Madeleine McCann

Plumbthedepths · 17-06-2020 11:39PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sorry now, but this entire event is a sh!tshow on many levels.

But even so, it would be good if ze Germans manage to nail this man. I have to say I have my cynical hat firmly on my head, but who knows?

I have to laugh at those castigating the "bumbling Portuguese Police". Honestly, this saga is the most bizarre thing I have ever come across and deserves scrutiny and cynicism of the highest order with regard to everyone involved.

A high ranking British police officer refused to lead the Mets operation because he was not allowed investigate certain avenues. The investigation by nearly every authority involved is a mess but having said that some of the participants deliberately hampered them.

Beasty · 17-06-2020 11:42PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Sure a minute ago you were saying it was Jane Tanner who said what he said. Lol. You clearly haven’t a notion

retro:electro wrote: »

Good post iamwhoiam. And I’ve always thought of you as a very reasoned and measured poster, no skin in any game so to speak.. so I just have to point out it’s quite interesting to me who thanked your post.. or rather, who didn’t.

Those who are only interested in repeatedly vilifying the McCanns of course and who have for the most part left a disgusting and depraved pedo off the hook.

I mean.. some folk are just beyond comprehension.

retro:electro wrote: »

Jeremy wasn’t one of the tapas 7

To get back to the original point, you responded to a poster’s statement about jeremy’s account and tried one up her by stating she is misinformed

When actually it was you who was wrong and spouting misinformation. Cringe. And all you’ve done since then is shift goalposts and deflect.
Just own it and we will move on.

retro:electro wrote: »

Why the inverted commas? The person who labelled you “Anti Mc Cann” was ShineOn7.. she is on your side of the argument..

Sure you even thanked it :pac:

retro:electro wrote: »

On second thoughts I don’t think she was speaking about you either. She did say they make some “valid points”.

retro:electro wrote: »

No jibes. I said it did refer to you, then I said maybe it doesn’t. You didn’t like it either way.

Okay ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Moving on..

I'm going to be kind and only issue a(nother) threadban to you

You very clearly do not learn your lesson and this one will not be lifted

Banana Republic. · 17-06-2020 11:46PM

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

A high ranking British police officer refused to lead the Mets operation because he was not allowed investigate certain avenues. The investigation by nearly every authority involved is a mess but having said that some of the participants deliberately hampered them.

That’s been a major gripe of mine this thing of avenues not allowed being investigated, is this the reason the Mc Canns came back to the UK with the understanding that they wouldn’t be seen as suspects and therefore would not be investigated. (Only a theory) What are the “off limits” avenues? Why are all the police forces so far apart from each other? Surely knock all the heads together and liaise like normal police forces do in collaboration for a European case.

Spanish Eyes · 17-06-2020 11:54PM

There is possibly a D notice or whatever it's called in UK on the family and the investigation. I dunno if that's true, but nothing adds up to me on any level, police investigations, witness statements, timelines, evidence, dogs, private investigators and so on.

limnam · 17-06-2020 11:56PM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

There is possibly a D notice or whatever it's called in UK on the family and the investigation. I dunno if that's true, but nothing adds up to me on any level, police investigations, witness statements, timelines, evidence, dogs, private investigators and so on.

Absolutely

Also why I'm always surprised at people who are nailed on one way or another

How could anyone have any fcking clue in all this mess.

2u2me · 17-06-2020 11:56PM

Banana Republic. wrote: »

That’s been a major gripe of mine this thing of avenues not allowed being investigated, is this the reason the Mc Canns came back to the UK with the understanding that they wouldn’t be seen as suspects and therefore would not be investigated. (Only a theory) What are the “off limits” avenues? Why are all the police forces so far apart from each other? Surely knock all the heads together and liaise like normal police forces do in collaboration for a European case.

I just read that the portuguese authorities refused the met access to re-test a hair sample in 2012. That seems ridiculous; what have they got to lose?

I think there is an element of destruction in testing, perhaps there isn't enough of the evidence? Just a guess. If I had only a small amount of evidence, I would require a good reason for someone to destroy what little evidence I have; do you see what I mean

Spanish Eyes · 18-06-2020 12:02AM

limnam wrote: »

Absolutely

Also why I'm always surprised at people who are nailed on one way or another

How could anyone have any fcking clue in all this mess.

No one knows. The only thing that is certain (better duck down here!), is that if the parents hadn't left the babies alone EVERY night of their holiday, this would not have happened. FACT.

I find it very difficult to understand those who dispute this fact TBH, but then again everyone is entitled to their opinion I suppose.

MoonUnit75 · 18-06-2020 12:03AM

2u2me wrote: »

I just read that the portuguese authorities refused the met access to re-test a hair sample in 2012. That seems ridiculous; what have they got to lose?

I think there is an element of destruction in testing, perhaps there isn't enough of the evidence? Just a guess. If I had only a small amount of evidence, I would require a good reason for someone to destroy what little evidence I have; do you see what I mean

Chain of custody I’d imagine. Picture a portuguese courtroom some years from now and the prosecution produce a hair and saliva sample that proves who the culprit was. Then the defence get up and ask ‘isn’t that the same hair and saliva sample that you sent to Germany and England for several months where it was handled by foreign detectives and labs that are not licensed in this country?’. Game over.

Spanish Eyes · 18-06-2020 12:03AM

2u2me wrote: »

I just read that the portuguese authorities refused the met access to re-test a hair sample in 2012. That seems ridiculous; what have they got to lose?

I think there is an element of destruction in testing, perhaps there isn't enough of the evidence? Just a guess. If I had only a small amount of evidence, I would require a good reason for someone to destroy what little evidence I have; do you see what I mean

British police have similar samples that were analysed in the UK. Germans should ask them for it now. I can imagine the answer.

Banana Republic. · 18-06-2020 12:08AM

2u2me wrote: »

I just read that the portuguese authorities refused the met access to re-test a hair sample in 2012. That seems ridiculous; what have they got to lose?

I think there is an element of destruction in testing, perhaps there isn't enough of the evidence? Just a guess. If I had only a small amount of evidence, I would require a good reason for someone to destroy what little evidence I have; do you see what I mean

Absolutely but can’t these forces send their lead officer or lab team to the country and test it there. From the outside it looks like it’s a vs then vs them type scenario when in fact they have solved it by now if they had of worked together. Again madeleine is the one who has suffered for this all. Just wise all the police forces would be get one person each and work together as a team to solve the case.

Leg End Reject · 18-06-2020 12:11AM

I haven't read all this thread so apologies for a question that has probably been answered already.

It was reported that the McCanns gave their children sedatives so they would sleep while they went to dinner. I believe it was supposed to have been mentioned in Kate's diary.

Was this true?

MoonUnit75 · 18-06-2020 12:13AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

British police have similar samples that were analysed in the UK. Germans should ask them for it now. I can imagine the answer.

From what I remember those samples were already low copy number so they could only run a single test.

Spanish Eyes · 18-06-2020 12:17AM

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

From what I remember those samples were already low copy number so they could only run a single test.

OK, but things have moved on and who knows if those samples could produce something of note today. That was 2008. We have come a long way since then.

But I am not disputing you either.

Mike3287 · 18-06-2020 12:19AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The Portuguese police probably see the bumbling efforts of ze Germans and said, feck that, everyone thought the same of us too. Nope.

British police have access to the samples used for DNA too, AFAIR they were analysed in a lab in Britain somewhere. Nope, they won't share either.

It is getting more and more absurd.

Joking aside

The Germans will be the next ones sued by the McCanns

You can see the case building by the day

Spanish Eyes · 18-06-2020 12:23AM

Mike3287 wrote: »

Joking aside

The Germans will be the next ones sued by the McCanns

You can see the case building by the day

I can't dispute that. Their lawyers must be grinning from ear to ear if so. But with an open mind it might not be that way either. Just saying...

Wonder who pays for all this litigation anyway. Probably pro bono if the fund is at zero anyway.

MoonUnit75 · 18-06-2020 12:26AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

OK, but things have moved on and who knows if those samples could produce something of note today. That was 2008. We have come a long way since then.

But I am not disputing you either.

Yes, very true. Things have progressed at a fast pace. Incidentally the lab that did those tests Has shut down. They were also involved in the Omagh bombing low copy number testing and the controversy following it after a judge ruled it wasn’t scientifically valid. Hopefully any samples they still had didn’t go down the drain after it shut.

SusieBlue · 18-06-2020 12:28AM

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I haven't read all this thread so apologies for a question that has probably been answered already.

It was reported that the McCanns gave their children sedatives so they would sleep while they went to dinner. I believe it was supposed to have been mentioned in Kate's diary.

Was this true?

The McCanns admitted to having calpol in their possession, which isn’t a sedative, it’s just liquid paracetamol for kids. There is no evidence that they sedated the children whatsoever.
Other media footage of the twins would indicate that the children were simply heavy sleepers.

limnam · 18-06-2020 12:31AM

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I haven't read all this thread so apologies for a question that has probably been answered already.

It was reported that the McCanns gave their children sedatives so they would sleep while they went to dinner. I believe it was supposed to have been mentioned in Kate's diary.

Was this true?

AFAIK she originally refused to have them tested. Then they were tested months later.

Obviously there's no way to know if Madeleine was drugged.

If she did refuse to have them tested. Very bizzare.

MoonUnit75 · 18-06-2020 12:33AM

SusieBlue wrote: »

The McCanns admitted to having calpol in their possession, which isn’t a sedative, it’s just liquid paracetamol for kids. There is no evidence that they sedated the children whatsoever.
Other media footage of the twins would indicate that the children were simply heavy sleepers.

Apart from the previous night when they were all crying alone in the apartment for over an hour according to Kate and the lady in the apartment above.

Spanish Eyes · 18-06-2020 12:41AM

Drowsy antihistamines would not show up in a drug test panel AFAIK.

They knock you out as I discovered as an adult having taken Piriton for mosquito bites. I was out for the count in the middle of the day and no alcohol involved either. I think that ingredient is also in Nytol which is available over the counter for insomnia.

Just surmising.

SusieBlue · 18-06-2020 12:43AM

limnam wrote: »

AFAIK she originally refused to have them tested. Then they were tested months later.

Obviously there's no way to know if Madeleine was drugged.

If she did refuse to have them tested. Very bizzare.

Hair grows at a rate of roughly 1cm per month, 8cm of growth in the children’s hair meant that they could test back as far as 8 months.
The tests were carried out in September, 4 months after Madeleines disappearance.
So the results, which were negative, proves there were no drugs in their system from February of that year onwards.

Kate was also tested because of vicious allegations that was unstable and on anti depressants, suffering from mental health issues at the time of Madeleines disappearance, and her test also came back clear.

I can’t find any evidence of Kate refusing to allow the children to be tested, but regardless, the tests concluded that they hadn’t been sedated or drugged in the previous 8 months.

All above info can be read in depth here.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/kate-takes-drug-tests-to-prove-she-wasnt-on-anti-depressants-when-madeleine-vanished-7283047.html?amp

SusieBlue · 18-06-2020 12:46AM

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Apart from the previous night when they were all crying alone in the apartment for over an hour according to Kate and the lady in the apartment above.

I thought it was Sean & Madeleine who were crying? It’s quite normal for children of that age to wake up from sleep upset. Their parents of course should have been there to comfort and console them.
I’m speaking in general terms here though, I have seen lots of footage of those kids in extremely loud, busy environments being carried & jostled around by their parents and they remain sound asleep without a peep.
That’s what I’m referring to. That’s what indicates they are heavy sleepers to me.

MoonUnit75 · 18-06-2020 12:51AM

The hair tests were carried out privately by the McCanns, not by either of the police services. The samples were taken after the children had their hair cut, I think the haircuts were even mentioned in their blog. Since we all understand that hair grows out from the head, cutting the ends off will reduce the timespan you can test.

You would think the police would need a court order to get the hair tests done and for the first few months the only suspect was Murat so the lack of hair testing isn’t that surprising.

SusieBlue · 18-06-2020 01:00AM

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

The hair tests were carried out privately by the McCanns, not by either of the police services. The samples were taken after the children had their hair cut, I think the haircuts were even mentioned in their blog. Since we all understand that hair grows out from the head, cutting the ends off will reduce the timespan you can test.

You would think the police would need a court order to get the hair tests done and for the first few months the only suspect was Murat so the lack of hair testing isn’t that surprising.

It literally says in the link that the twins had 8cm of regrowth therefore they could conclusively and accurately test for drugs for the previous 8 months of their lives. The tests were done in September, 4 months after Madeleine went missing.

It says that the tests were carried out by a private toxicology testing company who would have absolutely no reason to fudge the results or lie for the McCanns.

The testing wasn’t done at the request of the police, but to quell the onslaught of unfounded speculation that Kate was psychotic and on medication and that they had drugged their children.
They arranged the testing to put these rumours to bed and prove their innocence against the accusations made by the PJ, and they did just that when all tests came back clear. But for some people it’s clearly still not enough.

Spanish Eyes · 18-06-2020 01:01AM

Did the tests cover Piriton or the equivalent?

SusieBlue · 18-06-2020 01:03AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Did the tests cover Piriton or the equivalent?

It doesn’t say, it just says that they weren’t sedated or drugged. I imagine if they had been found with piriton in their possession the media and public would have been shouting it from the roof tops.

People practically accused them of putting the kids under general anaesthetic when they admitted to having calpol with them, if they had antihistamines I can’t imagine it going unnoticed or unsaid.

Spanish Eyes · 18-06-2020 01:11AM

SusieBlue wrote: »

It doesn’t say, it just says that they weren’t sedated or drugged. I imagine if they had been found with piriton in their possession the media and public would have been shouting it from the roof tops.

People practically accused them of putting the kids under general anaesthetic when they admitted to having calpol with them, if they had antihistamines I can’t imagine it going unnoticed or unsaid.

The difference is that calpol is a very usual thing to have for kids, so are anti histamines in a Southern European country. I don't know if the NON drowsy versions were available back then, they certainly weren't when I was in Spain in 2007. I was out for the count having taken them for the mozzie bites.

Non drowsy antihistamines are the norm now, but maybe they weren't developed back 12 yrs ago. I dunno.

Peter Flynt · 18-06-2020 01:30AM

The Smith sighting is the most important imho, and apparently they do not believe that the person carrying that child (a four year old female) was CB - the guy in Germany.

My understanding is that that male person carrying that child has never come forward to rule themselves out.

SusieBlue · 18-06-2020 01:35AM

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The difference is that calpol is a very usual thing to have for kids, so are anti histamines in a Southern European country. I don't know if the NON drowsy versions were available back then, they certainly weren't when I was in Spain in 2007. I was out for the count having taken them for the mozzie bites.

Non drowsy antihistamines are the norm now, but maybe they weren't developed back 12 yrs ago. I dunno.

I personally wouldn’t find it suspicious if they had anti histamines with them in the slightest, and even if they did have some I don’t think it means they gave them to the children. They’re a very common thing to pack when going abroad, allergies and hay fever can easily flair up in new environments.

I would have thought that these things would be pretty essential items to bring when travelling with kids but for some reason some people find it inherently suspicious and see it as evidence of foul play.

limnam · 18-06-2020 07:09AM

Any news on this letter.

Madeleine McCann

Comments