Madeleine McCann

Rock77

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

cgcsb wrote: »

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.

Ok so the police were useless and botched the whole investigation so the parents must have done it..

‘The McCann Fans’ is a funny one Allright..

These would be people that don’t suspect the parents of a missing 3 year old child of her murder and body disposal based on the fact that there is no evidence to suspect them.

cnocbui

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

TheW1zard wrote: »

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

cgcsb

Something Else

Rock77 wrote: »

Ok so the police were useless and botched the whole investigation so the parents must have done it..

Well no, I don't think anyone on this thread has stated outright that the parents did it. Merely that it's possible they did, and at this stage, I doubt we will ever know. We don't know what happened to Maddie is the truth. I was pointing out that people who are 100% sure that the parents arent involved are the same people who criticise the police, yet they expect the same police investigation into the parents to be conclusive.

Rock77 wrote: »

‘The McCann Fans’ is a funny one Allright..

they exist.

Rock77 wrote: »

These would be people that don’t suspect the parents of a missing 3 year old child of her murder and body disposal based on the fact that there is no evidence to suspect them.

Yes, indeed there is no evidence to suspect anyone, just circumstances that arouse suspicion and any investigation like this should start with the people closest to the child.

Rock77

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

cgcsb wrote: »

Well no, I don't think anyone on this thread has stated outright that the parents did it. Merely that it's possible they did, and at this stage, I doubt we will ever know. We don't know what happened to Maddie is the truth. I was pointing out that people who are 100% sure that the parents arent involved are the same people who criticise the police, yet they expect the same police investigation into the parents to be conclusive.

they exist.



Yes, indeed there is no evidence to suspect anyone, just circumstances that arouse suspicion and any investigation like this should start with the people closest to the child.

Like I said before I would suspect a known pedophile that was in the area at the time rather than the parents.

I would begin to suspect the parents based on evidence of which there is none.

The pedo I would suspect because, you know... he’s a pedo.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

cnocbui wrote: »

Cheers John :pac:

cgcsb

Something Else

Rock77 wrote: »

Like I said before I would suspect a known pedophile that was in the area at the time rather than the parents.

I would begin to suspect the parents based on evidence of which there is none.

The pedo I would suspect because, you know... he’s a pedo.

Statistically it's more likely persons who knew the child, even if it was a pedo. The police should have investigated that possibility immediately.

Alrigghtythen

On the BBC news it said their lawyer told german police to stop wasting thier time?

retro:electro

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

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

On the BBC news it said their lawyer told german police to stop wasting thier time?

What was actually said:

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/madeleine-mccann-family-lawyer-urges-british-german-and-portuguese-police-to-stop-squabbling-12005556

Alrigghtythen

retro:electro wrote: »

What was actually said:

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/madeleine-mccann-family-lawyer-urges-british-german-and-portuguese-police-to-stop-squabbling-12005556

That makes more sense. Stop wasting time arguing and work together.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

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.

As I said, you need to watch the video more closely. The dogs reactions completely changed close to the McCanns car, before any calling back from the expert handler. The dog was called back because the handler was trying to tie down where he was getting the scent from. It's all explained in the video, the highly respected handler and his dog had no reason to target the McCanns car.

So you can't even list one piece of evidence against the peado? There's way more evidence against the McCanns!

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

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:

Again, you're going to have to take this up with the dictionary. Maybe you can email whoever publishes them or ask for the definition to be changed.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Rock77 wrote: »

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

I didn't say that at all.

I'm saying there's more evidence against the McCanns than against the peado. That doesn't mean the McCanns did it or the peado didn't.

As discussed. The cadaver dogs finding scents in the apartment, their car, the lies, their lack of care for their kids. There's no hard evidence clearly but you can see why they are still under suspicion.

cnocbui

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

callmehal wrote: »

As I said, you need to watch the video more closely. The dogs reactions completely changed close to the McCanns car, before any calling back from the expert handler. The dog was called back because the handler was trying to tie down where he was getting the scent from. It's all explained in the video, the highly respected handler and his dog had no reason to target the McCanns car.

So you can't even list one piece of evidence against the peado? There's way more evidence against the McCanns!

I have a slightly used bridge to sell you. Cheap, too.

There is no 'evidence' against the McCanns whatsoever, which is why they are not under arrest and have never been. There's lot's of mindless witterings from internet geniuses who think they can out think Sherlock Holmes and the combined police forces of the UK and Portugal, based on a couple 720p youtube videos.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

cnocbui wrote: »

I have a slightly used bridge to sell you. Cheap, too.

There is no 'evidence' against the McCanns whatsoever, which is why they are not under arrest and have never been. There's lot's of mindless witterings from internet geniuses who think they can out think Sherlock Holmes and the combined police forces of the UK and Portugal, based on a couple 720p youtube videos.

Ok, so as I said, there's more evidence against the McCanns than the peado.

"The cadaver dogs finding scents in the apartment, their car, the lies, their lack of care for their kids. There's no hard evidence clearly but you can see why they are still under suspicion."

SusieBlue

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

callmehal wrote: »

Ok, so as I said, there's more evidence against the McCanns than the peado.

"The cadaver dogs finding scents in the apartment, their car, the lies, their lack of care for their kids. There's no hard evidence clearly but you can see why they are still under suspicion."

And has been previously posted several times over, the handler encouraged that reaction and they have also proven to be mistaken on several occasion.

Any thoughts or opinions on the fact that those exact dogs gave a positive reaction to ‘human remains’, only for the ‘remains’ to turn out to be a coconut shell? And the fact that Martin Grimes got paid 93 grand for the pleasure?
And that no remains whatsoever were ever found by the dogs in that case, despite several positive reactions?
Any explanation for why that might be?

SusieBlue

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

callmehal wrote: »

Again, you're going to have to take this up with the dictionary. Maybe you can email whoever publishes them or ask for the definition to be changed.

I think you’re the one who needs to study the dictionary a bit harder here.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

And has been previously posted several times over, the handler encouraged that reaction and they have also proven to be mistaken on several occasion.

Any thoughts or opinions on the fact that those exact dogs gave a positive reaction to ‘human remains’, only for the ‘remains’ to turn out to be a coconut shell? And the fact that Martin Grimes got paid 93 grand for the pleasure?
And that no remains whatsoever were ever found by the dogs in that case, despite several positive reactions?
Any explanation for why that might be?

You're obviously not even bothering to watch the video. I'll copy the post again:

nc6000 wrote: »

The handler also doesn't touch or tap the other cars.

The expert handler calls the dog back to the other cars, it's in the video. He does the samw with the McCanns car and you can see the dogs reactions completely change, he found the scent. Watch the video. It's clear from an untrained eye that the dog had completely changed. Why do you think the highly regarded, highly trained, expert handler would purposely mislead people in this matter? Did you listen to what he had to say? What qualifications do you have to overrule him?

The other part has already been explained to you. You need to start reading posts and watching the videos.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

I think you’re the one who needs to study the dictionary a bit harder here.

Party
noun, plural par·ties.
a social gathering, as of invited guests at a private home, for conversation, refreshments, entertainment, etc.:
a cocktail party.
a group gathered for a special purpose or task:
a fishing party; a search party.

adjective
of or relating to a party or faction; partisan:
party leaders.
of or for a social gathering:
her new party dress.

verb (used without object), par·tied, par·ty·ing. Informal.
to go to or give parties, especially a series of parties.
to enjoy oneself thoroughly and without restraint; indulge in pleasure.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Game, set and match.

cnocbui

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

callmehal wrote: »

Ok, so as I said, there's more evidence against the McCanns than the peado.

"The cadaver dogs finding scents in the apartment, their car, the lies, their lack of care for their kids. There's no hard evidence clearly but you can see why they are still under suspicion."

No, I really can't. I have no way of knowing whether the dogs detected the scent of anything or were just acting in a way that they knew pleased the lovely guy who rubbed their tummies and provided the food.

This pervasive, mindless faith - and that is all that is; faith, that the dogs are infallible, without biases and are immune to influences from their handler, I find incomprehensible.

Sniffer dogs criticised as false positives revealed

Official police figures in New South Wales reveal drug detection dogs were wrong in almost two thirds of strip searches last year
...
According to the numbers for strip searches last year, sniffer dogs made 1,124 indications to NSW police. Of these, just 406 successfully identified a person carrying drugs – a 64% failure rate. General searches proved just as unsuccessful. 2017 saw 3,954 out of 10,224 general searches indicated by dogs turn up positive results – a 61% failure rate.

Numbers look no better for the start of 2018, either. The current failure rate for strip searches stands at 56% and at 63% for general searches in the first six months of the year.

https://www.iq-mag.net/2018/07/sniffer-dogs-false-positives/

You can find such failure rates in the US and elsewhere.

Nice video apparently showing a narcotics dog false alerting on cue by it's handler:

cnocbui

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

callmehal wrote: »

Game, set and match.

antasist |ˈfantəsɪst|
noun
a person who imagines or dreams about something desired: a serial liar and fantasist who had boasted of many affairs | a fantasist with delusions of grandeur.

SusieBlue

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

callmehal wrote: »

You're obviously not even bothering to watch the video. I'll copy the post again:




The expert handler calls the dog back to the other cars, it's in the video. He does the samw with the McCanns car and you can see the dogs reactions completely change, he found the scent. Watch the video. It's clear from an untrained eye that the dog had completely changed. Why do you think the highly regarded, highly trained, expert handler would purposely mislead people in this matter? Did you listen to what he had to say? What qualifications do you have to overrule him?

The other part has already been explained to you. You need to start reading posts and watching the videos.

He calls them back four times. He doesn’t do that to any other car in the car park. If you’re so trusting of the handler, why won’t you acknowledge that as he said, the dogs can only be used to corroborate existing physical evidence. Of which there is none.
Why don’t you trust that, why don’t you ignore it?

The other part proves hands down that the dogs are not infallible and are capable of being wrong.
When you add the fact that there is no physical evidence to the fact that the dogs have been proven to be completely wrong in the past, it knocks your little theory out of the water.
That video means absolutely nothing when you consider those concrete facts.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

cnocbui wrote: »

No, I really can't. I have no way of knowing whether the dogs detected the scent of anything or were just acting in a way that they knew pleased the lovely guy who rubbed their tummies and provided the food.

This pervasive, mindless faith - and that is all that is; faith, that the dogs are infallible, without biases and are immune to influences from their handler, I find incomprehensible.

https://www.iq-mag.net/2018/07/sniffer-dogs-false-positives/

You can find such failure rates in the US and elsewhere.

Nice video apparently showing a narcotics dog false alerting on cue by it's handler:

Where did I say the dogs were infallible? I'm saying when you add up the dogs finding the scent of death in 3 separate places, the lies from the McCanns, their lack of being responsible parents, put it all together and the suspicions are totally justified. Again I must ask, what qualifications do you have that makes you are greater expert than the dog handler?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

cnocbui wrote: »

antasist |ˈfantəsɪst|
noun
a person who imagines or dreams about something desired: a serial liar and fantasist who had boasted of many affairs | a fantasist with delusions of grandeur.

Are you talking about the McCanns? :pac:

It's also strange that from the beginning the McCanns have only talked about someone having taken Madeleine. From the very start. They never even considered Madeleine might have went looking for them. Especially since they told them that morning that she was crying the night before. Why did they never consider this?

SusieBlue

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

callmehal wrote: »

Party
noun, plural par·ties.
a social gathering, as of invited guests at a private home, for conversation, refreshments, entertainment, etc.:
a cocktail party.
a group gathered for a special purpose or task:
a fishing party; a search party.

adjective
of or relating to a party or faction; partisan:
party leaders.
of or for a social gathering:
her new party dress.

verb (used without object), par·tied, par·ty·ing. Informal.
to go to or give parties, especially a series of parties.
to enjoy oneself thoroughly and without restraint; indulge in pleasure.

We can all play this game.

Partying
par·tied, par·ty·ing, par·ties
To celebrate or carouse at a party or similar gathering: That night we partied until dawn.

Dinner Party
NOUN
A social occasion at which guests eat dinner and socialise together.

Now which word better describes going for tapas and wine? Going ‘out partying’ or going to a ‘dinner party’?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

He calls them back four times. He doesn’t do that to any other car in the car park. If you’re so trusting of the handler, why won’t you acknowledge that as he said, the dogs can only be used to corroborate existing physical evidence. Of which there is none.
Why don’t you trust that, why don’t you ignore it?

The other part proves hands down that the dogs are not infallible and are capable of being wrong.
When you add the fact that there is no physical evidence to the fact that the dogs have been proven to be completely wrong in the past, it knocks your little theory out of the water.
That video means absolutely nothing when you consider those concrete facts.

He calls the dog back to the other cars. He calls the dog back to the McCanns because the dog has obviously got the scent and he's trying to tie it down. He says this in the video. Maybe watch with the volume on.

I've already given my view on that. I didn't give any theory. You are assuming things and you know what assuming does don't you?

There's more evidence against the McCanns than the peado, that's the point and that's why they're still under suspicion. You can't even name one piece of evidence against the peado!!

roofer1988

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

Great so after 6500 posts,I finally know what a party is. Great

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

We can all play this game.

Partying
par·tied, par·ty·ing, par·ties
To celebrate or carouse at a party or similar gathering: That night we partied until dawn.

Dinner Party
NOUN
A social occasion at which guests eat dinner and socialise together.

Now which word better describes going for tapas and wine? Going ‘out partying’ or going to a ‘dinner party’?

:pac: Both are the same! Partying is the verb. This is hilarious. Basic English here Susie.

cnocbui

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

callmehal wrote: »

Where did I say the dogs were infallible? I'm saying when you add up the dogs finding the scent of death in 3 separate places, the lies from the McCanns, their lack of being responsible parents, put it all together and the suspicions are totally justified. Again I must ask, what qualifications do you have that makes you are greater expert than the dog handler?

A lack of bias; especially financial interest.

SusieBlue

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

callmehal wrote: »

He calls the dog back to the other cars. He calls the dog back to the McCanns because the dog has obviously got the scent and he's trying to tie it down. He says this in the video. Maybe watch with the volume on.

I've already given my view on that. I didn't give any theory. You are assuming things and you know what assuming does don't you?

There's more evidence against the McCanns than the peado, that's the point and that's why they're still under suspicion. You can't even name one piece of evidence against the peado!!

If the dog had got such a strong scent he wouldn’t have ran away. He doesn’t call the dog back to the other cars 4 times. I’ve watched that footage several times over. At this point I can only assume you are deliberately misrepresenting it. Many others who are suspicious of the McCanns admit that the dogs were a complete red herring.

So you have no theory or opinion as to why the dogs identified a coconut shell as human remains? You don’t think that’s remotely suspicious or that it would give you pause for thought?

I have no intention of wasting my time naming out all the evidence against Christian B, you are familiar with the case and you know he’s being questioned as a suspect.
I’m not going to waste my time rehashing it all to you, so you can scoff at it and dismiss it.
But far be it from me to stop you continuously defending a convicted pedophile and sex attacker, if you think there is absolutely nothing suspicious about his actions in the run up & aftermath of Madeleines disappearance then fair play to you.