Madeleine McCann

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

He also called the dogs back 3/4 times when they had moved on to other vehicles, until they gave a positive reaction. That grainy video is a joke.
How do you explain the positive reaction the dogs gave indicating a child who was alive and well was actually dead, on another case? Would it maybe be because the dogs aren’t infallible?

Plenty of evidence to arouse suspicion with Christian B. You are familiar with these threads so I won’t waste my time rehashing all the details for you. If you yourself can’t see any reason why he has come to their attention I won’t waste my time trying to convince you.
It’s dishonest to say there’s no other suspects when the police are presently questioning one, though.

The dog reacted before any of that! Are you trained in this area? I know I'm not. I'll take the word of the expert I think. He clearly explains it in the video.

Is there more evidence against Christain B than the McCanns? There's not. You can't even begin a list.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Those dogs were retired not long after that case because of poor performance. They gave indication that another child had died, who was later found to be safe and well. How do you explain that?
They rented the car 25 days after Madeleine disappeared, so in order for the scent of her corpse to be present, you’ll have to explain how and where they hid her body for over 3 weeks.

They can only be used to corroborate existing physical evidence. Of which there is absolutely zero. That’s the bottom line here.

Thought the dog retired because his handler did? What was the other case youre talkng about, i thought the dogs had a good record?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

:pac: :pac: :pac: I agreed that they were at a dinner party, I do not agree that they were out partying. There is a difference. :pac:

Yes, you finally agreed that they were at a party. When you go to a party, you're out partying. I don't know why you are so stuck upon this point?

Spanish Eyes

callmehal wrote: »

That's the sad reality, isn't it? For a lot of people, they have kids and that's it. Their whole world will be about the kids forever. Every moment they'll want to spend with them.

For others, that's not the case. Not saying it's the worst thing in the world but the McCanns put a party above their kids. It's sad that it had such disastrous results.

I don’t think the parents killed her, but realistically given what we know now, they didn’t protect her either. Poor little mite. It’s beyond comprehension for most parents, who as you say their kids are their whole world, and will be protected forever, well you know what I mean.

If it had been a one off you’d be inclined to forgive, but EVERY NIGHT, nah.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Was the front door locked or not?
If it wasnt why not?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I don’t think the parents killed her, but realistically given what we know now, they didn’t protect her either. Poor little mite. It’s beyond comprehension for most parents, who as you say their kids are their whole world, and will be protected forever, well you know what I mean.

If it had been a one off you’d be inclined to forgive, but EVERY NIGHT, nah.

I agree. I don't think it was them but they have to bear huge responsibility for their selfish and disgusting behaviour.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

The dog reacted before any of that! Are you trained in this area? I know I'm not. I'll take the word of the expert I think. He clearly explains it in the video.

Is there more evidence against Christain B than the McCanns? There's not. You can't even begin a list.

Did you even watch your video? Not once, not twice, not three, but FOUR times does the handler call the dog back to car. After the fourth time, the dog barked and gave a positive reaction.
He also explains that dogs can only be used to corroborate physical evidence.
Any explanation as to how the dogs got it completely wrong in other cases?

I’m not listing it because I’m not entertaining you, there is plenty of evidence against him or else he wouldn’t currently be being questioned for Madeleines murder. If you choose to ignore that, that’s your own prerogative. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Yeah the handler runs past all the cars except theirs never mind the dog

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Yes, you finally agreed that they were at a party. When you go to a party, you're out partying. I don't know why you are so stuck upon this point?

So if you go out for dinner and a few glasses of wine with your wife/husband, you’d consider that to be ‘out partying’? Ok :pac:
I suggest you only speak for yourself in that case because most people would not be of that opinion.

To most people, partying would involve a pub or a club, loud music, crowds, and lots of alcohol. Not tapas and wine in a quiet hotel restaurant :pac: :pac :pac:

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

TheW1zard wrote: »

Was the front door locked or not?
If it wasnt why not?

Front door was locked, the sliding doors were left unlocked. I haven’t seen any explanation as to why this was, I assume it was so they wouldn’t have to be swapping keys every time they got up to do a check. Stupid really.

MoonUnit75

SusieBlue wrote: »

Those dogs were retired not long after that case because of poor performance.

Is there a link to any official source that claims the dogs were retired because of poor performance?

They gave indication that another child had died, who was later found to be safe and well. How do you explain that?

Different dogs on a different case, but it turned out the furniture the dog alerted to had come from a house in which the owner had died.

Garlinge

Something Else

Was the front door locked or not?
If it wasnt why not?

The front door was locked from the outside but could be used to exit from inside without a key. The rear patio door was more convenient as slighly closer to the tapas bar and could be closed over but not locked from the outside. Leaving it like that meant that anyone could access the apartment without a key such as their friend who checked the children at one stage. It also meant the parents did not have to swop the key each time it was their turn to check.

MoonUnit75

SusieBlue wrote: »

So if you go out for dinner and a few glasses of wine with your wife/husband, you’d consider that to be ‘out partying’? Ok :pac:
I suggest you only speak for yourself in that case because most people would not be of that opinion.

To most people, partying would involve a pub or a club, loud music, crowds, and lots of alcohol. Not tapas and wine in a quiet hotel restaurant :pac: :pac :pac:

It wasn’t really a quiet hotel restaurant though, I don’t know many hotel restaurants where the fitness coach leads quiz nights.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Front door was locked, the sliding doors were left unlocked. I haven’t seen any explanation as to why this was, I assume it was so they wouldn’t have to be swapping keys every time they got up to do a check. Stupid really.

Why was he checking using the front, and she the back. Is that the case?
The only thing id say to that is presumably the guy who went to check slipped in the back door?
I made the point the other day they would have all used the same door but that doesnt appear to be the case?
(Gerry was out on the road talking to the tennis chap)

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Garlinge wrote: »

Was the front door locked or not?
If it wasnt why not?

The front door was locked from the outside but could be used to exit from inside without a key. The rear patio door was more convenient as slighly closer to the tapas bar and could be closed over but not locked from the outside. Leaving it like that meant that anyone could access the apartment without a key such as their friend who checked the children at one stage. It also meant the parents did not have to swop the key each time it was their turn to check.

Ah i get ya. Hence why gerry left by the front.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Is there a link to any official source that claims the dogs were retired because of poor performance?



Different dogs on a different case, but it turned out the furniture the dog alerted to had come from a house in which the owner had died.

The Jersey Children’s Home is one such case, Martin Grimes was paid 93k for his services and the dogs gave several positive reactions. This was in 2008, so roughly a year after Madeleine went missing.
One of the areas in which the dog gave a positive reaction to turned out to contain a coconut shell, and not human remains. There was nothing found in the end.
They simply aren’t relatable at all.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Article on the dogs.
http://laidbareblog.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-truth-of-dogs-mccann-case-and-more.html?m=1

cgcsb

Something Else

SusieBlue wrote: »

Those dogs were retired not long after that case because of poor performance. They gave indication that another child had died,

Well if you listened to the expert, you'd know that they cannot tell you that a child had died, they can only tell us where a corpse, or an item in close contact with a corpse, has been. The corpse they are smelling could be belonging to anybody. There are a number of reasons why they would smell death in a particular place.

SusieBlue wrote: »

They rented the car 25 days after Madeleine disappeared, so in order for the scent of her corpse to be present, you’ll have to explain how and where they hid her body for over 3 weeks.

Again the body wouldn't have to be in the car for the dog to alert, only an item that had been close contact with a corpse. An item of clothing for example.

SusieBlue wrote: »

They can only be used to corroborate existing physical evidence. Of which there is absolutely zero. That’s the bottom line here.

There was physical evidence but it couldn't be determined if it was belonging to Madeline or the twins. It's possible that new DNA techniques are developed in the future and they're able to place Madeline (or some item close to her) in the car from those samples.

cgcsb

Something Else

TheW1zard wrote: »

Thought the dog retired because his handler did? What was the other case youre talkng about, i thought the dogs had a good record?

Susie doesn't seem to get, despite explanation, that the dogs can't tell who's dead, just that somebody is dead.

cgcsb

Something Else

Garlinge wrote: »

Was the front door locked or not?
If it wasnt why not?

The front door was locked from the outside but could be used to exit from inside without a key. The rear patio door was more convenient as slighly closer to the tapas bar and could be closed over but not locked from the outside. Leaving it like that meant that anyone could access the apartment without a key such as their friend who checked the children at one stage. It also meant the parents did not have to swop the key each time it was their turn to check.

The hassle of that. like if it were me, I'd pay £30 for a babysitter and go out and enjoy myself instead of ruining my night, and putting the kids at risk with all this crap. Obviously they've a very different attitude to money and child safety. i'm surprised they bothered getting children's seats for the cars.

Kidchameleon

cgcsb wrote: »

Susie doesn't seem to get, despite explanation, that the dogs can't tell who's dead, just that somebody is dead.

Well, dogs will tell you if someone is dead or that they found coconuts :pac:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html

To date the ‘human remains’ that triggered the storm surrounding the case have turned out to be a piece of coconut shell.

Eddie the sniffer dog - the animal that had supposedly found the 'scent of death' in the Portuguese flat where Madeleine McCann disappeared - no longer had a licence for UK police forensic work when Harper started using him in Jersey. Eddie, whose owner, Martin Grime, was paid £93,600 for less than five months' work, triggered the first excavations by barking at a spot where Harper's team then unearthed what was claimed to be part of a child's skull. In fact, as a Kew Gardens expert has now confirmed, it was a piece of coconut shell.

cgcsb

Something Else

Kidchameleon wrote: »

The shutters can be opened from the outside and they are far from a "fair drop" down. Here is irrefutable evidence of these facts which you will no doubt get yourself into a spaghetti twist of bs to try and deny:

Are they the same shutters? are they broken? Police at the time said they only opened from inside.

Is this not the window in question?

https://www.google.ie/maps/@37.088671,-8.7307106,3a,75y,279.24h,90.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbKxQmlYs8JTNrdg-oSQ-dA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Kidchameleon

cgcsb wrote: »

Are they the same shutters?

Yes, they appear to be exactly the same shutters as observed by the Portuguese police at the time of the disappearance (notice the exact same patters of red "dirt" on the shutters in the PJ photos & the video.):

cgcsb wrote: »

are they broken?

Possibly. They are shutters in a holiday complex being used by many many people who probably don't know how to operate them. I would guess that shutters in situations like this are forever being broken & then repaired.

cgcsb wrote: »

Is this not the window in question?

No :rolleyes:

Check the floor plans of the apartment before commenting on shutters & windows again.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Well, dogs will tell you if someone is dead or that they found coconuts :pac:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html

To date the ‘human remains’ that triggered the storm surrounding the case have turned out to be a piece of coconut shell.

Eddie the sniffer dog - the animal that had supposedly found the 'scent of death' in the Portuguese flat where Madeleine McCann disappeared - no longer had a licence for UK police forensic work when Harper started using him in Jersey. Eddie, whose owner, Martin Grime, was paid £93,600 for less than five months' work, triggered the first excavations by barking at a spot where Harper's team then unearthed what was claimed to be part of a child's skull. In fact, as a Kew Gardens expert has now confirmed, it was a piece of coconut shell.

The Kew Gardens expert was proven to be wrong and that it was indeed skull.

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Then, of course, there was the lies from the McCanns. Why would they lie when their 3 year old daughter went missing? Were they ashamed of their behaviour going partying and leaving their kids on their own? Or was it more sinister?

With very little evidence to go on, you can see why the McCanns became suspects.

To be honest it sounds like you are saying there’s no evidence that anyone else did it so the parents must have..

There is no evidence that the parents did it either, they were investigated and totally cleared. I would be inclined to suspect a known pedophile that was in the area at the time rather than the child’s parents.

People are saying things like,

They used different doors to check the kids

It was the second last night

No fingerprints were found

The dogs reacted

They lied about how often they checked on the kids

Gerry, tennis guy and Jane all have slightly different stories

The door was unlocked

No sign of a struggle

The parents seem odd and non emotive

There is nothing here to suggest to me that these parents accidentally or otherwise killed their 3 year old and disposed of her body

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

cgcsb wrote: »

...
There was physical evidence but it couldn't be determined if it was belonging to Madeline or the twins. It's possible that new DNA techniques are developed in the future and they're able to place Madeline (or some item close to her) in the car from those samples.

You are assuming the evidence still exists. I have tried to find out if the samples were consumed in the testing process, like the one one off the knife in the Meredith Kercher case in Italy, where re-testing was impossible, but have been unable to find an answer to that question.

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

TheW1zard wrote: »

The Kew Gardens expert was proven to be wrong and that it was indeed skull.

Link, please:

3.7 �The Deputy of St. Martin of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding positive identification of the fragment found at Haut de la Garenne in 2008 as a piece of coconut shell: I must say, I find this is rather in bad taste before I start my question. Would the Minister advise whether the fragment found at Haut de la Garenne in 2008 has been positively identified at Kew Gardens; whether it is a piece of coconut shell, and if it is not, will he inform Members what it is and confirm that it is still in police possession? Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs): The fragment referred to has been positively identified by 2 experts at Kew Gardens as being from a coconut endocarp. This diagram is not in the least in bad taste. This is a diagram to show Members what an endocarp is and it does that in 2 ways. Firstly, the top diagram shows that the outside skin of a coconut has 3 different levels. This is the inner level of the 3 and the bottom picture demonstrates - the bottom half of it -what an endocarp looks like, so this is purely information for Members. If I said “endocarp”, people would have said: “What is an endocarp?” and I would not have been able to explain. There it is; both diagrammatically at the top and a picture of what a coconut endocarp looks like at the bottom. My information is that that identification was on 12th May 2009. 3.7.1 The Deputy of St. Martin: I did ask whether it was still in possession. Can the Minister inform Members whether the alleged fragment, or whatever it is, is still in police possession? Senator B.I. Le Marquand: It is indeed still in police possession, yes.

https://statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyQuestions/2010/Deputy%20of%20St%20Martin%20to%20HA%20re%20skull%20fragment%20at%20Haut%20de%20la%20Garenne.pdf

Perhaps you can use your link to update the Wiki article which has no mention of the coconut identification being overturned.

cgcsb

Something Else

Rock77 wrote: »

There is no evidence that the parents did it either, they were investigated and totally cleared.

Not really they let their arguido status expire, the 'investigation' wasn't up to much, local police were useless, even McCann fans admit that. The same police force wasn't suddenly going to become competent when investigating the possibility the parents were involved. Their methods involved creating quite fanciful scenarios and intimidating the suspect into confessing to that scenario, no matter how bizzar.

If they knew what they were doing, they would have sealed the crime scene, closed off the roads in the town that night, questioned the parents and their friends separately. take finger prints and shoe prints from everyone who went into the apartment and search their things to eliminate them as suspects first of all, then start interviewing known local peados. The police just cluster****ed around and lost the golden hours of the investigation.

They would have discovered the staff at the hotel were well aware of the kids being left alone and wrote it on the guest book at the tapas bar.

If the police were at all competent the guy who was breaking into the apartments of British families only would have been easily brought in.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

cnocbui wrote: »

Link, please:

https://statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyQuestions/2010/Deputy%20of%20St%20Martin%20to%20HA%20re%20skull%20fragment%20at%20Haut%20de%20la%20Garenne.pdf

Perhaps you can use your link to update the Wiki article which has no mention of the coconut identification being overturned.

Read post #6468, and watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=155&v=jQ_wBsL8uIc&feature=emb_logo

Rock77

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

cgcsb wrote: »

There was physical evidence but it couldn't be determined if it was belonging to Madeline or the twins. It's possible that new DNA techniques are developed in the future and they're able to place Madeline (or some item close to her) in the car from those samples.

Or these new techniques could prove that Madeline or some item close to her were not in the car.