not have a license is 100% incorrect. Trying to make it out as some random private company with links to the mccanns (what exactly is the mccann corperation) is 100% incorrect.
But we have also seen people claiming the flat was 120 metres away, which is 100% incorrect, it was just over 50m as the crow flies, and just over 75 to walk).
As for the DNA, we have seen people claiming things that are just 100% incorrect (after this was pointed out I have noticed people claiming the FSS are some shady company with no liencse to practice, which as we have said it a complete falsehood).
If people are so sure it is the mccanns, why do they have to make things up to prove their point.
here are some facts:
1) No-one noticed anything amiss with Madeleine during her holiday, no bruises, no yellowing associated with long term calpol use, no subdued behaviour. Photos taken on the day she went missing back this up.
2) madeleine was seen alive and well at six, and six thirty by people other than the mccanns.
3) between eight thirty and ten the mccanns are only unaccounted for for five minutes each. No-one notices anything amiss.
4) The mccanns did not know the area well, witness state they spent most of their time at the resort. They did not have a car, nor did they have access to a spade or tools for digging.
5) No-one, including the police, reports smelling vomit or cleaning products in the mccann flat on the night madeleine disappeared.
6) Sniffer dogs follow madeleine's scent out of the flat, and down the road.
7) several wees later Eddie, a dog trained to alert to both cadaver's and bodily fluids, and keela a dog trained to alert to blood search the flat. The hadnler states these dogs are not infallible, and they are not evidence. They make alerts, and bodily fluids are discovered
8) The dog, after being called back several times, alerts to the mccanns car. Bodily fluid is found.
9) The FSS, a government owned agency, which carried out nearly all forensic work for UK criminal investigations, and maintained the UK's criminal's dna database, analysed the material found. The only bodily fluids they could identify in the car, were nails belonging to Kate and gerry. They found the key fobb had one profile on it which contained components matching gerry. They found cellular material in the car boot which could not be indentified as a specific bodily fluid. They said this material came from three to five people, conatained 37 components, 15 of which were found in madeleine's DNA (she had 19 different components), but stated those 15 could not be determined to come from one individuel and were found in a large number of people. they also stated that these 15 components would be found in her relatives, and 100% of madeleine's components would be found in her parents.
The also looked at the flat, and found only one piece of material could be madeleine's, but this material could also be gerry's. they found material that did not belong to the mccanns, and material that was too small to be indentified.
10) jane Tanner claimed she saw a man carrying a child wearing pink pyjamas walking away from the flat at approx 21;15. at approx 22:00, the smith family walking back from a bar saw a man matching jane tanner's description walkiing with a similar child. they said it was too dark to get a good look at the man. Later Mr Smith said the turn of the head reminded him of Gerry mccann, but the other adults do not say this. he also says he cannot identify the man facially as he did not have his glasses and it was dark. For clarification, several people, including Mark Warner staff state Gerry was on the resort at this time.
11) Three people, the mccanns, and murat are made aguidos (Murat first), but this is later dropped, and the police say there is no evidence against them.
12) despite judicial secrecy, information is illeaglly leaked to papers, and some papers print false stories. The Mccanns and Murat later win apologies and compensation as do the mccanns friends (the mccanns and their friends have their comepensation in the form of donations to the find madeleine fund). Sadly many of these false stories continue to be put about as fact by a minority of people on the internet, such as the madeleine foundation, and the madeleine mccann research group. These same people also go onto various forums, and twitter accounts to keep these myths going. Tony bennett is facing another court case for this behaviour.
13) Amaral is removed from the case. he also receives a criminal conviction for falsifying evidence in another case.
14) A minority of people claim the fact that the find madeleine fund is a private company rather than a charity is suspicious. In fact under the charity act 2006, and in line with the charity commissions rules, it would be illegal for the find madeleine fund to be a charity. In England and wales charities must have a public benefit and cannot just be about finding one specific child. Therefore the find madeleine fund is a not for profit company run by a board, and therefore with its accounts publicly available just like any charity, and not for profit company.
