Comments on: Madeleine McCann: The Observer, The Locator And Bloody Footprints

By: Annie_m

Annie_m — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 20:43:50 +0000

1032
Kris
see 1016

By: on2u

on2u — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 01:24:37 +0000

35 Man on the Hill
26 roger
man on the hill/What right do you have to desecrate someone for not jumping in on this gangland lynching. everyone has a right to their opinion and if Roger 26 does not agree that is his right. To compare him with Hitler is an over reaction from someone who is a little zealous to say the least. This is an open ended forum. You are not HItler or any other dictator. I may not agree with some but I will defend there right to free speech.

By: debbie carroll

debbie carroll — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:38:28 +0000

hello gerry and kate , my name is debbie carroll and i live in ireland . i no madeleine is still alive , because i watch sky tv every morning .it is very good it brings you up to date with everything that is going on in the world. i pray every night for little madeleine . to come home . i no she will be home soon. kate you will not go to jail ok . nor will gerry ok . be strong for little madeleine ok. f debbie carroll . tonyanddebbie@eircom.net if you want to email back.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.love you both .

By: Veronica Russell

Veronica Russell — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 06:20:34 +0000

Must say this case is getting more interesting day by day. I know if I was Kate McCann I would not be as arrogant and as a parent I would be falling apart as I suspect most mothers would. But her composure has been a little too perfect, her manipulation of the facts and last but not least I do not think I would be blaming the police for the missing body of my child. Wasn’t she the one who left this innocent child alone not once but on many occasions. Let us never forget the first crime here the crime of child negligence and she should be thanking her lucky stars she still has the twins. At age 2 they are not going to realise what is going on but she does the church thing and going to the Pope (now that was a mind blower). Shows a very clever cover upper to me. God bless you little Madeleine. I hope the truth comes out soon so you can rest in peace. After all this is about you and how you were betrayed by those you loved the most.

By: Ria

Ria — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:26:48 +0000

Everybody is looking for some drama and the Portuguese police is just providing more. And why didn’t they find the footprints earlier? Dumped in the sea? Why is that so surprising? If she was killed she could’ve been dumped anywhere. For heavens sake, can’t these police shut their mouths for some time!!!! And do some real work.

By: Bob

Bob — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:01:03 +0000

Anybody got anything else to say?

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:42:02 +0000

“theese reports seem sonclusive and i think they should be taken off the suspect list AT ONCE!”

Irony indeed. Surely you aren’t for real?

By: Madeline Mccann Supporter

Madeline Mccann Supporter — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:36:26 +0000

I offer a hug to gerry and kate - theese reports seem sonclusive and i think they should be taken off the suspect list AT ONCE!

By: Mercedes

Mercedes — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:33:12 +0000

I am amazed by the way in which the persons who defend the innocence of the McCann try to become discredited to the press when it publishes something “that is not convenient for them”, nevertheless the same persons do bear in mind the news appeared in the same newspapers when the news support there theories.
My analysis. Perhaps some employee of the laboratory of Birmingham has facilitated part of the forensic report to News of the World, perhaps footprints were found and perhaps one of these footprints had a spot of blood. Also perhaps this spot found has a “indeterminate” correspondence with Maddie. If we are selective, we must be it with everything.

By: Robbin

Robbin — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:54:41 +0000

What about to ask the Mccanns to help Robert Murat financially who is innocent and got in trouble because he was trying to help?
The Madeleine fund has enough money to help him.
The Mccanns knew from the first second that Murat was innocent and they alowed his humilliation and crazy high expenses.
GERRY, SO MANY PEOPLE HELPED AND BELIEVED YOU!

WHAT ABOUT HELPING MURAT WHO IS INNOCENT?

By: Robbin

Robbin — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:48:01 +0000

What a crazy story about the foot print. I don’t believe that.
The papers are saying that, not the police.
It seems that a group of 6 new Portuguese dete ctives arrived Saturday in Algarve, to analise the documents.Millions of pages to be read.I was shocked when I read that one of them is specialised in child sex abuse.
I hope this means only to test all possibilities, including child sex abuse.
I hope this never happened to Maddie, poor little girl.

By: Edna

Edna — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:16:28 +0000

Weird, I had a page open on my laptop and decided to try to comment there and now my name shows. I don’t know if this is registered or not. Again, apologies for being so off-topic with all these posts.

By: Seraphina

Seraphina — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:15:59 +0000

Have the McCanns lost the services of their PR man? Recently we have had quotes attributed to “friends” which seems odd if you have a pro PR chap.

By: Edna

Edna — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:14:49 +0000

test

By: Edna

Edna — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:13:56 +0000

testing old site

By: Rosemary

Rosemary — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:42:10 +0000

I thought I was already registered - yesterday went away to enjoy the sunshine and found when I returned late at night the format had changed and I was locked out. The font size is even smaller than before and a password is now required to log in. There’s no longer a spam sum (good, I was always getting that wrong).

By: Rosemary

Rosemary — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:38:08 +0000

Test

Back in August someone posting here suggested Barragem da Bravura would be the ideal place to hide a body.

By: Seraphina

Seraphina — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:12:14 +0000

Ferdinand,

“It could for example be valid evidence in a case when for some reasons one would be sure that the blood would be of either person A or person B - and person B could be exluded with very strong evidence, whereas the test would state moderate evidence for the test against person A’s DNA”

I think we’re saying the same thing, then. The blood from the ‘bloody’ footprint could only have come from a very limited number of people. Coupled with the shape of the shoe, that takes on a greater significance, and taken with evidence of an identical partial footprint having been found on the rental car starts to make a compelling bit of evidence. I’m not suggesting for a moment that this evidence is sufficient in itself to prove anything but it forms part of the total evidence.

By: Ferdinand

Ferdinand — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:48:39 +0000

“…one would hope that if the FSS report does say that the match is “moderate”, it is using the term as used by ordinary people.”

No, it is a terminus technicus.

It is only step 3 on an eight-point scale: no scientific evidence, limited, moderate, moderately strong, strong, very strong, extremely strong and conclusive.

It really doesn’t mean more than “it could well be Maddi’s blood, but it could as well be someone elses”. It could for example be valid evidence in a case when for some reasons one would be sure that the blood would be of either person A or person B - and person B could be exluded with very strong evidence, whereas the test would state moderate evidence for the test against person A’s DNA.

By: Seraphina

Seraphina — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 07:34:31 +0000

Ferdinand,

I don’t think that it’s as hit-and-miss as you are suggesting though neither of us could be sure unless we knew how the particular lab classify their results. The following link is interesting…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fingerprinting#Considerations_when_evaluating_DNA_evidence

…one would hope that if the FSS report does say that the match is “moderate”, it is using the term as used by ordinary people. While there is scope for massive blunders with DNA testing, it is extremely reliable for confirming circumstantial evidence and for helping to formulate postulates. After all, if the police (at this stage I include the UK and PJ) have a working theory that is very accurate is far easier for them to search for evidence to corroborate that. Sadly, it is also far easier for wrong-thinking people to plant or manipulate evidence to fit a guilty charge, but that’s another issue.