I’m sorry if such a question isn’t allowed. But, naturally, the decision is entirely yours as moderators and it doesn’t really matter anyway.

Not too bad, thanks trying to avoid the swine flu (the local school was closed last Monday)
Not been online too much ,family problems.

See the McCanns are now suing Amaral ( new thread!)
Wondered why the invasion of pro McC’s after a long absence

But have to say as sorry as I feel for MM, the spiel goes on and on too much, and not that much about MM herself

That is absolutely spot on. There can be no argument to that whatsoever. Anyone who states that they are paying for it then great, so they should. It’s the very least they should be feeling.

Noone likes the situation. Noone would ever want it to happen but the buck has to stops with someone and it’s stopped with mccanns. Rightly so.

Regards
Lone

It doesn’t matter whether one ‘likes’ the parents or not, but their lack of care and attention to their children did cause all this. I don’t have to ‘like’ the police either, in fact I’m supremely indifferent to all of them personally, but if the police are being condemned for apparently not doing their job, could you explain why the parents are being lauded in spite of failing in their duty of care to their children?

Its Madeleine who suffered the consequences of both parties failures, and she may have paid with her life.
If brickbats are being thrown at the police, its not on to tell the parents to duck when they didn’t do all they could to prevent an alleged abduction.
The current discussion is where all the parents were at given times, its simple really had they been with their children, where they should have been….

The parents feelings in this are secondary, they made free choices and now its facing the music, and if its discordant, well thats their problem

Moderator _ Its best to be crystal clear on the details before you post

I THINK, but would need to look at a really good plan, with clear photos, of that part of the complex, that there was something, a wall, or a drop of some sort, between JT and the Mcs’ apartment, once she turned the corner to go to her own apartment from the road where she’d seen GM and JW, to swap places with her partner in looking after their own child.
—————————–

Maria

Of course, not that it really matters, but to add; there were two walls, a car park and some large shrubbery between M’s bedroom window and the road at the top, which I believe was the path that Tanner took. And thats not to mention the fact that it was slightly dark with no street lamps.

Comment from Clarence Mitchell in the link you’ve just sent.

“I can confirm that the Portuguese police put it to Gerry as a fact that Madeleine’s DNA had been found in both the apartment and the vehicle when it is now clear that the initial FSS report had made no such claim.
“You have to ask yourself what the police were trying to achieve by overstating evidence that they didn’t have, nor could claim to have.
“One wonders, under those circumstances, what the motivation was.”

I have to disagree with CM. One does NOT have to wonder what the motivation was! One does NOT have to ask oneself what the police were trying to achieve. One has a very good idea! Wonder if CM’s twigged yet?

Garth, purepseculation but what if Tanner and Kate were in cahoots and Gerry knew nothing about it at the time?
Remember no “smell of death” was detected on Gerry’s clothing and unlike Kate he managed to answer all of the questions the PJ put to him.
———————
AZ

I can only suggest that had that been the case, then surely the Smiths would have described a person carrying a child wearing a skirt and looking like Kate McCann.

With regard to Tanner not noticing the shutters………….. At the time of her sighting she suspected nothing, so why would she look to the shutters anyway?

And RB should be RO’B, I suppose!

I don’t know for sure. I don’t keep links, but I did read something to that effect at one time. Maybe someone else knows? I do remember it though, because I’d asked myself exactly the same question. Again, if it was that obvious, I don’t think they would have been stupid enough to come up with the story. In any case, I presume it was dark, she was probably hurrying to let RB out to go to the tapas bar for something to eat. Unless it was near and/or very obvious, she might well not have noticed. (By the way, I didn’t think she’d then left the child alone. She stayed to look after her, didn’t she? I thought she was in her own apartment when Kate came back at 10.0pm.)

Why or how would JT have been in cahoots with Kate?! GM and Kate had been together with the children just before they went to eat. Kate hadn’t even been back to the apartment herself in the meantime; only GM and and MW went to check the kids until Kate went at 10.00pm.

Of course, maybe Kate managed to whisper quickly to JT (in between pretending to be panic-stricken, I mean), that Madeleine had had an accident and died, she, Kate, was going to hid the body in a fridge but wanted to keep it all from GM and would like to concoct a kidnapping story and would JT, as her mate, please think up a lie quickly to support this. Then probably JT said,
“No probs Kate! You’d do the same for me, I’m sure! I’ll think up something. Best not tell Gerry, he might just be a tad annoyed. He does have a bit of a soft spot for the kids. You know what dads are like. By the way, what did you think of the starters tonight? Pathetic weren’t they? Once you’ve secretly buried Madeleine, you’ll have to help me write a strong letter of complaint. OK?”

Yeah…when I think about it, it could have been like that…

I was merely taking a favourite word from that great sleuth, Sherlock Holmes, but I wasn’t aware that anyone had forgotten the fact that they had left the children, least of all Madeleine’s parents and wider family who must weep bitterly, daily, over that tragic major failure on their part. The fact that it was, in that sense, their own fault, must only make the grief all the harder to bear.

But let’s not forget that some criminal may have taken Madeleine and done unspeakable things to her. Let’s not forget that, if that’s the case, that person should be hunted down. It is NO EXCUSE to say, over and over and over and over again, that the children should not have been left. It gets nobody anywhere at all to do that. Wringing of hands in self-recrimination on the Mcs’ part would not find the truth but might stop them working hard to pursue the matter by sapping every last drop of emotional energy. Other people smugly blaming them forever for their failure will not help either. Liking or not liking the Mcs as parents is irrelevant.

In any case, their original dreadful error does not let them off the hook now it terms of their duty to do their absolute best to find out what happened to their child. It seems to me that they are doing just that and intend to make it their life’s work, if necessary, to continue doing so.

As I always said, and was mocked by the mods for indecisiveness in saying, as if this had been merely an academic debate in some student union, that should follow “debating rules”, instead of a real live issue……I may be wrong. I don’t know! I can’t know. Neither can anyone, not even PeterMac, a retired policeman! But that’s certainly how it looks to me. And, apparently, it’s how it looks to the police as well.

I think I have just answered my own question:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2501055/Madeleine-McCann-Portuguese-detectives-lied-to-Gerry-McCann-about-DNA-evidence.html

In other words, nothing, zilch, nada - no meaningful DNA whatsoever - just more indications of how the PJ were operating at the time.

Basically, yes. One of the stories might be spot on in all details or a couple versions could each contain elements that are correct and other which aren’t. My main point is that inconsistencies/mistakes in stories, are not automatically indicative of deception or ill intent, they are to be expected in any traumatic situation.

Clive

When I previously asked what DNA evidence had been retrieved as a consequence of the dogs indications, I was not being facetious, as I genuinely do not know. I know of lots of newspaper reports such as the evidence amounted to no more than 6 badly degraded cells.

What I want to know is what the PJ files say about it, because I am not sure there really wasn any real DNA evidence recovered. So if anyone can point me at the files satement on the matter I would be grateful.

As to the 75% match. It is interesting that leaks from the PJ at the time claimed the match was categorically 100%. I think we all know who was the source of those leaks. A 75% match does not mean much:

“Sir Alec Jeffreys said DNA matches alone did not establish guilt and all Madeleine’s genetic characters would be found in at least one family member.”

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2008/08/sir-alec-jeffreys-and-dna.html

One crucial thing about the dogs and DNA was that not a single trace of Madeline’s blood was found anywhere that the dogs indicated there was some, not a speck.

AZ

I thought the shutters were at the back of the apartment, fronting on to a car park, in other words, around the corner from where everyone was and theirfore out of sight.

Elementary? perhaps a babysitter would have been even more elementary and responsible of the parents?

Lets not forget their neglilence which led to this contribution of this saga

Brilliantly summed up!

GM would have nothing to gain, as far as I can see, from not supporting what JT says…especially if she was lying to protect him!! It looks he told the simple truth; he didn’t notice her and neither did JW. Presumably they were deep in comparing their respective prowess on the tennis court, or maybe, more charitably, and as JW’s partner wrote in the Guardian, discussing the well-known difficulties of getting babies to sleep!

Amaral’s theory is laughable, not to say highly offensive, because many people saw GM around at 10.00pm. (Of course, he’s making a lot of money out of it and attempting to recover his reputation after being unceremoniously thrown off the case by his own superiors.) It could not possibly have been GM that the Smiths saw, even if the person did bear a resemblance to GM, at least in the Smiths’ memory. And, of course, it was months before that similarity was commented on by them, ie when the Mcs came off the plane on their return to the UK. I seem to remember that it was reported that the PJ just said there was too much bureaucracy and it was too difficult for them to track down this crucial witness once back in Ireland. Absolutely incredible. We can but hope that the two current investigators do manage to follow it up, although I once read that the Smiths (if that’s the real name) were especially anxious to protect their privacy. If true, this is understandable but one hopes they may decide to give further interviews now.

As you say, Garth, one has to wonder why this wasn’t followed up earlier. Of course, it will probably lead nowhere at all at this late date.

One also has to wonder why the Mcs keep on probing for the truth, in the glare of world publicity at the second anniversary, and have appointed new investigators, if they are guilty of some crime. Highly unlikely.

As someone said this has to be left to the police. It WAS left to them and they were unable to come up with anything at all. What hope for amateur sleuths? Elementary……..!!

Madeleine was disturbed in her sleep by Wilkins and GM talking in the street outside the living room. She awakes and goes to the living room where she clambers over the settee to open the window. She slips and falls banging her head (I guess) which (combined with the calpol ) causes her to die as a result. Gerry is then seen scarting her off down towards the beach with her in his arms (as spotted by the Smiths) whereby her body was concealed.

The above is no joke. I know it is only one explanation but its the one which he gives which ties everything together and which he must believe is near the truth.

Personally, I don’t think you could get any further away from the truth if you tried. And this was the chief investigating officer in this case!!? Unbelievable!!

Feck me, I think even Houdini would be proud of Gerry McCann……….. beat that mate!