"Who would leave children that young alone?"

[brit1981]

Going back to the legal actions, taking a civil action is not the same as sueing someone. Civil courts can place restrictions on someone, and do not just award monies. carter-ruck have acted for many individuels who are unknown but have faced false accusations, or have been accused of making false accusations.
It is normally quicker to take a civil action, and in some case more effective. In this sort of case it is more normal to go though the civil courts, at least initially.

 

[Donjeta]

As they have never even been charged let alone found guilty they are innocent. Not one shred of evidence has been found against them either (all there ever was, was a EVRD alerting but who according to the handler alerts to bodily fluids too, and some cellular material in a car which could just as easily have come from Gerry and Kate as from Madeleine).

No one has ever been charged or found guilty in Madeleine's disappearance, therefore everybody is innocent and Madeleine was never abducted at all.

:waitasec:

There seems to be some hole in this logic.

You don't seriously think that guilty parties never escape prosecution,, do you?

 

[brit1981]

No one has ever been charged or found guilty in Madeleine's disappearance, therefore everybody is innocent and Madeleine was never abducted at all.

:waitasec:

There seems to be some hole in this logic.

You don't seriously think that guilty parties never escape prosecution,, do you?

No, an unidentified person or persons is/are guilty. One cannot just claim that people have to prove their innocence, and that the EU is going to have to introduce an entire new justice system to placate randoms on the internet who seem to believe they are entitled to have the Mccanns prove their innocence to them.
The PJ, Scotland yard, the Portuguese prosecutors have all stated the parents were not involved. Therefore they hae been cleared.

 

[Donjeta]

No, an unidentified person or persons is/are guilty. One cannot just claim that people have to prove their innocence, and that the EU is going to have to introduce an entire new justice system to placate randoms on the internet who seem to believe they are entitled to have the Mccanns prove their innocence to them.
The PJ, Scotland yard, the Portuguese prosecutors have all stated the parents were not involved. Therefore they hae been cleared.

No one has to prove anything to persons on the internet. However, There are enough crimes that go unsolved forever to tell that some guilty parties are never charged and it is pure nonsense to claim that not having been charged proves that one is innocent.

This is true universally, not just concerning the McCanns.

If there is evidence that they could not have done it it is totally another matter but I am still waiting to hear what it is.

 

[Donjeta]

Are unidentified fingerprints rare in a hotel room?

Were all the previous occupants of the room and hotel workers tested?

 

[brit1981]

No one has to prove anything to persons on the internet. However, There are enough crimes that go unsolved forever to tell that some guilty parties are never charged and it is pure nonsense to claim that not having been charged proves that one is innocent.

This is true universally, not just concerning the McCanns.

If there is evidence that they could not have done it it is totally another matter but I am still waiting to hear what it is.

With all due respect I think you will have a long wait if you are expecting Scotland yard to show you their evidence, or the PJ to show you all of their evidence. It is not normal to show members of the public evidence in a criminal investigation, this case was unusual because Portugal do release some information, but not all they have available. It is normal that the police just announce someone is not believed to be involved, it is not normal that they have to release their reasons for doing this to the general public. Apart from anything that could cause problems in actually arresting the person who did do it, as they will learn of vital evidence that could implicate them.
Three parties that have access to all the evidence have stated the McCanns are nto invoved, the general public has no right to demand the authorities disclose their reasons for stating this, and that until they do they will not believe the authorities.

Going back to someone getting into the flat, according to the police files and news reports there had been cases of break ins in thse flats (including one directly above where madeleine stayed, not long before she was abducted). What is more there wre no signs of forced entry. I wonder if they all had dodgy locks on the front door, or if there were too many master keys made? Also, the break-ns were not witnssed by anyone, which does rather demonstrate that people could and did get into these flats without being seen.

 

[brit1981]

Are unidentified fingerprints rare in a hotel room?

Were all the previous occupants of the room and hotel workers tested?

The fingerprints were found on the outside of the shutter, but I have no idea who else was discounted from making them. I know other occupants did have their DNA tested though.

 

[Donjeta]

There were previous break-ins? Didn't you just say a couple of days ago that this was such a non-dodgy and crime free area that it was perceived OK to leave unattended children in hotel rooms?

It is possible that there is some evidence that we are not privy of that definitively clears the parents but according to what has been reported there is at least two hours that Kate and Madeleine were not accounted for and no one besides Gerry says they saw Madeleine alive after that.

There could be some surveillance footage that shows they never left the hotel room but that same surveillance should show the abductor then, shouldn't it?

Getting access to hotel rooms seems to be frighteningly easy. Did they have
a key card or a key?

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...lion-hotel-rooms-with-arduino-microcontroller

Bad news: With less than $50 of off-the-shelf hardware and a little bit of programming, it’s possible for a hacker to gain instant, untraceable access to millions of key card-protected hotel rooms.

This hack was demonstrated by Cody Brocious, a Mozilla software developer, at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas.

 

[brit1981]

There were previous break-ins? Didn't you just say a couple of days ago that this was such a non-dodgy and crime free area that it was perceived OK to leave unattended children in hotel rooms?

It is possible that there is some evidence that we are not privy of that definitively clears the parents but according to what has been reported there is at least two hours that Kate and Madeleine were not accounted for and no one saw Madeleine alive after that.

There could be some surveillance footage that shows they never left the hotel room but that same surveillance should show the abductor then, shouldn't it?

That was the problem, these break-ins were nto made public (wouldyou go on holiday somewhere that had had several break-ins), so the impression given was a nice sleepy village. Only afterwards did these break-ins become public knowlegde ( and only after madeleine disappeared did the place get decent lighting).

There was no CCTV at the complex.

But not all the evidence has been reported, thats the probem. All we can go in is the PJ, SY, and Portuguese prosecutors stating the parents are not involved. We have no idea what other evidence they have. Scotland yard have said they have evidence that has made them believe it was a stranger abduction, but obviously they have no t released this evidence.

Kate was only alone with the children for an hour an a half. During that time David Payne saw madeleine alive, so if he is telling the truth there was only an hour (as witness saw him go up there there is no reason to think he is lying, and if he is lying why not get him to lie again and claim to have seen madeleine in her room after eight thirty?). Once Gerry returned there was only an hour for him to be told that by the way his first born child had died, and why did they not just dump her body like a piece of rubbish, then get showered and changed and carry on with their dinner plans, oh but while they were at dinner they better tell their friends so they can get Jane to lie for them!!

Or it could be that the authorities are right, that the mccanns had nothing to do with this. that they just left the children sleeping but alive, and someone broke in (either through the patio, front door, or window) and for some reason took the child.

 

[Donjeta]

I would go with the simplest option and assume that if there is an unlocked door that is going to be what was used. The abductor would probably have bruises from kicking himself if he went to the trouble of breaking in through a window and later read in the paper that the door was unlocked. There were people about at the time and someone entering through a window would definitely be suspicious but through a door, not so much.

 

[brit1981]

I would go with the simplest option and assume that if there is an unlocked door that is going to be what was used. The abductor would probably have bruises from kicking himself if he went to the trouble of breaking in through a window and later read in the paper that the door was unlocked. There were people about at the time and someone entering through a window would definitely be suspicious but through a door, not so much.

I agree. I can see someone opening a window for an escape route, but chosing to enter and exit by the front door. I wonder why it could be opened even when it was supposed to be locked and had the key in it? That is very odd. Some places though can be very lax with keys and master keys, so that coudl also be an option.

 

[SapphireSteel]

It's all irrelevant anyway.

The reason Madeleine went missing is because she was neglected by her parents.

 

[brit1981]

It's all irrelevant anyway.

The reason Madeleine went missing is because she was neglected by her parents.

There are laws for child neglect in the Uk and Portugal and leaving a sleeping child fifty metres away for half an hour at a time is not considered neglect.

According to the police madeleine disappeared because of a stranger abduction.

Did you manage to find the sources for your claims about the FSS (you know how it really was not a government owned agency charged with forensic examination and maintaining the dna database but a private company with no legal right to examine DNA and with links to the mccanns), the involvment of at least three governments, the police, ambassadors etc in a cover-up to protect a cardiologist and part time GP from the north of England. I would really be interested to see this proof you said you had, and once you upload it here you do not have to worry about the powers that be destroying it.

 

[SapphireSteel]

There are laws for child neglect in the Uk and Portugal and leaving a sleeping child fifty metres away for half an hour at a time is not considered neglect.

According to the police madeleine disappeared because of a stranger abduction.

Did you manage to find the sources for your claims about the FSS (you know how it really was not a government owned agency charged with forensic examination and maintaining the dna database but a private company with no legal right to examine DNA and with links to the mccanns), the involvment of at least three governments, the police, ambassadors etc in a cover-up to protect a cardiologist and part time GP from the north of England. I would really be interested to see this proof you said you had, and once you upload it here you do not have to worry about the powers that be destroying it.

Can you please show me where I stated ANY of the above?

:what:

 

[fabgod]

For the third time - the reason that particular abduction is relevant is BECAUSE TWO OF THE SUSPECTS IN THAT CASE WERE IN THE VICINITY AT THE TIME MADELIENE DISAPPEARED. And no, that doesn't apply to every abduction across half the world.

Oh missed this post, so sorry Cappuccino,
for the second time, it isnt really relevant as the suspects were rumoured to be in the area as were many many other suspicious people.

The two suspects are homosexual men, who have only ever preyed on boys as far as I am aware.
Most of the boys were significantly older than 3 years of age and were boys, male, not girls.

They were convicted of murdering a woman reportedly because she was about to testify against them, so as I mentioned earlier, it is hardly the same pattern of offending is it?

 

[brit1981]

Oh missed this post, so sorry Cappuccino,
for the second time, it isnt really relevant as the suspects were rumoured to be in the area as were many many other suspicious people.

The two suspects are homosexual men, who have only ever preyed on boys as far as I am aware.
Most of the boys were significantly older than 3 years of age and were boys, male, not girls.

They were convicted of murdering a woman reportedly because she was about to testify against them, so as I mentioned earlier, it is hardly the same pattern of offending is it?

The reason some thought them to be suspects was because they had links to others like them who they might do favours for, and because soem peopel thought one of them looked like an efit of a man seen watching the flat (i do not see any similarity myself)

 

[brit1981]

Can you please show me where I stated ANY of the above?

:what:

Saphire this is what you have posted earlier

On the general discussion thread you said
“It was also acknowleged that the British Police failed to supply ALL of the evidence they had developed to the Portugese police, for state reasons. There is now PROOF of political interferance on this one, at the highest level, which in itself is unheard of.

There is now also proof of involvement with the US Government. The fact that they would be involved in a missing child investigation in another country at all is highly irregular, but it is fact. The end result is the Portugese police have shut down the investigation and refuse to open it, and Madeline will forever be denied justice.”

On the “why did madeleine go missing thread you stated”
This case stinks of collusion and cover up, at the highest level. We have proof of this.

You have also said “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.”

on the cadaver dog thread
The lab in question, FSS Ltd, has already lost a clump of Madeline's hair. OOPS!!!
Mistakes like this don't "just happen" in controlled scientific environments, especially in high profile cases.

This case is like an onion. The more layers you peel off, the stinkier it gets.
On the “why did madeleine go missing thread you replied to my earlier comment in the following way (you comments are in bold)

Secondly, if you honestly believe you have evidence of a cover up at the highest level, then why do you not show this evidence. Send it to a whistleblowing site, put it up here.

Already done. See: wikileaks.

You have claimed or implied the british police are involved,

They were, and are

he US ambassador was involved,

He was
the Portuguese government was involved,

They werethe UK government was involved,
They wereall of the mccanns friends were involved,

They were

One cannot honestly be expected to believe the FSS was a private company with no legal remit to examine DNA and links to the McCanns, and that the idea of it being a government owned agency charged with examining forensic evidence and maintianing the DNA database is a lie the government and FSS made up?

One cannot also be expected to believe two british governments (therefore involving all three major parties), the US government, the fss, the british police etc are involved in coverign up a crime for two ordinary people from the north of england. especially not when the "proof" is supposed to be a wikileaks cable which makes no mention of any of this.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Saphire this is what you have posted earlier

On the general discussion thread you said
“It was also acknowleged that the British Police failed to supply ALL of the evidence they had developed to the Portugese police, for state reasons. There is now PROOF of political interferance on this one, at the highest level, which in itself is unheard of.

There is now also proof of involvement with the US Government. The fact that they would be involved in a missing child investigation in another country at all is highly irregular, but it is fact. The end result is the Portugese police have shut down the investigation and refuse to open it, and Madeline will forever be denied justice.”

On the “why did madeleine go missing thread you stated”
This case stinks of collusion and cover up, at the highest level. We have proof of this.

You have also said “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.”

on the cadaver dog thread
The lab in question, FSS Ltd, has already lost a clump of Madeline's hair. OOPS!!!
Mistakes like this don't "just happen" in controlled scientific environments, especially in high profile cases.

This case is like an onion. The more layers you peel off, the stinkier it gets.
On the “why did madeleine go missing thread you replied to my earlier comment in the following way (you comments are in bold)

Secondly, if you honestly believe you have evidence of a cover up at the highest level, then why do you not show this evidence. Send it to a whistleblowing site, put it up here.

Already done. See: wikileaks.

You have claimed or implied the british police are involved,

They were, and are

he US ambassador was involved,

He was
the Portuguese government was involved,

They werethe UK government was involved,
They wereall of the mccanns friends were involved,

They were

One cannot honestly be expected to believe the FSS was a private company with no legal remit to examine DNA and links to the McCanns, and that the idea of it being a government owned agency charged with examining forensic evidence and maintianing the DNA database is a lie the government and FSS made up?

One cannot also be expected to believe two british governments (therefore involving all three major parties), the US government, the fss, the british police etc are involved in coverign up a crime for two ordinary people from the north of england. especially not when the "proof" is supposed to be a wikileaks cable which makes no mention of any of this.

The wikileaks is PROOF of governmental involvement where none should actually exist.

Madeleine disappeared in Portugal which means the ONLY agencies which should be involved are the Portugese Police.

Why is this case discussed between the US and UK Ambassadors, at all?

 

[SapphireSteel]

Saphire this is what you have posted earlier

On the general discussion thread you said
“It was also acknowleged that the British Police failed to supply ALL of the evidence they had developed to the Portugese police, for state reasons. There is now PROOF of political interferance on this one, at the highest level, which in itself is unheard of.

There is now also proof of involvement with the US Government. The fact that they would be involved in a missing child investigation in another country at all is highly irregular, but it is fact. The end result is the Portugese police have shut down the investigation and refuse to open it, and Madeline will forever be denied justice.”

On the “why did madeleine go missing thread you stated”
This case stinks of collusion and cover up, at the highest level. We have proof of this.

You have also said “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.”

on the cadaver dog thread
The lab in question, FSS Ltd, has already lost a clump of Madeline's hair. OOPS!!!
Mistakes like this don't "just happen" in controlled scientific environments, especially in high profile cases.

This case is like an onion. The more layers you peel off, the stinkier it gets.
On the “why did madeleine go missing thread you replied to my earlier comment in the following way (you comments are in bold)

Secondly, if you honestly believe you have evidence of a cover up at the highest level, then why do you not show this evidence. Send it to a whistleblowing site, put it up here.

Already done. See: wikileaks.

You have claimed or implied the british police are involved,

They were, and are

he US ambassador was involved,

He was
the Portuguese government was involved,

They werethe UK government was involved,
They wereall of the mccanns friends were involved,

They were

One cannot honestly be expected to believe the FSS was a private company with no legal remit to examine DNA

Your words not mine.

and links to the McCanns, and that the idea of it being a government owned agency charged with examining forensic evidence and maintianing the DNA database is a lie the government and FSS made up?

Your words not mine.

One cannot also be expected to believe two british governments (therefore involving all three major parties), the US government, the fss, the british police etc are involved in coverign up a crime for two ordinary people from the north of england. especially not when the "proof" is supposed to be a wikileaks cable which makes no mention of any of this.

Why were these agencies involved at all? In your opinion?

 

[brit1981]

The wikileaks cable provides not evidence of a cover-up. It says the british police developed the current evidence against the mccanns. It was also written by someone not directly involved in the case. As the police helped with the FSS and the dogs, and the PJ claimed this had come up with evidence which was being used against the mccanns, it does not prove a cover-up at all. It just confirms the PJs claims at the time that they thought the FSS reports and the dogs was evidence.

The FSS was one of the best forensic science labs in the EU, it helps with lots of foreign cases. In any criminal case involving a foreign national it is normal for their embassy/consulate to be involved, and for their police and government to also offer help (at least in the EU). For instance when two british nationals were murdered in antigua the british sent police over on the condition the murderers did not receive the death penalty.
It would not be normal for just the police of that country to be involved. They are legally obliged to inform the embassy so they can provide help (this happenes if you are involved in a case as a victim of perpetrator).
And there is o evidence that the US ambassador was involved, he might just have been having a gossip with the british ambassador about a case which was all over the media.

Now you have said:
This case stinks of collusion and cover up, at the highest level. We have proof of this.
Where is your proof, the wikileaks cable does not prove this in anyway at all. do you honestly believe it does say there was a cover-up?

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.”

Can you please provide your evidence for this claim.

The lab in question, FSS Ltd, has already lost a clump of Madeline's hair. OOPS!!!

Can you provide evidence for this claim.

In the following your answers to my questions are underlined and in bold.

You have claimed or implied the british police are involved,

They were, and are

he US ambassador was involved,

He was

the Portuguese government was involved,

They were

the UK government was involved,
They were
all of the mccanns friends were involved,

They were

Can you please provide your evidence that the police, mccanns, mccann's friends, the ambassador, and the governments were involved in a cover-up.
Can you provide evidence they were involved in a cover-up

And please tell me you do not think a wikileaks cable claiming the british police developed the current evidence against the mccanns is evidence of a cover-up involving ambassadors, the police, and that the FSS was not what it claimed to be.