Dienstag, 28. Oktober 2014

Phase 3

That was quick.

Only two days after my latest post predicting future tests on items from the hired car that had been sent back to Portugal, we have this article in Correio da Manha, that mentions retesting and hired car in one sentence.

Will wait for proper translation. Stay tuned...


-----------

Pulled up from the comments section. Big thank you to Mercedes:


Experts from the National Institute of Legal Medicine (INML) analyzed 444 hairs that were collected by the Judicial Police in the months following the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in 2007, in Praia da Luz, Lagos. As far as CM knows, 25 blood and saliva samples, and three other traces found in the room where the girl disappeared, and in the trunk of a car underwent forensic tests. These are some of the vestiges that Scotland Yard now wants to take to England to be retested in a British private laboratory.

The English, as CM reported yesterday, want to re-analyze the curtains that were in Maddie’s room, which were subject to expert analyses by INML in 2007, and which found nothing relevant. The collection of vestiges was made in homes, cars and sofas by experts of the Forensic Science Laboratory of the PJ. Among these vestiges are also hair samples and saliva of several people who were considered important for the investigation. In the list of 444 hairs subject to examination 432 are human and 12 nonhuman, 98 had no correspondence with any DNA profile and 19 gave partial results. The request for re-evaluation of the vestiges, are part of a 6th rogatory letter. This despite the absence of a decision, by the new public prosecutor in Portimão, Inés Sequeira, about the 5th letter, sent by the British to Portugal.

Sonntag, 26. Oktober 2014

The final curtain? (update)

The Mirror, which has been the inofficial mouthpiece for a couple of months now, today continues to  desperately spin the fact that Scotland Yard wants to retest for possible DNA evidence from the apartment where the McCanns stayed in 2007.

Madeleine McCann new DNA hope: Curtains may hold key to who took her


Do you notice the reek of desperation evaporating from these two lines? How to spin the basic facts when the latest paedo is as good as eliminated from the investigation? When hairs of burglar-abductors are not the only objective of the Scotland Yard investigation. When CURTAINS are being mentioned...

The Mirror tries to tell the uninformed masses - and some that should be informed - that the curtains from the bedroom where Madeleine and her two siblings were sleeping are the focus of the request to retest some of the samples that were returned to Portugal at the end of 2007 and those that were kept there from the beginning. You remember the whooshing curtains?

Unfortunately, these curtains were never collected, sent to Britain, tested or kept in Portugal. Just check the files.

The only curtains that feature prominently in the original police files are those that were hanging behind the furniture-that-must-not-be-named and where the four-legged-creatures-that-must-also-not-be-named did what they are supposed to do with unquestioned precision. Curtains that never got in contact with the burglar-abductor if you believe the abduction tale.

The original Portuguese investigation retained a sample of the lower part of the white net curtains from the living-room (I said it). Guess where Keela the CSI blood dog alerted when she was deployed to 5A for a second time on August 3rd?

On this date a new sniffer dog inspection was carried out in the apartment mentioned above, with the help of the dog Keela who detects human blood remains. The activity produced the following results: 19.19 The dog "marked" an area of tiles in the living room, next to the window and behind the sofa. 19.20 The dog "marked" the lower part of the left white coloured curtain of the window behind the sofa.


It is not quite clear what happened to the original blue curtains that were tested at the FSS in Britain. So far I could not find a return note. But searching for it, I found another return note that could turn out extremely interesting in the next weeks.

It is the delivery note from the FSS to Leicestershire Police of non-perishable samples that were not destroyed but returned. Thirty-three samples.




They could represent the following items (there is no batch number given, so take this with caution):

1. 10 (1) baggage compartment lined with fabric with ventilation holes
2. 10 (2) moulded plastic extension
3. 1A Head hair collected from the driver - s seat.
4. 1B Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the driver - s seat.
5. 1C Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom of the driver - s seat.
6. 1D Nail fragment collected in the floor in front of the driver - s seat
7. 2A Head hair collected to the right of passenger - s seat.
8. 2B Head hair collected from the floor next to the right front passenger - s seat
9. 2C Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the right front passenger's seat
10. 2D Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom of the right front passenger's seat.
11. 2E Nail fragment collected in the floor in front of the driver - s seat.
12. 3 Head hair collected between the front seats.
13. 4A Head hair collected from the left area of the back seat.
14. 4B Fibres and possible head hair from the back in the left area of the back seat.
15. 4C Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom in the left area of the back seat.
16. 5A Head hair collected from the middle area of the back seat.
17. 5B Fibres and possible head hair from the back in the middle area of the back seat.
18. 5C Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom in the middle area of the back seat.
19. 6A Head hair collected from the right area of the back seat.
20. 6B Fibres and possible head hair from the back in the right area of the back seat.
21. 6C Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom in the right area of the back seat.
22. 7A Head hair collected from the left seat of the luggage area.
23. 7B Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the left seat in the vehicle luggage area.
24. 7C Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom in the left area of the back seat.
25. 8A Head hair collected from the right seat of the luggage area.
26. 8B Fibres and possible head hair from the back of the right seat in the vehicle luggage area.
27. 8C Fibres and possible head hair from the bottom of the right seat in the vehicle luggage area.
28. 9 Head hair collected from the vehicle luggage area.
29. 11 Fibres and possible head hair in the rear shelf/luggage cover.
30. 11 Fibres and possible head hair in the rear shelf/luggage cover.
31. 12 Key card
32. 13 Pattern sample of the fabric covering the vehicle seats.
33. 15 Pattern samples taken from the clothes worn by PMFG Vilhena.

All samples from the hired car. It is yet unclear if they were returned to Portugal.

So the Mirror might still focus on the relatively safe area of the bedroom, where the dogs did not alert, while the curtain in question is definitely from the living-room where they did, but what will they do if the focus is turning onto samples from the hired car? Will we then see headlines like this?
 

Kate and Gerry furios:
Burglars stored body in hired car while they were jogging





Donnerstag, 9. Oktober 2014

All in the Family





This was Clarence Mitchell talking to the Press shortly after Martin Brunt had stalked and outed her on live TV, while the DailyMail shortly afterwards gave her real name away splitting the outing to avoid repercussion.

After her horrible and lonely death we find out via a radio interview of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernhard Hogan-Howe that it was the family who gave the Dossier to the Police, either to BHH himself as Martin Brunt claimed, or to Operation Grange, although a complaint to the local police of Leicestershire would have been the logic choice.


Interviewer: So tell me about that file that was handed to you re. at the McCanns, you know, concerned individuals and certainly that story has been in the headlines with tragic consequences...yesterday. A file handed to you? Are you looking at it at the minute?


BHH - no what happened, well first of all, you may have seen over the last 10 days we've launched a cyber crime unit, about 500 officers. Thats really intended to target people who steal things, not necessarily bullying , I think that's going to be a real challange to us in the future just in terms of volume.

But in terms of that file, what happened if you recall was that the family handed to our team who are investigating or reviewing the murder of... sorry errm reviewing the missing girl errm the McCann daughter. The file was handed to that team and we were liasing with Leicestershire police which is where the McCann family live..... and as suddenly it turned out possibly the person who was trolling or abusing people may well have been.

So the file was in the process of being considered partly by the Met, partly by Leicestershire police but it was likely to have been dealt with by Leicestershire police and not by the Met.


The question remains who gave the "dossier" to the media, but if one discounts the leaking of such uninteresting material by the Police then there remains only one possibility...

IMO this concerted campaign to shut up those on the internet that still after 7 years are very vocal in questioning the McCanns and their version of events started with the book by Summers & Swan, which prepared the way with their constant reference to "haters" of the parents combined with the claim of authority on the "definite account" of what happened in Praia da Luz in 2007.

The supporter group had been hording information on the "dissenters" for a long time and after Summers and Swan claimed that trolls and haters had led a campaign to discredit their book on amazon.co.uk with unjustified reviews, and when @sweepyface (Brenda Leyland) was linked to one of those negative reviews the way was clear. She, one of the more moderate dissenters, was to be the first EXAMPLE to be outed and presented to the world as a troll, soon to be followed by those that actually used veiled threats against the parents. Her "crime" was that she had written a review on Amazon and lived in Leicester.

Only that the whole campaign to finally shut up those questioning the McCanns failed not only to coincide with Scotland Yard giving up the case as impossible to solve, but also because the first victim of the campaign dared to kill herself. (Pending coroner's verdict)

And so Gerry now refuses to talk about "trolls"

Asked whether they felt it was right for the media to identify internet trolls, 46-year-old Mr McCann replied: ‘I don't really want to talk about trolls, we're here very much to talk about child rescue.’

Of course he is... And enjoying himself on a charity do, where he was sure to run into Hugh Grant and was able to discuss the advantages of sending in the Press when need be.All in the spirit of the #HackedOff campaign.

For those of you who really want to get to the bottom of the news and want to decide for themselves if Brenda Leyland did anything that constituted an offence (either by racism or threats) , feel free to check yourself in her "tweet-file".


.

Sonntag, 5. Oktober 2014

And Gerry said:"Let there be an example.."






....and there was an example



Rest in Peace sweepyface and rest assured that the intimidation campaign against those that dare to question the McCanns will not be successful.

Your "crime" was a tweet that called for the McCanns to suffer "for the rest of their miserable lives "
The same "crime" Kate McCann committed in her book when talking about Goncalo Amaral, saying "he deserves to be miserable and feel fear".

Don't judge a book by it's cover

No, I am not going to dwell again on the impossibility of the "last photo" being taken on Thursday 3rd of May. I am not going to mention the difficulty of losing ones hard earned tan within hours or gaining the same on a rainy day. Not on the tantrums little girls can throw when they are not going to get to wear their new dresses until the 6th day of their holiday or the meteorological facts in the western Algarve in May 2007.

Instead I am going to start with those things that are NOT in the book. A book with the claim of being the "most definite account possible" should cover all aspects of the case. One would think....

The first thing you notice missing is the word "NEGLECT". It appears only once in connection with a person who had the audacity to ask that the parents be investigated by Leicestershire police for child neglect. Something that would be normal had Maddie gone missing in the UK. Nine adults, leaving eight children, aged from 1-3, on five consecutive nights alone in apartments outside a confined resort without proper supervision, with at least one child crying on one night for at least 75 minutes (1 hour and 15 minutes) should be challenged by investigative authors about their parental conscience. At least once.

The next thing that is missing is everything surrounding the person of David Payne that might in any way be deemed libelous although it is part of the police files the summerswaning couple are so eager to cite, albeit, I fear, from translations they appear to use from unpaid authors firmly placed in the nutter box by the almost-Pulitzer-Winners... still unpaid, but used...

Neither the statements by Mr. and Mrs. Gaspar about an alleged incident in Mallorca on a previous holiday is mentioned, nor the alleged recognition of David Payne by Yvonne Martin, nor is the incident properly described where David Payne visits Kate McCann in/out of the apartment on May 3rd at 17:00/17:30/19:00 with/without his wife and with/without Gerry being present. Would the vision of Kate wrapped in a towel after her shower have distracted Anthony, the old rascal?

Also prominently missing is every statement from the police files that contradicts the version of the parents. Like the statement by the cleaner of the Ocean Club who was very certain that one of the cots had been placed in the parent's bedroom and NOT in the children's bedroom as the authors/parents claimed. Nor the statement of the Ocean Club receptionist who claims the reservation for the Tapas Bar was made by a man who was accompanied by a child that she thought had been Madeleine.


Missing is also the clear fact that after prolonged discussions there are emails in the files by all friends of the McCanns clearly rejecting the participation in the proposed reconstruction. The authors simply claim that the Public Prosecutor had given up on the notion of a reconstruction without mentioning their clear refusal.

And it goes on. The many inconsistencies in their statements like the point of entry/exit, the curtains, how they left Madeleine, who she claimed had cried the night of Wednesday - all brushed away with one declaration that everybody that has to deal with statements including the acclaimed authors KNOWS that statements are notoriously fallible. Oh well, that revelation will revolutionise the judicial system.

But what I found even worse than the many omissions that would be necessary to give an unbiased and independent account of the disappearance of a little girl are the slight twists of the evidence at hand. Deliberate little "amendmends to the truth" that might fool those that haven't spent months of real research of the files.

An example regarding the search Eddie the cadaver dog did on the items taken from the villa of the parents:

"When these items were taken to another location for examination, the dog Eddie alerted to clothing in one of the boxes. Again, Grime thought it possible that the cadaver dog was reacting to cadaver scent contamination."
Eddie did not react to the clothing IN "one of the boxes ". He reacted to Kate's white top and checkered trousers and one t-shirt of Madeleine that had been laid out on the floor together with the rest of the contents of that box. By saying he reacted to clothing IN the box and not to clothing FROM the box it is insinuated that this scent might have resulted from some sort of transferance, which could not have been the case since it was only three explicit items from the box he reacted to. Had transference been the cause every item would have rendered an alert.

Another example of twisting the evidence comes from the description of the already mentioned visit by David Payne in 5A:

"David, who had stopped by the McCanns' apartment earlier, said as he sat down that Madeleine and the twins had "looked like perfect children ... all clean in their pyjamas, having a story""

Now this quote does not come from any statement by David Payne but rather from the statement by Fiona Payne, his wife. His comment had run like this:
The three children were all you know dressed you know in their pyjamas, you know they looked immaculate, you know they were just like angels, they all looked so happy and well looked after and content and I said to Kate, you know it's a bit early for the you know, for the three of them to be going to bed, she said ah they've had such a great time, they're really tired and you know err so I say, you know I can't remember exactly what, what you know the night attire, what the children were wearing but white was the predominant err colour
Why was David's recollection not allowed to enter the most definite account possible? Why had Fiona's statement to be used? One explanation could be the mention of the colour white in the pyjamas which was the colour Aoife Smith remembered instead of the predominantly pink with floral aspects that was presented to the world.

One last example is at least questionable regarding its origin. With the sighting by George Brooks of a couple carrying a child on the early morning of May 4th we don't see any evidence that the authors have actually spoken to George. They refer more than once to the files and not to a personal interview with him. Nevertheless we find an exact description of the said couple whereby the man has a remarkable similarity whith the man Jane Tanner allegedly saw the night before thought to be the abductor for almost 7 years:

 "...Brooks said, he thought the couple were both in their thirties. The man was "less than 6 foot tall", had "shoulder-length hair and looked quite tanned". The woman was "dark-haired and slim". To him, they did not look British, or like tourists."
This description is nowhere to be found in the files. It is simply copied and pasted from a Daily Express article from May 7th as if it was gospel truth...

I could go on dissecting the most definite account possible but since it's world-wide distribution looks to be only marginal, it would be time wasted. The notion is clear. The almost sickening repetition of the mantra that there is not a shred of evidence against the parents had to brush over the fact that indeed there are plenty of indications and possible circumstantial evidence that at least raise legitimate doubt.