Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Madeleine McCann

Options
1…7475777980…264

Comments

  • Options
    #2282
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    You thought right. The dogs have proven track records and for that reason have been used by the FBI. I think it is naive to discredit them totally. An alert would indicate Madeleine lay dead for a certain length of time. A non alert could mean a body was moved before scent developed. Thus, a non alert does not mean no one died in the apartment.

    I don’t discredit them totally.. but I do take their “findings” with caution.. and would agree with experts who say "Dog alerts can be unreliable. The handler himself makes it clear in the police report that such alerts are meaningless without corroborative evidence. There was no such evidence.
    It is vital to note that alerts by such dogs are classified as intelligence rather than evidence, as police officers familiar with their use will verify. These alerts must be supported by forensics in order to be used as evidence. The results of the forensic examinations did not identify any blood or Madeleine's DNA. To suggest or use the dogs' reactions as evidence is simply wrong.
    Thus, an “alert” actually means nothing if there is no forensics evidence to back it up.

    Again, I will reiterate that Eddie lost his licence to work forensically in the UK.


  • Options
    #2283
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    retro:electro wrote: »
    I don’t discredit them totally.. but I do take their “findings” with caution.. and would agree with experts who say "Dog alerts can be unreliable. The handler himself makes it clear in the police report that such alerts are meaningless without corroborative evidence. There was no such evidence.
    It is vital to note that alerts by such dogs are classified as intelligence rather than evidence, as police officers familiar with their use will verify. These alerts must be supported by forensics in order to be used as evidence. The results of the forensic examinations did not identify any blood or Madeleine's DNA. To suggest or use the dogs' reactions as evidence is simply wrong.
    Thus, an “alert” actually means nothing if there is no forensics evidence to back it up.

    Again, I will reiterate that Eddie lost his licence to work forensically in the UK.

    I understand taking them with caution. There is always room for error.

    These dogs are, to my understanding, usually used in the search of bodies and have had success. There was unlikely to be a body found in the McCann apartment and if she was moved within hours they would have detected nothing. I certainly wouldn't expect doctors to be unaware of cadaver scent. No way they would have kept a body hidden in an apartment for any length of time.


  • Options
    #2284
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Right, but you said this..
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    An alert would indicate Madeleine lay dead for a certain length of time.

    An alert “indicates” absolutely nothing if it’s not supported by forensic evidence. The dogs own handler even stated same.

    Tbh you’re confusing me now..
    First you said this
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    the dog would not be wrong :)

    Then this..
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    Personally, I don't think it has much weight as the scent would only be present if Madeleine died in the apartment and lay there dead for several hours.

    Then this...
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    The dogs have proven track records and for that reason have been used by the FBI. I think it is naive to discredit them totally.

    Then this..
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    I understand taking them with caution. There is always room for error.

    But I *think* beneath it all you are agreeing with my initial point, which is that their “findings” are unreliable and prove nothing if not supported by forensics. Hence not dismissing them totally at first, but taking any “alerts” with caution until confirmed by forensics; which in this case there was none.


  • Options
    #2285
    goat2
    Registered Users Posts: 4,939 ✭✭✭goat2


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    Very good point. And no, the dog would not be wrong :)
    Ant the Titanic was unsinkable


  • Options
    #2286
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    To clarify, there was a joke back a page about a banana being put in place of a dead body and a dog alerting to the banana. I am saying the dog would not be wrong in this case if it detected the scent of death, where cadaver scent had been, in this case under or around the banana. The dog found the scent, which it is trained to do.

    I don't know of any case where detecting cadaver on its own as the primary piece of evidence, saw someone convicted of a crime. I could be wrong but I imagine there would have to be far more than that. And that is because of course there is room for error.

    I believe there is a place for scent dogs and don't discredit them by any means. I'm sure the families of people who have had remains returned to them are very grateful for their contribution.

    Also, lack of detection of blood in the McCann apartment by a dog is neither here nor there. A person can die without spilling blood, i.e. choking, drowning, breaking neck, overdose, to name a few. None of these would necessarily leave blood.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2287
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    goat2 wrote: »
    Ant the Titanic was unsinkable

    The Titanic wasn't unsinkable. A human just said it was :)


  • Options
    #2288
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,762 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    This thread has gone to the dogs.

    Not for the first time.


  • Options
    #2289
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    Also, lack of detection of blood in the McCann apartment by a dog is neither here nor there. A person can die without spilling blood, i.e. choking, drowning, breaking neck, overdose, to name a few. None of these would necessarily leave blood.

    Keela is trained to detect blood. Both dogs will alert to dried blood of live human beings.
    None of the alerts by Keela have been confirmed by forensics as being blood. No blood OR DNA of Madeleine was found/identified. The DNA that was identified belongs to three living persons. As well as that, the dog who confused a coconut for a skull is now unlicensed and does not work forensically in the UK anymore.
    So, now that all of that has been debunked and we have established that the dogs are unreliable, what exactly is supporting your theory that she died in the apartment?


  • Options
    #2290
    limnam
    Registered Users Posts: 9,152 ✭✭✭limnam


    nc6000 wrote: »
    OK, so who do you think cremated her and where was this done?


    Don't recall stating I thought anyone cremated anyone.


    Try reading the post again.


  • Options
    #2291
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    retro:electro wrote: »
    Keela is trained to detect blood. Both dogs will alert to dried blood of live human beings.
    None of the alerts by Keela have been confirmed by forensics as being blood. No blood OR DNA of Madeleine was found/identified. The DNA that was identified belongs to three living persons. As well as that, the dog who confused a coconut for a skull is now unlicensed and does not work forensically in the UK anymore.
    So, now that all of that has been debunked and we have established that the dogs are unreliable, what exactly is supporting your theory that she died in the apartment?

    I'm not sure what you have established or debunked with the dogs. If Madeleine died in the apartment and was moved quickly after there would be no cadaver. If she died in one of the ways I mentioned in a previous post there would be no blood. The dogs are proof of no blood and no body being left for a lengthy period of time.

    I don't believe there was an abduction. To me, an accidental death when a child is left alone for 20,-30 minutes at a time is far more likely than an abductor. Maybe it isn't to you, but it is to me.

    If there was proof of any theory we would know it. The reason this case is so mind boggling is because there is no evidence at all.

    Now, in the absence of me giving you definitive proof Madeleine died in the apartment, how about you care to tell me your evidence it was an abductor. If you have it, I would be very interested in hearing it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2292
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    So you have no proof to support your claims that she died in the apartment? What about all the blogs you’ve read? There must be something, no?

    You may be right in that, generally, an accidental death is more likely than an abduction, however, subsequent and unexplained disposal of a body under the glare of the world’s media and cover up lasting over a decade is certainly not.

    Also I’ve already outlined my theory directly to you and the how’s and why’s of it over and over on this thread. Feel free to go back and refresh if you’re failing to remember. Funny how you agree that there’s no proof of any scenario but that still doesn’t prevent you from accusations of drugging, bagging, burial.. possible cremation? But the abduction theory is what you have a problem with cos it’s “less likely”, despite the fact that all we actually know is a child was there one minute and gone the next. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #2293
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    The dogs are proof of no blood and no body being left for a lengthy period of time.

    How’d you figure that?


  • Options
    #2294
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    retro:electro wrote: »
    So you have no proof to support your claims that she died in the apartment? What about all the blogs you’ve read? There must be something, no?

    You may be right in that, generally, an accidental death is more likely than an abduction, however, subsequent and unexplained disposal of a body under the glare of the world’s media and cover up lasting over a decade is certainly not.

    Also I’ve already outlined my theory directly to you and the how’s and why’s of it over and over on this thread. Feel free to go back and refresh if you’re failing to remember. Funny how you agree that there’s no proof of any scenario but that still doesn’t prevent you from accusations of drugging, bagging, burial.. possible cremation? But the abduction theory is what you have a problem with cos it’s “less likely”, despite the fact that all we actually know is a child was there one minute and gone the next. :rolleyes:

    What can I say, I don't believe she was abducted. You can roll your eyes, demand evidence but until you have proof of an abduction then sorry, I just don't believe it. Yes someone could have got in and left without being seen by anyone. I'm not denying that could have happened. I just dont believe it happened like that. And it appears my views are far from isolated

    Yes, a child was there and is gone. That is what we know. We also know abduction is not the only scenario. Failure to prove how something happened doesn't mean it couldn't have. In the absence of definitive proof that Madeleine was taken, I will continue to hold my opinion until proven otherwise.


  • Options
    #2295
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    retro:electro wrote: »
    How’d you figure that?

    If you are saying the dogs are unreliable then you are saying they could not alert to blood or cadaver. Maybe they were ubreliabe. I can't answer that either way. I don't believe cadaver was there unless Madeleine lay on the apartment dead for several hours, and that is highly unlikely if she was being checked as her parents describe.


  • Options
    #2296
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    What can I say, I don't believe she was abducted. You can roll your eyes, demand evidence but until you have proof of an abduction then sorry, I just don't believe it. Yes someone could have got in and left without being seen by anyone. I'm not denying that could have happened. I just dont believe it happened like that. And it appears my views are far from isolated

    Yes, a child was there and is gone. That is what we know. We also know abduction is not the only scenario. Failure to prove how something happened doesn't mean if couldn't have. In the absence of definitive proof that Madeleine was taken, I will continue to hold my opinion until proven otherwise.

    You don’t want to provide possible timelines, you don’t want to provide proof. You don’t want to do anything at all that might tarnish the baseless poison you’ve been posting throughout the thread. And yes, accusing two parents of drugging their child and disposing of her body when you admit you have absolutely no proof for saying so is nothing short of poisonous. Basically you want unrestricted and unquestionable free reign to post whatever unsubstantiated rubbish you like and accuse whoever you want of anything without the burden of having to back up your claims. No. You cannot say anything you like and then close yourself off to being challenged. The real world doesn’t work like that. Most of us can’t walk around accusing people of all sorts without proof and without being answerable to someone, unless looking rational and sane is not a priority.

    You have basically plucked a theory out of the sky and ran with it. I think most of the theories of parental involvement are projections from posters who could possibly see themselves acting in the manner they accuse the McCanns of resorting to. But it’s not the reality for many. Most people could not and would not dispose of a child they loved in such a dismissive manner and carry on a front for over a decade.

    The fact the are cold people who made strange decisions does not mean it’s open season for a free for all to accuse them of all and sundry. An abduction is a reasonable conclusion to come to when there is such a remarkable lack of evidence pointing to anything else, unless she vanished into a poof of thin air which is not plausible. What isn’t reasonable is accusing the parents of the remaining McCann children of drugging and body disposal without a shred of proof and then posting that all over the internet as if it were fact.


  • Options
    #2297
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    retro:electro wrote: »
    You don’t want to provide possible timelines, you don’t want to provide proof. You don’t want to do anything at all that might tarnish the baseless poison you’ve been posting throughout the thread. And yes, accusing two parents of drugging their child and disposing of her body when you admit you have absolutely no proof for saying so is nothing short of poisonous. Basically you want unrestricted and unquestionable free reign to post whatever unsubstantiated rubbish you like and accuse whoever you want of anything without the burden of having to back up your claims. No. You cannot say anything you like and then close yourself off to being challenged. The real world doesn’t work like that. Most of us can’t walk around accusing people of all sorts without proof and without being answerable to someone, unless looking rational and sane is not a priority.

    You have basically plucked a theory out of the sky and ran with it. I think most of the theories of parental involvement are projections from posters who could possibly see themselves acting in the manner they accuse the McCanns of resorting to. But it’s not the reality for many. Most people could not and would not dispose of a child they loved in such a dismissive manner and carry on a front for over a decade.

    The fact the are cold people who made strange decisions does not mean it’s open season for a free for all to accuse them of all and sundry. An abduction is a reasonable conclusion to come to when there is such a remarkable lack of evidence pointing to anything else, unless she vanished into a poof of thin air which is not plausible. What isn’t reasonable is accusing the parents of the remaining McCann children of drugging and body disposal without a shred of proof and then posting that all over the internet as if it were fact.

    How I came to my conclusion of what I think happened is actually none of your business. If I want to say it came to me in a dream, I read it in tea leaves, read it on a forum or indeed plucked it out of the air, then I actually can. I'm not breaking any rules here. No one on this thread needs to provide you or anyone with anything to support the theory they believe. This is a thread about a mystery, you have to expect people to air their opinions of theories.

    I have never said it is a fact Madeleine's parents sedated her. It is and only ever has been a theory, so please don't claim I am making factual statements when I am not. It's the theory I believe most likely and quite possibly one of the the most widely accepted theories.

    By all means defend the McCanns. I personally cannot defend anyone that thinks what they did was like leaving children asleep in bed while they dined in the backyard. These are educated people that knew, possibly more than most, what horrible things could happen to three small children left alone for 20-30minutes in an unlocked and unfamiliar apartment. As doctors they know how easily a child could choke, fall, cut themselves. And yet despite this they chose to prioritise themselves. That is key for me. They prioritised themselves.

    You are right, most parents wouldn't conceal the death of a much loved child. They would, on finding their child dead call the police and face possible prosecution for neglect, lose their careers and reputations and custody of their two remaining children.

    It's a lot to lose when it won't bring a daughter back.


  • Options
    #2298
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Sunflower 27 wrote: »
    How I came to my conclusion of what I think happened is actually none of your business. If I want to say it came to me in a dream, I read it in tea leaves, read it on a forum or indeed plucked it out of the air, then I actually can.

    Lol, okay. I’ve read enough.


  • Options
    #2299
    Sunflower 27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,955 ✭✭✭Sunflower 27


    Something Else
    retro:electro wrote: »
    Lol, okay. I’ve read enough.

    Amen. :)


  • Options
    #2300
    Charmeleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 437 ✭✭Charmeleon


    retro:electro wrote: »
    Keela is trained to detect blood. Both dogs will alert to dried blood of live human beings.
    None of the alerts by Keela have been confirmed by forensics as being blood. No blood OR DNA of Madeleine was found/identified. The DNA that was identified belongs to three living persons. As well as that, the dog who confused a coconut for a skull is now unlicensed and does not work forensically in the UK anymore.
    So, now that all of that has been debunked and we have established that the dogs are unreliable, what exactly is supporting your theory that she died in the apartment?

    You’ve only established your lack of understanding of how the dogs work. The dog specially trained to indicate for blood did not indicate at all of the same places as the cadaver dog, therefore the cadaver dog was not indicating dried blood from a living person.

    The dog also did not identify a coconut shell as human bone. The dog indicated and it is up to a human to collect any evidence that may or may not be there. The person decided the ‘coconut shell’ was the ‘hit’, not the dog.


  • Options
    #2301
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Charmeleon wrote: »
    You’ve only established your lack of understanding of how the dogs work

    Na. The ones showing a lack of understanding are the ones who have posted claims such as “alerts indicate Madeline lay dead for a period of time”, and dogs could not be wrong etc etc.

    Charmeleon wrote: »
    The dog also did not identify a coconut shell as human bone. The dog indicated and it is up to a human to collect any evidence that may or may not be there. The person decided the ‘coconut shell’ was the ‘hit’, not the dog.

    And thank god for human forensic analysis right? Otherwise if we stopped short of that and judged only on the merit of the “alert”, we’d be led to believe the coconut was a skull :)
    Dogs lead police to evidence, alerts are not considered evidence unless there’s something forensically substantial to support it. What a lot of people on here have done is taken the alerts alone as something weighty and built a fantasy around it consisting of all sorts of unsubstantiated waffle. Maybe they are the people you need to direct your information at.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2302
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    On advice of Mark Harrison, the PJ asked a dog handler, Martin Grime, to bring his dogs to Praia da Luz.
    Eddie is trained to search for and locate human remains and body fluids including blood. The dog has also been trained to identify 'dead body' scent contamination. Keela is indeed trained to detect blood. Both dogs will alert to dried blood of live human beings.
    In six years operational deployment in over 200 cases the dog has never alerted to meat based foodstuffs. The dog has never alerted to 'road kill'. Yet in training the dog has alerted to a 1 cm cube of pork soaked in petrol for 1 week and then burnt until only a residue remains. That's according to the handler, Mr Grime. He hasn't provided any records of the dog's successes and failures to substantiate his claims. He worked at South Yorkshire Police Force from 2003 to August 2007. During that period he was deployed on 37 occasions. That's an average of 9 per year. Eddie was seven in 2007..........
    He alerted to two different places in the McCanns’ apartment, the garden, two of Kate McCann’s clothes, one of the children’s T-shirts, on the pink soft toy, ‘Cuddle Cat’. He was not deployed in the car, so he didn't alert to two places in the car. He did however alert to the driver's door, in one compartment of which was the car's key card. Eddie alerted to the key card.
    None of the alerts by Keela have been confirmed by forensics as being blood. No blood or DNA of Madeleine was found/identified. The DNA that was identified belongs to three living persons.
    Portuguese forensics examined the apartment the day after Madeleine disappeared. No vestige of blood was found.


  • Options
    #2303
    Montgolfier
    Closed Accounts Posts: 879 ✭✭✭Montgolfier


    Something Else
    Just watched the 3 part series of statement analysis by Pete Hyatt on YouTube very reveling.
    Who are they connected to in Scotland yard that got this covered up so well.


  • Options
    #2304
    Mantis Toboggan
    Registered Users Posts: 17,681 ✭✭✭✭Mantis Toboggan


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/13/netflix-to-stream-madeleine-mccann-series-after-delays-and-disputes

    New Netflix documentary!

    Free Palestine 🇵🇸



  • Options
    #2305
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBnarCTOiCY



    Here's the trailer. Should be an interesting watch.


  • Options
    #2306
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,762 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Not really. The only thing that might be interesting would be new and substantial evidence sufficient to solve the mystery and that isn't going to happen via another documentary.


  • Options
    #2307
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    I'm not expecting the case to be solved by it :)
    But it's always interesting to see a different perspective on a case.....and one hopefully with decent production value.


  • Options
    #2308
    cnocbui
    Registered Users Posts: 19,762 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Maybe I was bit harsh. :)

    I'll summarise it for you:

    Blah, blah, blah .. Madeline goes missing .. blah, blah, blah Amaral is an incompetent and possibly corrupt fish out of water, well out of his depth .. blah, blah, blah .. No one knows what happened to Madeline but the only theory that holds water at the end of the day is that someone went into the apartment and abducted her.

    Hope I didn't spoil it for you.


  • Options
    #2309
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    It's like someone spoiling the Titanic movie by telling you it sinks :pac:


    From the trailer, it looks like they are going for the abduction/corruption slant anyhow. As long as there are not 6 episodes on cadaver dogs I'll be happy.


  • Options
    #2310
    splinter65
    Registered Users Posts: 9,420 ✭✭✭splinter65


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    cnocbui wrote: »
    Maybe I was bit harsh. :)

    I'll summarise it for you:

    Blah, blah, blah .. Madeline goes missing .. blah, blah, blah Amaral is an incompetent and possibly corrupt fish out of water, well out of his depth .. blah, blah, blah .. No one knows what happened to Madeline but the only theory that holds water at the end of the day is that someone went into the apartment and abducted her.

    Hope I didn't spoil it for you.

    But but but the shutters but but but the cadaver dogs but but but connections in high places


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2311
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Think I'm going to have to come offline for a few days, I've been following a thread about the documentary in a FB group I'm in and some of the "theories" thrown around would make your head wobble.

    Two particularly colourful suggestions were that Kate & Gerry sold Madeleine to be used as human bait in dog fights, or that the parents used donated eggs to conceive her with the IVF and that Madeleines "real parents" tracked her down and snatched her back.
    And apparently Kate & Gerry know this but can't tell the police as they'd have to admit to using donated sperm and eggs.

    Another was that the Tapas 9 were satan worshippers and offered up Madeleine as sacrifice to the devil. The proof of this is that one of the Tapas 9 apparently did an astrology course and has a keen interest in horoscopes.

    Its going to be a long few days.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement