Madeleine Mccann Missing Girl

[AsimButtHitsASix]

I've no doubt that happens and has done for decades. I just don't think the German polis are holding back on the arrest of a nonce so they can release it a week after Dominic Cummings had to give a press conference to make people forget he's a walloper

[Dee Man]

6 minutes ago, GordonD said:

Can't remember who it was but some Labour politician sent a memo on 11 September 2001 saying that this might be a good time to release some unfavourable figures. 

Wasn't the exact quote, "Today is a good day to bury bad news"?

ETA: Aye.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1358985/Sept-11-a-good-day-to-bury-bad-news.html

Edited June 5, 2020 by Dee Man

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, MuckleMoo said:

I'm hoping this circus is finally coming to an end and, ideally, the girls body is found.

I'll admit that there has been times where I've had suspicious in regards to the Mcann's behaviour but I've always came back to the same conclusion. How the hell were they able to get rid of the body and hide it so well under such police and media scrutiny? How did they not crack while being questioned? And why would the rest of the group that the Mcann's were with back up (for the most part) there story?

The decision to leave the kids in the apartment while they got pished has obviously been the catalyst for this whole tragedy. The Mcann's reluctance to except any responsibility in that regard has always been an issue for me, however it is they who have to live with that decision for the rest of there lives. Although publicly they have shown little remorse in taking that decision I'm sure privately they must regret it every minute of every day. As badly as they sometimes come across in the press I can't imagine what it must be like knowing that your actions have indirectly led to the death of one of your children.

This has always been my view, too.

But they really come across as a most unlikeabale couple, as do their friends from what little I've gleaned of them.

(And that should really be "accept".)

Edited June 5, 2020 by Jacksgranda

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, Alternative Title said:

I would be very interested to read whatever evidence you have to back this up. It would play a major part in changing my opinion on what happened.

Just about everything I have read says the dogs are infallible, and they were used to convict David Gilroy at the High Court in Edinburgh.

Gerry made the mistake of saying they were "incrrredibly unreliable" (try to imagine his nasal sneer) in a TV interview. He cited a case in the state's but later had to eat his words when it turned out the dogs had been right all along.

Please post a link to your evidence. It would give me closure.

 

^^^Big team found

[D Angelo Barksdale]

41 minutes ago, Nkomo-A-Gogo said:

[welshbairn]

39 minutes ago, Alternative Title said:

this has all the Hallmarks of Clarence Mitchell

Who do you think he bribed, the German prosecutor or the paedo?

[Alternative Title]

16 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

This has always been my view, too.

But they really come across as a most unlikeabale couple, as do their friends from what little I've gleaned of them.

(And that should really be "accept".)

An understanding of psychopaths and narcissists is very helpful when analysing their actions. Not least because they are so convinced of their superiority and infallibility that they make the most glaring mistakes.
Think Cummings and his arrogant rebuttal of criticism.

Of course, it's not for me to call this lot narcissistic psychopaths because they played tennis and went jogging whilst others searched for their child. Thats for a psychiatrist to say.

 

 

[ICTChris]

I don't know a great deal about the McCann case but one thing that does strike me is that there is a significant group of people who are absolutely obsessed with this case, in a very strange way.  It isn't so much that people want to find out what happened to the victim it's more that people seem to have an absolute conviction that her parents are either guilty or at the very least are terrible people.  A few years ago there was a case where a woman commited suicide after being doorstepped by a news reporter about a tweet she had sent accusing the McCann's of murdering their daughter (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-31982088).  She had sent hundreds of tweets about the case in less than a year.

The focus that the case has had must mean something.  I think there's an intersection of prurient interest in a horrible case and a typically British reaction based on class resentments.  It's very niche but I do recall Beatrix Campbell going on the Today programme at the time Shannon Matthews disappared and singing the praises of Karen Matthews' as a parent, comparing that unfavourably to the McCanns.  Not a take that has stood the test of time.

[Nutz_the_Squirrel]

11 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

Brian Limond must be feeling a bit nervous

Matt Hancock

[harry94]

1 hour ago, Alternative Title said:

I would be very interested to read whatever evidence you have to back this up. It would play a major part in changing my opinion on what happened.

Just about everything I have read says the dogs are infallible, and they were used to convict David Gilroy at the High Court in Edinburgh.

Gerry made the mistake of saying they were "incrrredibly unreliable" (try to imagine his nasal sneer) in a TV interview. He cited a case in the state's but later had to eat his words when it turned out the dogs had been right all along.

Please post a link to your evidence. It would give me closure.

 

This is just an expedited summary of the NPIA report a few years ago that led to Yorkshire Police abandoning their usage . Soon after this, the same dogs were used in Jersey to investigate a sex abuse case. Their indications led to a coconut shell being identified as a human skull. Other dogs were used in the Shannon Matthews case and indicated the death scent as well which took the police down that route. The same report also goes into a bit of depth on handler procedures etc and gives examples of the McCann case and points where there were ripe conditions of false positives (i.e. the calling back to the same particularly spot).

They are possibly picking up what they are trained for but they can't distinguish different scents from humans and there's just very little understanding on quality control, you've had cases where the dogs are picking up on burial sites from thousands of years ago and material transfer, you can't really define a well understood envronmenta limit. This is even in the handlers own admission and he's even very clear that he would not overstate his findings without corroborating evidence.

 

[Alternative Title]

32 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

I don't know a great deal about the McCann case but one thing that does strike me is that there is a significant group of people who are absolutely obsessed with this case, in a very strange way.  It isn't so much that people want to find out what happened to the victim it's more that people seem to have an absolute conviction that her parents are either guilty or at the very least are terrible people.  A few years ago there was a case where a woman commited suicide after being doorstepped by a news reporter about a tweet she had sent accusing the McCann's of murdering their daughter (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-31982088).  She had sent hundreds of tweets about the case in less than a year.

The focus that the case has had must mean something.  I think there's an intersection of prurient interest in a horrible case and a typically British reaction based on class resentments.  It's very niche but I do recall Beatrix Campbell going on the Today programme at the time Shannon Matthews disappared and singing the praises of Karen Matthews' as a parent, comparing that unfavourably to the McCanns.  Not a take that has stood the test of time.

The class prejudices did as much to shield the McCanns as to persecute them. Mitchell said it was "preposterous" that people could suspect two middle class professionals of covering up their actions, on Panarama two years ago.

[welshbairn]

34 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

I don't know a great deal about the McCann case but one thing that does strike me is that there is a significant group of people who are absolutely obsessed with this case, in a very strange way.  It isn't so much that people want to find out what happened to the victim it's more that people seem to have an absolute conviction that her parents are either guilty or at the very least are terrible people.  A few years ago there was a case where a woman commited suicide after being doorstepped by a news reporter about a tweet she had sent accusing the McCann's of murdering their daughter (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-31982088).  She had sent hundreds of tweets about the case in less than a year.

The focus that the case has had must mean something.  I think there's an intersection of prurient interest in a horrible case and a typically British reaction based on class resentments.  It's very niche but I do recall Beatrix Campbell going on the Today programme at the time Shannon Matthews disappared and singing the praises of Karen Matthews' as a parent, comparing that unfavourably to the McCanns.  Not a take that has stood the test of time.

Wonder if she recorded a final message.

Quote

Coroner Catherine Mason concluded she had killed herself and called for sales of helium to be regulated.

 

[Alternative Title]

5 minutes ago, harry94 said:

This is just an expedited summary of the NPIA report a few years ago that led to Yorkshire Police abandoning their usage . Soon after this, the same dogs were used in Jersey to investigate a sex abuse case. Their indications led to a coconut shell being identified as a human skull. Other dogs were used in the Shannon Matthews case and indicated the death scent as well which took the police down that route. The same report also goes into a bit of depth on handler procedures etc and gives examples of the McCann case and points where there were ripe conditions of false positives (i.e. the calling back to the same particularly spot).

They are possibly picking up what they are trained for but they can't distinguish different scents from humans and there's just very little understanding on quality control, you've had cases where the dogs are picking up on burial sites from thousands of years ago and material transfer, you can't really define a well understood envronmenta limit. This is even in the handlers own admission and he's even very clear that he would not overstate his findings without corroborating evidence.

 

Thanks, I've already seen the Jersey case discussed. I'm sorry to cop out, but I can't remember why it was disproved, and I don't want to go back and revisit it .

However if it is water tight, would it not be of use to Gilroy and others who have been convicted on the alerts of the dogs?

[welshbairn]

15 minutes ago, Alternative Title said:

Thanks, I've already seen the Jersey case discussed. I'm sorry to cop out, but I can't remember why it was disproved, and I don't want to go back and revisit it .

However if it is water tight, would it not be of use to Gilroy and others who have been convicted on the alerts of the dogs?

There was a lot more evidence in the Gilroy case than just the cadaver dogs behaviour

Quote

[10] A cadaver dog, which is trained to react to the presence of dead bodies, reacted to areas in the basement garage and to a recessed area in the basement near the door leading from the basement to the garage. The dog also reacted to the boot of the car, but no forensic links to the deceased were established.

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=fbc08aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

[harry94]

Just now, Alternative Title said:

Thanks, I've already seen the Jersey case discussed. I'm sorry to cop out, but I can't remember why it was disproved, and I don't want to go back and revisit it .

However if it is water tight, would it not be of use to Gilroy and others who have been convicted on the alerts of the dogs?

I don't think it's a question of really being 'water tight' or not, there's a bit of a grey area in the science when it comes to assessing their capabilities and at times, they've proven to have made themselves very useful in directing where an investigation should go. If you're deploying them with no appreciation of that limit though (or indeed the lack of a limit with sometimes their abilities being so good to pick up on things from hundreds of years ago), it's not a good usage.

Re the Gilroy case, I didn't actually know a lot about that apart from the mentions in the Margaret Fleming case. From reading the appeal here and section 63, it looks like the court ruled that the dogs were 1 of 7 bits of evidence used and there was another point about statements he made that could have possibly been inadmissible (but the appeal court didn't feel the need to rule on that). It looks like him being caught going on long trips away with his car (CCTV) to Argyll and subsequent cover ups etc were probably the most compelling parts of the story.

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

I don't  know a great deal about the McCann case

Well leave it us experts then son.

[sugna]

20 hours ago, The OP said:

I bow to your knowledge of the Portuguese legal system and shall ignore the fact it is a calling card of the morons who accuse the McCanns with no hard evidence and a passionate unwillingness to look facts in the face.

I said "arguido" rather than "suspect" for no reason other than accuracy.

[Billy Jean King]

Unreal the headlines in the likes of the Mail and Express demanding to know why the Portuguese police hadn't identified this guy sooner. They did as "good" a job as UK forces despite MILLIONS being spent by UK police forces over the years keeping an investigation going that also failed to throw up this chap. Would love to know how many working hours have been spent by officers in Portugal by uk forces? Good thing the Germans are on the ball.

[throbber]

1 hour ago, MixuFruit said:

I am pretty sure I wouldn’t forget a face like that even if I saw him 13 years ago.

[welshbairn]

9 minutes ago, sugna said:

I said "arguido" rather than "suspect" for no reason other than accuracy.

"Person of interest" ? So someone who might have useful information but doesn't have to be an actual suspect? Just guessing here, my Portuguese is rusty.