the McCanns

[aintforever]

It's relevant because she phoned friends and family individually, telling them all something that was not true.

 

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id31.html

 

What have you read on dog evidence?

 

She assumed that because the window and shutters were open that's how the intruder got in so that's what she told people. Not sure what that proves.

[sadoldgit]

I thought that the dogs used had never been wrong in over 200 jobs? Anyway, the important thing is to ignore whether Hall is a crank or not and look at the statements that have been made and then changed several times as if to fit what the police are coming up with. There is a great deal that doesn't add up.

[pap]

I thought that the dogs used had never been wrong in over 200 jobs? Anyway, the important thing is to ignore whether Hall is a crank or not and look at the statements that have been made and then changed several times as if to fit what the police are coming up with. There is a great deal that doesn't add up.

Dogs generally aren't wrong in these cases. They weren't wrong in the landmark Zapata case that Gerry McCann based his passionate "dog evidence is crap" argument on. They were right, despite the huge lengths that Zapata went to in order to cover up his crime. Even after the confession, the remains are still not recoverable due to the amount of moving about and attempts to destroy.

 

Your defence of Richard D Hall is unnecessary. For such a massive crank, he has done a deft job in highlighting the huge issues in the case without straying too far off the reservation. I am looking forward to buctootim's review.

[Bearsy]

Why do dogs make such good detectives?

[Bearsy]

They always follow leads

[Bearsy]

Soz

[sadoldgit]

...

[pap]

Cost of Operation Grange tops 10 million.

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/hunt-missing-madeleine-mccann-cost-4428360

[sadoldgit]

I wonder if they would have spent this money if the couple had been a couple of chavs from a working class background?

[buctootim]

Stupid waste of money. The NHS could save or extend 300 or so lives for that instead of looking for one girl who is almost certainly already dead

Edited 16 October, 2014 by buctootim

[aintforever]

I think we can all agree that is a daft waste of money. Questions do need to be asked as to how someone with high-powered connections can seemingly pull so many strings.

 

Sort of shoots down in flames any idea that the McCanns did it though, unless they get a kick out of getting teams of detectives to try and catch themselves.

Edited 14 October, 2014 by aintforever

[Whitey Grandad]

I wonder if the investigators would have been as keen if it had taken place in Poland instead of Portugal.

[Jonnyboy]

I wonder if the investigators would have been as keen if it had taken place in Poland instead of Portugal.

 

These sound like libellous insinuations Mr Grandad. I shall be forwarding your correspondence to my colleagues at the station. Ah thank you very much.

[FloridaMarlin]

I wonder if they would have spent this money if the couple had been a couple of chavs from a working class background?

 

I don't think you need anybody to provide an answer to that question.

[sadoldgit]

I think we can all agree that is a daft waste of money. Questions do need to be asked as to how someone with high-powered connections can seemingly pull so many strings.

 

Sort of shoots down in flames any idea that the McCanns did it though, unless they get a kick out of getting teams of detectives to try and catch themselves.

 

Not at all. They have to keep going. If they back off now it would look worse for them. They know they are ok as long as the body is not discovered. If they did it that is. But with no proof of an abduction where does that leave the enquiry? Yep, right back with them.

[Saint in Paradise]

The other day I saw a picture of Kate and boy has she aged. It is obvious she has something

on her mind that is causing her great anguish but whether it's guilt because they left the kiddies,

worried sick because they don't know what has really happened to Maddie or guilt because they

are totally responsible I wouldn't like to even make a guess at now.

 

Whatever the real cause is though after all those years I now have sympathy for them as they are

still going through hell.

[pap]

The language in that Mirror article was interesting. It begins with an assertion that there will be "a new drive for the truth", nowt in itself, but also, "disappearance" seems to have usurped "abduction" as a watchword.

[CB Fry]

The language in that Mirror article was interesting. It begins with an assertion that there will be "a new drive for the truth", nowt in itself, but also, "disappearance" seems to have usurped "abduction" as a watchword.

 

Has it? The McCanns own book released three or four years ago uses the word "disappearance" as the sub heading. Whenever the story is mentioned in the news I hear disappearance spoken not abduction. And even the Wikipedia page is titled "the disappearance of".

 

So The Mirror using a word very commonly used to describe the case, including by the McCanns. Not quite a new "watchword" then.

 

Reality is boring, I know.

[Gingeletiss]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/a-british-paedophile-linked-to-the-madeleine-mccann-case-and-arrested-in-malta-spent-a-decade-on-run-in-australia/story-fni0cx12-1227091554271?nk=ed5707f5004ca1f6e3f873f3018dcbe6

[sadoldgit]

The other day I saw a picture of Kate and boy has she aged. It is obvious she has something

on her mind that is causing her great anguish but whether it's guilt because they left the kiddies,

worried sick because they don't know what has really happened to Maddie or guilt because they

are totally responsible I wouldn't like to even make a guess at now.

 

Whatever the real cause is though after all those years I now have sympathy for them as they are

still going through hell.

 

One way or another they are responsible for her "disappearance", harsh as it sounds. If they had stayed home or arranged childcare then we would have this thread.

[hutch]

One way or another they are responsible for her "disappearance", harsh as it sounds. If they had stayed home or arranged childcare then we would have this thread.

That's the reality of it. Anything else is just spin.

[aintforever]

Not at all. They have to keep going. If they back off now it would look worse for them. They know they are ok as long as the body is not discovered. If they did it that is. But with no proof of an abduction where does that leave the enquiry? Yep, right back with them.

 

Why do they have to keep going? If the distraught parents thing is a big act then they have already done way more than any grieving family in history - it won't look any worse for them at all if they decided to keep a low profile now. The only reason the story is in the press now is because of them, the only reason it is being looked into by detectives is because of them.

 

If they did it they could not possibly know if any new evidence or the body could be discovered.

[CB Fry]

Why do they have to keep going? If the distraught parents thing is a big act then they have already done way more than any grieving family in history - it won't look any worse for them at all if they decided to keep a low profile now. The only reason the story is in the press now is because of them, the only reason it is being looked into by detectives is because of them.

 

If they did it they could not possibly know if any new evidence or the body could be discovered.

You're wasting your time.

 

SOG's reasoning comes straight out of the "Aha! But that's exactly what they want you to believe" school of conspiracy science.

[sadoldgit]

Conversely I could argue that they may think if they stop now people will think a) they no longer care or b) they are guilty. We all have our own thoughts on the subject but personally I would be very surprised if they gave up doing what they have been doing so far. It is what they know, it is what they do. It doesn't make them any more or any less guilty. It is what they do.

 

It doesn't change what the sniffer dogs found. It doesn't change the discrepancies in their statements. It doesn't change the fact that their is no evidence of an abduction It doesn't change anything.

[sadoldgit]

You're wasting your time.

 

SOG's reasoning comes straight out of the "Aha! But that's exactly what they want you to believe" school of conspiracy science.

 

Mr Fry, do you honestly believe that the McCann's would welcomed the Met if the Met said that they were treating them as prime suspects?

 

What we have now is more of the same as before. Tenuous links from a trial that went cold years ago but perpetuating the abductor theory that seems to have no basis in fact.

[CB Fry]

Mr Fry, do you honestly believe that the McCann's would welcomed the Met if the Met said that they were treating them as prime suspects?

 

What we have now is more of the same as before. Tenuous links from a trial that went cold years ago but perpetuating the abductor theory that seems to have no basis in fact.

 

Who on earth would "welcome the Met" if they were "treating them as prime suspects"? Would you "welcome the Met" if you found out they were treating you as a prime suspect for something?

 

So, thanks for a pointless question.

 

But I agree with you on tenuous links. I believe you may have watched four hours worth of it.

[pap]

Ah, the usual trolls are just unhappy because SOG watched the film and reported doing so.

 

Must be infuriating for them. From CB Fry's endless repetition on the main board, one could reasonably conclude that he thinks no one is listening to him.

 

Same question to him that Tim got. What's Star Wars VII like?

 

This ability to review films without watching them is wasted on Richard D Hall.

[aintforever]

Mr Fry, do you honestly believe that the McCann's would welcomed the Met if the Met said that they were treating them as prime suspects?

 

What we have now is more of the same as before. Tenuous links from a trial that went cold years ago but perpetuating the abductor theory that seems to have no basis in fact.

 

There is nothing stopping the MET treating them as prime suspects, the investigation will go where the evidence leads them.

 

I really worry about your sanity if you think someone who killed someone would actively petition the MET to investigate their own crime years later after they have got away with it. What for, publicity, a weird sort of kick? This is Hollywood B movie stuff.

[Bearsy]

if they are guilty of daughter slaughter, their behaviour since the start has been narcissistic to an almost psychopathic extreme so yeah, they prob would be getting off on this, or any kind of attention. They don't lose by getting caught, they only lose when ppl ain't talking bout them anymore. I mean if the McCann's canned their daughter, which tbh I don't spose they did, really.

[pap]

I don't think narcissism is too far off. These are people that by their own admission, decided that their fun was more important than the safety of their infant children. How does one make that call without a bit of it?

 

In the early days, much of the media focus centred on the abrogation of some fairly basic and universally recognised parental responsibilities.

 

Since then, they have continued to put themselves about in the media, but much less is said about the negligence angle. It's suspects, sightings, appeals, photofits & reconstructions, all predicated on the notion that the McCanns are not involved in Madeleine's disappearance.

 

Gerry seems to love the attention, laughing away with VIPs mere weeks after the event.

 

My position has remained consistent throughout. I don't think they are murderers, but I do think they know what happened and have a lot of help keeping the truth out of the news.

 

First words out of Kate's mouth were "they've taken her". No attempt to see if she'd wandered off somewhere and did not look for her daughter that night. Instead, she rang four people and told them the same lie. Abduction via the window. The proof? Jemmied shutters that somehow managed to repair themselves before Portuguese plod checked them.

[Verbal]

I don't think narcissism is too...etc.

 

Citizenfour is out this weekend. Go and watch it - it's about something that actually matters, a real conspiracy not an imaginary one, and one that has far-reaching effects that we've yet to fully comprehend. You might find it a welcome relief from your own self-approving wallowing in others' family misfortunes.

[pap]

Citizenfour is out this weekend. Go and watch it - it's about something that actually matters, a real conspiracy not an imaginary one, and one that has far-reaching effects that we've yet to fully comprehend. You might find it a welcome relief from your own self-approving wallowing in others' family misfortunes.

Great. More media recommended by a coward afraid of his own name.

 

Shame really. Sure the film deserves better than to be cheerled by a defunct propagandist.

[sadoldgit]

Who on earth would "welcome the Met" if they were "treating them as prime suspects"? Would you "welcome the Met" if you found out they were treating you as a prime suspect for something?

 

So, thanks for a pointless question.

 

But I agree with you on tenuous links. I believe you may have watched four hours worth of it.

 

You have completely missed my point. If you haven't watched the films then how can you know that what is in them is tenuous? There is no magic in police work. They take statements. They look at the available evidence. If things don't match then they have some more work to do. Things do not match in this case. There is no conspiracy theory. Just things that do not add up. Many of those things are the evidence given by the McCanns and some of the Tapas 7. One of the most respected policemen in this country has serious doubts about the evidence in this case so have a go at me all you like and continue to wallow in your ignorance.

[sadoldgit]

Citizenfour is out this weekend. Go and watch it - it's about something that actually matters, a real conspiracy not an imaginary one, and one that has far-reaching effects that we've yet to fully comprehend. You might find it a welcome relief from your own self-approving wallowing in others' family misfortunes.

 

So are you saying that the disappearance of a 3 year old girls doesn't matter? This is not about a conspiracy theory. It is about trying to find out what happened to a little girl.

[Gemmel]

I have watched (Yes all four hours) the video.

 

Question; The dog that found blood - Did he just find blood or did he find Maddies blood? My understanding is that it was just blood.

[CB Fry]

So are you saying that the disappearance of a 3 year old girls doesn't matter? This is not about a conspiracy theory. It is about trying to find out what happened to a little girl.

 

Of course it is, dear.

[CB Fry]

You have completely missed my point. If you haven't watched the films then how can you know that what is in them is tenuous? There is no magic in police work. They take statements. They look at the available evidence. If things don't match then they have some more work to do. Things do not match in this case. There is no conspiracy theory. Just things that do not add up. Many of those things are the evidence given by the McCanns and some of the Tapas 7. One of the most respected policemen in this country has serious doubts about the evidence in this case so have a go at me all you like and continue to wallow in your ignorance.

 

The main thing that "doesn't add up" is the fact these supposed criminals are the ones driving on the investigation into the crime they supposedly committed.

 

Have a ponder on that "not adding up" before you accuse me of ignorance for not watching a pointless video hosted on the website of a fu cking crackpot who thinks the 7/7 bombings were staged.

 

Meanwhile, you carry on your quest for justice for that little girl by watching stuff on Youtube. You're, like, my hero.

[Bearsy]

omg now they've got gemmel too where will it end?

[Gemmel]

omg now they've got gemmel too where will it end?

 

LOL - Note quite Bearsy, they haven't got me just yet :)

[aintforever]

I have watched (Yes all four hours) the video.

 

Question; The dog that found blood - Did he just find blood or did he find Maddies blood? My understanding is that it was just blood.

 

It was just blood, any blood. I expect if someone staying in the apartment a week before had dropped a used tampon on the floor the dog would bark like a goodun.

 

And the other dog that "sniffs out corpses" would alert to cadaver which can be from a bit of decaying blood, or an old w@nkstain. One such dog "sniffed out a corpse" in the Shannon Matthews case and she was found alive. Turns out someone had died years ago on some furniture they brought second hand.

 

The MET will know exactly what value to put on that dog evidence.

[CB Fry]

It was just blood, any blood. I expect if someone staying in the apartment a week before had dropped a used tampon on the floor the dog would bark like a goodun.

 

And the other dog that "sniffs out corpses" would alert to cadaver which can be from a bit of decaying blood, or an old w@nkstain. One such dog "sniffed out a corpse" in the Shannon Matthews case and she was found alive. Turns out someone had died years ago on some furniture they brought second hand.

 

The MET will know exactly what value to put on that dog evidence.

Nice.

 

Of course, this information probably isn't on the four hour MegaYouTube so won't count as things that "don't add up" in SOG's little head.

 

http://news.sky.com/story/844071/sniffer-dogs-can-hinder-police-work

 

Maybe our four-hour movie conspiro-loon is working on a five hour documentary claiming that Shannon Matthews is, in fact, dead. Dogs don't lie, after all.

[Gemmel]

 

http://news.sky.com/story/844071/sniffer-dogs-can-hinder-police-work

 

.

 

A South Yorkshire Police spaniel called Eddie was said to have sniffed out the "scent of death" at the Haut de la Garenne children's home in Jersey and the apartment from which Madeleine McCann disappeared in Portugal.

 

But in both cases nothing more was found and South Yorkshire Police say Eddie is no longer working with them.

 

 

Victim recovery dogs from four different police forces were used during searches for kidnapped schoolgirl Shannon Matthews in Dewsbury in West Yorkshire in 2008.

 

The dogs found evidence of dead bodies, but officers later discovered the corpses were nothing to do with her disappearance.

 

"The properties searched contained a high level of second-hand furniture bought from dwellings where someone had died," according to the NPIA report.

 

"This resulted in numerous indications that required further investigation to confirm whether they were connected to the investigation, or to previous owners of the furniture."

 

The Association of Chief Police Officers told Sky News it was consulting individual police forces and hoped to have national training standards for the dogs later this year.

 

The rest of the stuff of that video is just noise. But the dog stuff was interesting. Had it been Maddies Blood - one would assume that their would had to have been some sort of trace, however small that they could have done DNA (The video shows four little blood splattering's, on a wall) and would have been able to say if it was Maddies blood or not. I guess the fact that is not what they are saying, suggests the answer.

[sadoldgit]

The main thing that "doesn't add up" is the fact these supposed criminals are the ones driving on the investigation into the crime they supposedly committed.

 

Have a ponder on that "not adding up" before you accuse me of ignorance for not watching a pointless video hosted on the website of a fu cking crackpot who thinks the 7/7 bombings were staged.

 

Meanwhile, you carry on your quest for justice for that little girl by watching stuff on Youtube. You're, like, my hero.

 

Grow up

[sadoldgit]

Of course it is, dear.

 

Why do you have to be so patronising?

[sadoldgit]

I have watched (Yes all four hours) the video.

 

Question; The dog that found blood - Did he just find blood or did he find Maddies blood? My understanding is that it was just blood.

 

One dog found blood. One dog found the scent of a body. The fours hours of film were not just about the reactions of the sniffer dogs although when you add everything up it creates a bigger picture. The reactions of the dogs are interesting but what is more important is the difference in the statements made by the McCanns and others. Although of course if you are CB Fry that isn't important. What is important is making childish comments.

 

We are not policemen. The person who led the investigation in Portugal was professional, just as the Met police are. By all means have a pop at me, but are you saying the guy doesn't know his job?

[CB Fry]

Why do you have to be so patronising?

 

Grow up

Let's remember who called who "ignorant" shall we.

 

And let's remember which one of us is fawning over the half-formed, conjecture riddled, sensationalist falsehoods churned out by a fruitcake who thinks 9/11 was faked. Let's remember which one of us has swallowed the "Police dogs are never wrong" horseshi it. Let's remember which one of us watched four freaking hours of it.

 

But yeah, I'm the ignorant one.

[pap]

A South Yorkshire Police spaniel called Eddie was said to have sniffed out the "scent of death" at the Haut de la Garenne children's home in Jersey and the apartment from which Madeleine McCann disappeared in Portugal.

 

But in both cases nothing more was found and South Yorkshire Police say Eddie is no longer working with them.

 

 

Victim recovery dogs from four different police forces were used during searches for kidnapped schoolgirl Shannon Matthews in Dewsbury in West Yorkshire in 2008.

 

The dogs found evidence of dead bodies, but officers later discovered the corpses were nothing to do with her disappearance.

 

"The properties searched contained a high level of second-hand furniture bought from dwellings where someone had died," according to the NPIA report.

 

"This resulted in numerous indications that required further investigation to confirm whether they were connected to the investigation, or to previous owners of the furniture."

 

The Association of Chief Police Officers told Sky News it was consulting individual police forces and hoped to have national training standards for the dogs later this year.

 

The rest of the stuff of that video is just noise. But the dog stuff was interesting. Had it been Maddies Blood - one would assume that their would had to have been some sort of trace, however small that they could have done DNA (The video shows four little blood splattering's, on a wall) and would have been able to say if it was Maddies blood or not. I guess the fact that is not what they are saying, suggests the answer.

 

Respectfully, you can't use a cover up to disprove the existence of another cover up. Haut de la Garenne shares similarities with this case in that there was no political will to pursue it. Still isn't, despite the fact that Savile was a visitor, among others.

 

Moving on to the DNA, the dogs actually did recover some, but not much. They had to use low copy profiling to produce their results, but they managed to match 15 of 19 of Madeleine's genetic markers. The CPS will take a case to court on less in this country.

 

Under those circumstances, the "noise" you refer to would be ripped apart under cross-examination. If you didn't see any issues with David Payne's evidence versus Kate's account of the same events, I'm sure a competent prosecutor would.

 

Question to the Stonecutters and No-Homers. What are your objections to a trial? Isn't that how the justice system normally works? If the evidence is that flimsy, it'll surely be chucked out of court.

[Gemmel]

What are your objections to a trial? Isn't that how the justice system normally works? If the evidence is that flimsy, it'll surely be chucked out of court.

 

And that is exactly the point. If there was enough evidence, to arrest, to accuse, for a trial, then there would be one- BUT there isn't, that is the reality.

 

My personal take on it is there is not enough, because it doesn't exist, because they didn't do it.

[pap]

And that is exactly the point. If there was enough evidence, to arrest, to accuse, for a trial, then there would be one- BUT there isn't, that is the reality.

 

My personal take on it is there is not enough, because it doesn't exist, because they didn't do it.

Don't agree. There is plenty of evidence. Check the McCann files if you want more.

 

http://www.mccannfiles.com

 

There is no political will despite significant public interest. If you really want "noise", just refer to every UK media article on the McCanns once the UK government sent their chief spinner into Portugal to spirit them out.

[CB Fry]

Don't agree. There is plenty of evidence. Check the McCann files if you want more.

 

http://www.mccannfiles.com

 

There is no political will despite significant public interest. If you really want "noise", just refer to every UK media article on the McCanns once the UK government sent their chief spinner into Portugal to spirit them out.

There isn't "plenty of evidence", sweetheart.

 

A website created by Internet nutcases primarily is not evidence. Although, to you, no doubt it's a "great resource".

 

Four hours of rambling video created by your hero Richard E Grant is not evidence either.

 

As Gemmel said, if there was enough evidence there would be a trial. There isn't, because they didn't do it.