Unsolved Madeleine McCann

[Carana]

Can any of our Englsih friends if they can please inform of the relevance of the questions to Jane Tanner and other guests T9 about having dined with the Irwins at any point of their holiday?, something she denied twice?

The Irwins were booked for dinner at the Tapas at 8:30pm (the same time as the T9).
03_VOLUME_IIIa_Page_608
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

I don't recall a witness statement from them in the PJ files, although they may have given one to the UK police at a later date. They were due to leave on 5 May, so the PJ may not have had time to interview them prior to their departure.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_336.jpg

 

[CAS79]

The Irwins were booked for dinner at the Tapas at 8:30pm (the same time as the T9).
03_VOLUME_IIIa_Page_608
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

I don't recall a witness statement from them in the PJ files, although they may have given one to the UK police at a later date. They were due to leave on 5 May, so the PJ may not have had time to interview them prior to their departure.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/02_VOLUME_IIa_Page_336.jpg

Thankyou, in which case it would be a legitimate line of questioning and almost certainly a random chance they were dining in the same place that night.

Now as for the Tanner Statement and the Irish family to the man carrying a child. Would a child in arms look out of place in this tourist village at 9-10 at night or would a parent carrying a child be expected do we think. I see by the booking sheet Carana that many of the guests appear to have children on their trip.

 

[Carana]

Thankyou, in which case it would be a legitimate line of questioning and almost certainly a random chance they were dining in the same place that night.

Now as for the Tanner Statement and the Irish family to the man carrying a child. Would a child in arms look out of place in this tourist village at 9-10 at night or would a parent carrying a child be expected do we think. I see by the booking sheet Carana that many of the guests appear to have children on their trip.

I don't see why it would appear odd in the circumstances (although that's a subjective view):
- it's a small village with an evening creche facility for some holiday-makers dining out.
- the Portuguese tend to eat later than in the UK and often take even small children with them in the evening.

 

[CAS79]

I don't see why it would appear odd in the circumstances (although that's a subjective view):
- it's a small village with an evening creche facility for some holiday-makers dining out.
- the Portuguese tend to eat later than in the UK and often take even small children with them in the evening.

So the chance of this been a false lead is strong. What we might just have is a parent walking their child home for the night after taking them to dinner and falling asleep.

 

[woopedazz]

Summary of thread: Go!

 

[Carana]

So the chance of this been a false lead is strong.

There is a chance that neither of the children being carried were, in fact, her. However, the man (or men, if they were two different people) never came forward to be eliminated. That said, the police never asked the Smith family to take part in a police sketch exercise (Jane got one done once back in the UK) and it was some time before useful descriptions appeared in the press.

 

[BrenR1958]

All about the burglaries, locks and break-ins

http://regretsandramblings.com/2012/02/16/predators-break-ins-locks-and-pat-brown/

 

[debunker]

Summary of thread: Go!

The world is divided into two broad groups of people- those that have a love for justice and understand the principles thereof and those who love justice and do not understand the principles thereof. The former group understand that the abilities of people are wonderful but limited- that people sometimes get things wrong and that the system of justice exists to deliver decisions and outcomes where possible within its own constraints. The second group believes that the world is black and white, divided into goodies and baddies and that the system of justice exists to punish wrongdoers whatever the uncertain circumstances of knowledge about a case. The former group believe it is better to not speak of possible wrongdoing if one does not have the sufficient knowledge, the latter believe that it is their right to spread calumnies over the Internet because they believe they know better than the formal justice system.

 

[J_Moore]

Summary of thread: Go!

Pretty young blonde girl tragically disappears. English speaking world is shocked. No one really has access to the facts, but that doesn't let them stop having a 1000 post discussion in 20 days.

 

[woopedazz]

The world is divided into two broad groups of people- those that have a love for justice and understand the principles thereof and those who love justice and do not understand the principles thereof. The former group understand that the abilities of people are wonderful but limited- that people sometimes get things wrong and that the system of justice exists to deliver decisions and outcomes where possible within its own constraints. The second group believes that the world is black and white, divided into goodies and baddies and that the system of justice exists to punish wrongdoers whatever the uncertain circumstances of knowledge about a case. The former group believe it is better to not speak of possible wrongdoing if one does not have the sufficient knowledge, the latter believe that it is their right to spread calumnies over the Internet because they believe they know better than the formal justice system.

Without knowing the facts of the case I take it from your answer that you are... pro-abduction. You disgust me.

How am I doing so far?

 

[debunker]

Without knowing the facts of the case I take it from your answer that you are... pro-abduction. You disgust me.

How am I doing so far?

Don't ASSume: it makes an ASS out of U and ME- especially YOU.

I admit that I do not know what happened at all. There is insufficient evidence to decide on anything.as the Portuguese Attorney General has said.

I am open to any verdict handed down by a competent court- there is nobe yet and may not be.

I dislike, with a passion, pitchforkers who libel and slander technically innocent people for their own amusement- numpties with neither sense, knowledge and logic on the one hand and lacking a moral compass on the other hand.

I have never claimed that what happened was abduction- merely that Abduction and Harm from people known to Madeleine are possibilities, but that deciding this should be left to competent people and organisation, and not to thick moral pygmies.

 

[debunker]

Pretty young blonde girl tragically disappears. English speaking world is shocked. No one really has access to the facts, but that doesn't let them stop having a 1000 post discussion in 20 days.

Do you not feel that if you find a group of cowardly, possibly mentally disordered vigilantes that there is a moral imperative to support basic moral behaviour by opposing hose who choose to bully, harass and defame people with whom they have no clear connection save for the need to gratify their own warped minds?

 

[Sabot]

Just watch it, Debunks. Not all of us McCann supporters are actually raving crackers or even over emotional. And we don't all get off on what you see as some sort of insanity. As far as I can see The McCanns are Innocent, so could you perhaps tell me what is wrong with me for believing so.

 

[sadie]

-SNIP-
As far as I can see The McCanns are Innocent, so could you perhaps tell me what is wrong with me for believing so.

Agreed. So many pointers.

I believe in Justice. There are no facts that i know of, which indicate in any way, that the Mccanns have done anything to Madeleine, either by accident, or deliberately.

None, Zilch, Nada.

But there is a history of stranger pre-pubescent abductions in PT, with three little girls including Madeleine going in a period of 2years 8 months - all in a tiny cluster near PdL - and a total of 7 stranger pre-pubescent abductions. Spaced roughly 2 years apart, but with a break of 5 years when the son of an elite was taken in by the ( I believe Porto) PJ. He was released after questioning, with a warning from the PJ.
The information on this has all been whooshed, but another poster has seen a similar report.

There is no possible way that the Mccanns could have done the abduction, that I can see.
Also, if they were guilty, how come they have returned to PdL to stage a reconstruction, to beg for witnesses ? ... and more recently, how come they have pestered the Gov to re-open the investigation using Scotland Yard ? An absurdly dangerous things to do if they were involved.

If someone can supply me with any real factual evidence (NOT NEWSPAPER REPORTS etc) that the Mccanns have killed Madeleine, either accidentally or deliberately, or taken part in any kind of abduction, I shall take it on board and re-align my views accordingly.

 

[sadie]

Without knowing the facts of the case I take it from your answer that you are... pro-abduction. You disgust me.

How am I doing so far?

woopedazz


I think you misunderstand the words pros and antis in the Mccann discussions


We are talking about being pro-Mccann (believing their innocence) or anti Mccann (believing them giulty).


This word Pro is NOT to do with being pro-abductions!

 

[debunker]

Just watch it, Debunks. Not all of us McCann supporters are actually raving crackers or even over emotional. And we don't all get off on what you see as some sort of insanity. As far as I can see The McCanns are Innocent, so could you perhaps tell me what is wrong with me for believing so.

I too believe the McCanns are innocent. But some discourse on Pro forums idolises the McCanns, excuses their child care arrangements, and fails to accept some basic facts: they have not been cleared of the crimes, merely remain presumed innocent, and tere is evidence that could be used in court against the- jus insufficient. Arguing these two last points got me thrown off stopthemyths because some members could not accept the truth that they had myths of their own. Some Pros are as crazy as some Antis.

 

[debunker]

Agreed. So many pointers.

I believe in Justice. There are no facts that i know of, which indicate in any way, that the Mccanns have done anything to Madeleine, either by accident, or deliberately.

None, Zilch, Nada.

But there is a history of stranger pre-pubescent abductions in PT, with three little girls including Madeleine going in a period of 2years 8 months - all in a tiny cluster near PdL - and a total of 7 stranger pre-pubescent abductions. Spaced roughly 2 years apart, but with a break of 5 years when the son of an elite was taken in by the ( I believe Porto) PJ. He was released after questioning, with a warning from the PJ.
The information on this has all been whooshed, but another poster has seen a similar report.

There is no possible way that the Mccanns could have done the abduction, that I can see.
Also, if they were guilty, how come they have returned to PdL to stage a reconstruction, to beg for witnesses ? ... and more recently, how come they have pestered the Gov to re-open the investigation using Scotland Yard ? An absurdly dangerous things to do if they were involved.

If someone can supply me with any real factual evidence (NOT NEWSPAPER REPORTS etc) that the Mccanns have killed Madeleine, either accidentally or deliberately, or taken part in any kind of abduction, I shall take it on board and re-align my views accordingly.

There is evidence that suggests that the McCanns could have committed the offence- that is the view of the Portuguese Police- see their various reports. There is the evidence of the dogs, the DNA, the interviews with contradictions, various behaviours.

There is not enough solid evidence to bring a case and several strands of evidence (dogs and DNA0 in particula) would collapse under cross examination.

That said, to suggest that there is no evidence is a false statement. There is evidence but the Portuguese prosecutors found it to be insufficient.

 

[Carana]

Aside from that it's been a slog to get any decent information, apart from the accuracy of scent dogs Kelly and Keisha, or whatever their names were. Besides the parents, are there any other suspects in this case?

At the time, there was also Robert Murat. All three had their official suspect / person of interest lifted when the case was archived.

In a looser sense, there were several statements reporting people acting suspciously. Most of whom were never identified.

Here's one, for example. The granddaughter of the apartment's previous owner saw a man staring intently at the balcony on two occasions. As far as I know, he was never identified. It could of course be innocent, but perhaps not. If anyone had been observing the McCanns, they would know that they checked on the children via the balcony sliding glass doors, which were not locked as they only locked from the inside.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/T_M_S_AGE_12.htm

 

[Tony Bennett]

Checking back in to say I am ready at anytime to continue [sp.] my conversation with Tony Bennett about the dogs.

Debunker, you say that we were having a conversation.

I must say that, this far, it has felt more like an interrogation.

To date, I’ve answered a dozen or so questions from you.

I asked you one question, about the significance of thew dogs’ alerts. You replied with your familiar refrain that Martin Grime’s and his dogs made a mistake.

Well, actually you say they made 13 mistakes in a row.

If this is indeed a genuine conversation and not an interrogation, the simplest way for our conversation to proceed would be for you to answer my second question to you, which has remained unanswered for a week. Or any other McCann-believer can reply; after all, my invitation to respond was addressed to all McCann-believers on this thread

Here is my question again:

Continuing with the Moderators’ plea for this discussion to be based on actual facts, here are some of the key facts in the case, all of them undisputed facts, which cry out for an explanation…I invite the McCann-believers on here to account for these 10 facts...:
1. The McCanns’ original story, which they telephoned through to their family, friends and the media on the night they reported Madeleine missing, was that an abductor had forced entry to their apartment by jemmying open the shutters and window and taking Madeleine away by the same route
2. The next day, both the police and the management of the Ocean Club complex where the McCanns were staying established that this was not the case. The McCanns then came up with alternative explanations
3. Taking the accounts of the McCanns and their friend Jane Tanner as truthful, Madeleine must have been taken during a time period of less than 5 minutes, between 9.10am and 9.15am that evening. No-one heard an abductor. No-one (save Jane Tanner, see next point) saw an abductor. The abductor left no forensic trace whatsoever
4. Jane Tanner claimed to have seen a man carrying a child on the road near the McCanns’ apartment at 9.15pm that evening. Her description of this man changed a number of times, becoming more detailed as time went on. Not only that, but during a press conference when the McCanns were claiming that Madeleine might have been taken by a Victoria-Beckham lookalike on a boat to Australia, the McCanns’ leading private detective, Dave Edgar, said that Jane Tanner might have seen a woman carrying a child, not a man
5. Another man carrying a child was seen by an Irish family at 9.55pm the same evening. They made witness statements. Neither the police nor the McCanns nor their advisers made any connection between the two sightings. However, in a TV programme shown in 2009, the McCanns suggested it could be one and the same person, despite the obvious problem that it would be highly unlikely for an abductor to be carrying a child around the village a full 40 minutes after he had stolen her. Dr Kate McCann promotes the idea that these two sightings are the same man in her book, ‘madeleine’, pp 370-372. Jane Tanner said the man had ‘thick, dark, long hair’. The Irish family described his hair as ‘short, brown’
6. When the two cadaver dogs were called in by the police in August 2007, and reports emerged that they had alerted to the scent of a corpse at 11 locations associated with the McCanns, but nowhere else, they then came up with several possible reasons why the dogs had alerted to the scent of a corpse
7. The dogs alerted to 4 places in the flat (living room under the window, wardrobe in the McCanns’ main bedroom, veranda and garden), two of Dr Kate McCann’s clothes, a red children’s T-shirt, two places in the McCanns’ hired car and on the key fob, and on the pink soft toy, Cuddle Cat
8. After they were made suspects, the McCanns changed tack, claiming that cadaver dogs were highly error-prone. In one TV interview, Dr Gerald McCann said they were ‘incredibly unreliable’
9. The McCanns made much of a judge in the Zapata case having ruled the dogs’ evidence inadmissible. The dogs had alerted to the scent of a human corpse in two places associated with the Zapatas. Months later, Eugene Zapata made a full and detailed confession as to how he had murdered his wife, Jeanette, and what he had done with the body. He confirmed that the dogs alerts had been 100% correct
10. Despite the above, Dr Kate McCann used a quote in her book ‘madeleine’ (p 267) from Eugene Zapata’s defence lawyer in 2006 (18 months before Zapata confessed) about the unreliability of cadaver dogs to bolster her case that these cadaver dogs were unreliable. Yet since 2006 immense progress has been made in training reliable sniffer dogs to detect a huge variety of odours in such fields as drugs, explosives, medicine and, of course, criminology.
What hypothesis can best explain these (agreed) facts?

+++++++++++++


I think by the way we can regard our ‘conversation’ on the dogs’ alert as at an end. This is what our conversation has produced:

• clear evidence from Mr Grime himself, especially in the rogatory interview he gave to Leicestershire Police in April 2008, that Eddie is trained primarily to alert to the scent of a human corpse, while Keela is trained primarily to search for human blood
• clear evidence from Mr Grime himself, especially in the rogatory interview he gave to Leicestershire Police in April 2008, that Eddie’s training was based primarily on him being trained to alert to the presence (or past presence) of various body parts from dead persons
• clear evidence from Mr Grime himself, both in the video of him searching various premises and items in Praia da Luz, especially in the rogatory interview he gave to Leicestershire Police in April 2008, that Eddie alerted to the past presence of a corpse
• the quote from the Attorney-General’s report, on which the McCanns rely so much and from which their spokesman quotes so much, that Eddie detected ‘human cadaver scent’, whilst Keela detected blood and body fluids
• two concessions by me, namely (a) that Eddie’s training included, inter alia, alerting to dried blood and (b) that it was possible (even though that is not Eddie’s main purpose) that Eddie could alert to dried blood alone
• you have been unable to cite any instance where Eddie has given a false alert, i.e. alerted to a human corpse when there was (or never had been) a human corpse present in a certain location
• disagreement as to whether Eddie was correct in his 13 alerts to human cadaver scent (as I say) or made a series of 13 errors (as you say).

On that last point, I note that you have ingeniously referred to alleged error rates of dogs in their alerts. You’ve cited error rates of 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% etc.

OK, let us suppose that Eddie has an average error rate of 10%. This would mean he would have been right in 11 out of his 13 alerts.

If his error rate was 20%, he would have been right in 10 out of his 13 alerts.

If his error rate was 30%, he would still have been right bin 9 out of 13 alerts.

And even if his error rate was 40%, he would still have been right in 7 out of 13 alerts.

If this was the point you were trying t make, it doesn’t seem to assist your case a great deal.

Finally, your claim that I have ‘form’ for evading genuine discussion re what really happened to Madeleine is false. I would also add that your repeating this claim at regular intervals is unlikely to enhance your case.

 

[Tony Bennett]

Thanks for the informative posts sadie. 3 children abducted from an area seems to point in one direction...

So, here we have a claim from Sadie that Joana Cipriano was mysteriously abducted. And that is followed by a poster, Eastern Tiger, saying that this could be evidence that Madeleine McCann was also abducted.

As I have stated once before here, there is a battle going on for the truth in the case. And very often, on the McCann-beleiver side of the debate, they tell very deliberate lies. This is one such example.

Joana Cipriano was aged 8 when she was reported missing, two days after the event, by her mother. Nearly a year later, after both she and her brother Joao made voluntary and detailed confessions to mudering her in her house, this evil pairt were sentenced to 16 years 8 months and 16 years respectively for their awful crimes. The senior detective who led the investigation into this despicable act was none other than Dr Goncalo Amaral, the same man who also investigated the disapperance of Madeleine McCann and made them suspects. Below, I reproduce a post of mine on the Jill Havern forum. The evil pair appealed to the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts, who both confirmed the verdicts and the sentences. In doing so, the Supreme Court set out a list of 93 facts, which I reproduce below. I also reproduce a short follow-up post by ‘mira2’.

Now, for the sake of completeness, and so that posters here get a fuller idea of what is going on, I will add that these events have also taken place.

Leonor Cipriano (Joana’s mother) in 2007 launched a claim against Dr Goncalo Amaral and four other detectives for allegedly beating and torturing her into making a false confession.

On 8 April 2008, in a cloak of secrecy, a Portuguese lawyer appointed by the McCanns, Marcos Aragao Correia, visited Leonor Cipriano in Odemira Women’s Prison and Ms Cipriano appointed him as her lawyer in place of her existing lawyer.

The previous lawyer only found out that she had been replaced days beforfe the trial of the five detectives, which began on 21 October 2008.

The trial was notable for five long adjournments, including one caused by the Portuguese Bar Association suspending Mr Corriea for misconduct. The judge had to throw him out of the court. However, due to some legal jiggery-pokery behind the scenes by powerful legal figures, he was reinstated, and the trial continued.
In May 2009, and after Ms Cipriano was proven to be a serial liar, none of the detectives was found guilty of any acts of brutality, torture or assault. However (and some would say against the run of evidence), Dr Amaral and one other detective were handed suspended jail terms of 18 months for filing a false report about one alleged incident in the case.

Those on the McCann-believer side of the debate make much of this conviction, repeatedly referring to Dr Amaral as a ‘convicted criminal’. All I will add is that there are indications that there was political interference in the running of this case.
JOANA CIPRIANO - The 63 facts found proved by the Portuguese Appeal Court when confirming the long jail sentences of Leonor and Joao Cipriano


Tony Bennett on Wed May 30, 2012 10:00 pm
This case went to the Portuguese Appeal Court and then to the Supreme Court.
Here, the Appeal Court sets out, in a very lengthy judgment, the 63 facts found proved in relation to the murderers of 8-year-old Joana Cipriano: Leonor and Joao Cipriano, mother and uncle of Joana respectivley.The English translation is not good, but there is sufficient here for no-one to be left in any doubt why they were convicted.
Yet - yet - there are small groups of strange individuals out there on the internet who, though deluded, apparently believe with all sincerity that these two murderers are wholly innocent and have been deliberately framed.
Why?

[FINDINGS OF FACT IN THE JOANA CIPRIANO MURDER CASE TO FOLLOW SHORTLY]

 

[debunker]

Debunker, you say that we were having a conversation.

I must say that, this far, it has felt more like an interrogation.

To date, I’ve answered a dozen or so questions from you.

I asked you one question, about the significance of thew dogs’ alerts. You replied with your familiar refrain that Martin Grime’s and his dogs made a mistake.

Well, actually you say they made 13 mistakes in a row.

If this is indeed a genuine conversation and not an interrogation, the simplest way for our conversation to proceed would be for you to answer my second question to you, which has remained unanswered for a week. Or any other McCann-believer can reply; after all, my invitation to respond was addressed to all McCann-believers on this thread

Here is my question again:

Continuing with the Moderators’ plea for this discussion to be based on actual facts, here are some of the key facts in the case, all of them undisputed facts, which cry out for an explanation…I invite the McCann-believers on here to account for these 10 facts...:
1. The McCanns’ original story, which they telephoned through to their family, friends and the media on the night they reported Madeleine missing, was that an abductor had forced entry to their apartment by jemmying open the shutters and window and taking Madeleine away by the same route
2. The next day, both the police and the management of the Ocean Club complex where the McCanns were staying established that this was not the case. The McCanns then came up with alternative explanations
3. Taking the accounts of the McCanns and their friend Jane Tanner as truthful, Madeleine must have been taken during a time period of less than 5 minutes, between 9.10am and 9.15am that evening. No-one heard an abductor. No-one (save Jane Tanner, see next point) saw an abductor. The abductor left no forensic trace whatsoever
4. Jane Tanner claimed to have seen a man carrying a child on the road near the McCanns’ apartment at 9.15pm that evening. Her description of this man changed a number of times, becoming more detailed as time went on. Not only that, but during a press conference when the McCanns were claiming that Madeleine might have been taken by a Victoria-Beckham lookalike on a boat to Australia, the McCanns’ leading private detective, Dave Edgar, said that Jane Tanner might have seen a woman carrying a child, not a man
5. Another man carrying a child was seen by an Irish family at 9.55pm the same evening. They made witness statements. Neither the police nor the McCanns nor their advisers made any connection between the two sightings. However, in a TV programme shown in 2009, the McCanns suggested it could be one and the same person, despite the obvious problem that it would be highly unlikely for an abductor to be carrying a child around the village a full 40 minutes after he had stolen her. Dr Kate McCann promotes the idea that these two sightings are the same man in her book, ‘madeleine’, pp 370-372. Jane Tanner said the man had ‘thick, dark, long hair’. The Irish family described his hair as ‘short, brown’
6. When the two cadaver dogs were called in by the police in August 2007, and reports emerged that they had alerted to the scent of a corpse at 11 locations associated with the McCanns, but nowhere else, they then came up with several possible reasons why the dogs had alerted to the scent of a corpse
7. The dogs alerted to 4 places in the flat (living room under the window, wardrobe in the McCanns’ main bedroom, veranda and garden), two of Dr Kate McCann’s clothes, a red children’s T-shirt, two places in the McCanns’ hired car and on the key fob, and on the pink soft toy, Cuddle Cat
8. After they were made suspects, the McCanns changed tack, claiming that cadaver dogs were highly error-prone. In one TV interview, Dr Gerald McCann said they were ‘incredibly unreliable’
9. The McCanns made much of a judge in the Zapata case having ruled the dogs’ evidence inadmissible. The dogs had alerted to the scent of a human corpse in two places associated with the Zapatas. Months later, Eugene Zapata made a full and detailed confession as to how he had murdered his wife, Jeanette, and what he had done with the body. He confirmed that the dogs alerts had been 100% correct
10. Despite the above, Dr Kate McCann used a quote in her book ‘madeleine’ (p 267) from Eugene Zapata’s defence lawyer in 2006 (18 months before Zapata confessed) about the unreliability of cadaver dogs to bolster her case that these cadaver dogs were unreliable. Yet since 2006 immense progress has been made in training reliable sniffer dogs to detect a huge variety of odours in such fields as drugs, explosives, medicine and, of course, criminology.
What hypothesis can best explain these (agreed) facts?

+++++++++++++


I think by the way we can regard our ‘conversation’ on the dogs’ alert as at an end. This is what our conversation has produced:

• clear evidence from Mr Grime himself, especially in the rogatory interview he gave to Leicestershire Police in April 2008, that Eddie is trained primarily to alert to the scent of a human corpse, while Keela is trained primarily to search for human blood
• clear evidence from Mr Grime himself, especially in the rogatory interview he gave to Leicestershire Police in April 2008, that Eddie’s training was based primarily on him being trained to alert to the presence (or past presence) of various body parts from dead persons
• clear evidence from Mr Grime himself, both in the video of him searching various premises and items in Praia da Luz, especially in the rogatory interview he gave to Leicestershire Police in April 2008, that Eddie alerted to the past presence of a corpse
• the quote from the Attorney-General’s report, on which the McCanns rely so much and from which their spokesman quotes so much, that Eddie detected ‘human cadaver scent’, whilst Keela detected blood and body fluids
• two concessions by me, namely (a) that Eddie’s training included, inter alia, alerting to dried blood and (b) that it was possible (even though that is not Eddie’s main purpose) that Eddie could alert to dried blood alone
• you have been unable to cite any instance where Eddie has given a false alert, i.e. alerted to a human corpse when there was (or never had been) a human corpse present in a certain location
• disagreement as to whether Eddie was correct in his 13 alerts to human cadaver scent (as I say) or made a series of 13 errors (as you say).

On that last point, I note that you have ingeniously referred to alleged error rates of dogs in their alerts. You’ve cited error rates of 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% etc.

OK, let us suppose that Eddie has an average error rate of 10%. This would mean he would have been right in 11 out of his 13 alerts.

If his error rate was 20%, he would have been right in 10 out of his 13 alerts.

If his error rate was 30%, he would still have been right bin 9 out of 13 alerts.

And even if his error rate was 40%, he would still have been right in 7 out of 13 alerts.

If this was the point you were trying t make, it doesn’t seem to assist your case a great deal.

Finally, your claim that I have ‘form’ for evading genuine discussion re what really happened to Madeleine is false. I would also add that your repeating this claim at regular intervals is unlikely to enhance your case.

As usual you reply with a fog of obfuscation.

I am trying to keep the questions to the answerable set.

I asked you questions over a week ago that you refuse to answer and use such obfuscation to avoid answering.

You have already admitted that you were mistaken about Eddie reacting to dried blood- and now agree that a single reaction from Eddie (without a negative from Keela) could be simply to the dried blood of a currently living person. As with the tango, it takes two (dogs) to indicate cadaver scent- positive from Eddie and a negative from Keela to indicate 'no blood'.

Now returning to an answerable question:

How accurate/inaccurate are Eddie and Keela? Are they 100% accurate as you seem to claim, or do they have a level of accuracy/inaccuracy as every other scent dog seem to have.

Over to you to back your beliefs up with verifiable statements, preferably from an independent and respected source- you will find a series of references to the literature above.

 

[Tony Bennett]

FACTS FOUND PROVED BY THE PORTUGUESE APPEAL COURT IN THE JOANA CIPRIANO MURDER CASE [PART 1]

II. RATIONALE
9. Facts according to court appeal9. 1. Facts found:
a) the defendants are brothers [siblings - T.B.] to each other;

b) the defendant AA never had certain jobs or residence, living inside a car, or home of his brothers, surviving at the expense of odd jobs, carried out in various locations;

c) the defendant AA manifests contempt for human life - the result of social maladjustment and emotional coldness - anti-sociais/psicopáticas trends and has difficulty with impulse control, which leads him to be aggressive, trying to resolve conflicts through such aggressiveness, feeling no remorse for the consequences of acts that so conducts, trampling on the rights, wishes or feelings of others;

d) by a final judgment, and judgment of 10.11.1993, the defendant was convicted in AA penalty of four years in prison for practicing on 10.02.1992, a crime as attempted murder, p. and p. the arts. 22, 23, 74 and 131 of the Code Penal, consisting of such judgment that the defendant was persuaded by a third party who lived with a sister of the accused (GG) to take the life of another before had left him blind, exchange for $ 20,000 00 and a motor tricycle (see the certificate of fls. 675 ss which is hereby incorporated by play for all legal purposes);

e) the defendant expresses BB socially deviant behavior in terms of norms, values ​​and responsibilities, emotional instability and difficulty in expressing frustration with their socialization interpersonal relationships characterized by immature, superficial and narcissistic, which are salient features of manipulation (for satisfaction of own needs) and aggression (particularly sadistic tone), stressing in his personality the absence of empathy and insensitivity, which leads to contempt for the rights of the defendant, needs and feelings of others, for those driving their aggression, with weak capacity to feel remorse, have borderline personality traits with anti-sociais/psicopáticos, narcissistic and schizoid;f) the defendant BB, who had six children by five relationships throughout his life has come to show some disinterest in older children;

g) in relation to the eldest daughter, EE, currently live as father and grandmother in Olhão, there left him with 11 months of age, it is never interesting, not healing to know the same for 14 years;

h) the second son, FF, who lived with her paternal grandmother and lives with a paternal aunt in Messines, was also left handed them to his father, is not it more interesting;

i) the fourth son, HH, who now lives with his father in Porches, when she was seven months was left by the defendant BB alone at home, secure in the chair, having thus been found by neighbors who were aware of the situation;

j) at the time the defendant went to live with BB II, the relationship that he had two sons, JJ and KK;

l) the third son had been CC, born 31.05.1996, daughter of LL;

m) the smallest DC, in September 2004, was 8 years old, thin and with a height between 1.20 meters and 1.40 meters, (2)

n) the smallest CC was sometimes sad;

o) the defendant BB did not pursue any occupation;

p) when the defendant was living with a partner II, the smallest CC helped her mother in some household chores, and sometimes helped clean the house, was the younger brothers and shopped;q) before the defendant BB to find living with a partner II, intended that fail to have the lowest CC in charge, having left it, with 5 months of age with his father, LL - who was not related since the early pregnancy - which ended up a 'giving back' about 2 days later, and later returned to deliver it to the father, who did not want to stick with it;

r) in September 2003, the defendant left the BB CC delivered to a couple of people with alcohol problems and a daughter in bed with infectious disease, in a house without any conditions, for about two or three weeks;

s) on the first day of classes in the lower DC Primary School Figueira, in the academic year 2003/2004, the defendant did not follow the BB to the lower school, having come to DC with a neighbor, who asked not to help find way;

t) from another time, it led to lower neighbor to the hospital, at a time when it was visible being sick with a bad cough;

u) at dawn on September 12, 2004, the defendant AA, after having incompatibilizado UU with his brother, was raised to BB's house, carrying her clothes, and by day 12, remained in the house, situated in the village of Figueira - Mexilhoeira Grande, in Portimão area of ​​this region;

v) in the late afternoon of that day 12 returned home to his sister, the defendant BB, and the children of this, CC, JJ and KK;

x) at about 20 pm that day on September 12, the defendant sent the BB CC purchase a carton of milk and two cans at an establishment called "Pastry ...", located in Figueira, about 420 meters from the house ;

z) the room of the house where the defendant resided BB, is located immediately after the entrance into the house and the door which gives access to the street has a handle on the outside that allows immediate entry to the residence;aa) the smallest CC returned home coming "Pastry ...", where he had purchased the food mentioned above;

ab) at any given time, for reasons not specifically determined, both defendants began together to give repeated blows to the head of the lower CC, leading her to hit her head on the corner of the wall, which is visible bleeding from the mouth nose and temple, thanks to the wall of conflicts, which also caused the collapse of the lower and death, then stopping the activity of the defendants;

ac) were the smallest traces of blood on the walls and floor of the room in various places, and also near the entrance;

ad) the accused made sure of the death of CC, verifying that did not breathe or react and then not wanting to be blamed for the death of his daughter and niece, decided to prevent any such death was known to others;

ae) well, soon decided they had to make was not found in the house that there are any signs of what had just finished practice, the lower body was never found and that, preferably, be created in the belief that all the least would have been taken by others;

af) therefore, the defendant was in BB house, washing the wall and floor where there were signs of blood DC, and the place where the minor was dropped after death, using either a mop bucket and its;ag), and as they knew that the companion of defendant BB - II - and this friend, MM, were about to get home and can find out what had happened if there came to be cleared before the remains at about 21h 30m AA left the defendant, addressing the "Pastry ....", where he met with the II and MM, who were already there, and who said that the smaller CC had not returned home;

ah) when the three returned home, the defendant BB had already cleaned the bloodstains found there, and also noted that the smaller CC had not returned home after making purchases;

CONT.

 

[Tony Bennett]

FACTS FOUND IN THE JOANA CIPRIANO MURDER CASE BY THE PORTUGUESE APPEAL COURT: PART 2

ai) compared to that by the defendant, the MM II and decided to go look for the smallest, while the defendants were in the house;

aj) then decided the defendants, jointly cut the lower body to allow the same store in freezer of your room; to achieve that goal, the defendants muniram up a knife and a saw to cut metal that were in housing, tools able to get the results they wanted, in the span of about 30 minutes;

al) with such tools, helping each other, the defendants cut the body of the CC, separating the head from the trunk and cutting the legs by the knee area;

an) bits of each body was placed in bags of plastic - in the head, trunk, and in another part of the legs and the two legs below the knees in a third - and after they have a node at the opening of the bag containing the head , tried at least three bags in place such freezer compartments, leaving the smaller blood in various parts of the interior of the second drawer cabinet;

ao) the defendants did not put the shoes that had the smallest shoe bags, having stayed home all pairs of shoes that used the least that summer;

ap) for the lowest ever be dead for about two hours, the body has not left much blood;

aq) between 22h 30m and 23h, the defendant joined the BB II and MM companion, to whom reiterated that the CC had disappeared, and only then moved to "Pastry ....." and asked the owner (NN) if the CC had been there, saying after she had disappeared;

ar) however, the defendant informed of anything the police, despite the GNR military service in Figueira, since there arose a popular festival called "Festival of the Cockle," was the third person (NN) that did, telephone, 0h and 44m for the September 13, when he learned that the defendant had not done yet, and as a result of the aforementioned phone call, the defendant ended up talking to the GNR elements of Figueira near the church;

as) at the time the defendant said he had not phoned for not having money in the phone;

at) later, at about 2 am, the defendant bought cakes at a bakery located in the same locality;

au) on the morning of the 13th, the defendant went to the BB Tour GNR in Lagos, accompanied by the defendant AA, where he lodged a complaint with the disappearance of CC;

av) and third party intervention, family II of his companion, began to be truly widespread the alleged 'disappearance' and distributed photographs of the CC, because until then the defendants had intended not to alert the authorities;ax) in the late evening of day 13, the defendants left the house together, taking a bag;

az) AA the defendant remained at the home of defendant BB to 14 days, length of time during which the two defendants, so that was not possible to determine, transported the remains of CC to an unknown location, thereby giving effect to the intention who had proposed - to prevent the location of those remains - even today it is not located such remains as were not located the cutting tools used, the defendants hid in unknown location;

aaa) the defendant BB gave interviews to the media, trying to make believe that he had actually gone lower, version before that held many of the people who were interested in the fate of smaller and questioned about the matter;

aab) in these interviews about the case the defendant BB sometimes spoke of her daughter in the past and was wearing black blouse;

aac) ticks, including so-called "pellets" (ticks in its early adulthood) have receivers chemical stimuli associated with the temperature which allow them to detect the existence of the own chemical components of blood;

aad) in 18.9 days, the defendant BB acquired oil and a mop of steel, which washed the house, taking advantage to erase almost all signs of what had occurred there, leaving only traces of human blood inside the house, contaminated the products used;

aae) a nominee of defendant BB, criminal investigation police officers traveled to the home of the paternal grandmother of the eldest daughter of the defendant BB (EE) in Olhão, looking for the CC, and investigated whether a person of Moroccan nationality would have taken the smallest;

afa) when present at a clinical psychologist in the context of expertise within the sphere of the case, the defendant BB referred to the existence of some neighboring Brazilian nationals who might have brought with them to DC, because that would have two cars "good" and have been would come away from the location on the same date on which the smallest had "disappeared";

aag) following particulars of the defendant AA, PJ sought elements of the body of the CC in a landfill next to the brown dirt road that gives access to Mexilhoeira then other places nearby, still in Poco Barreto, a car crashed in Silves, under the bridge over the Rio Arade;

aah) the defendants were able to disrupt the activities of research and prevented the location of the remains of the lower CC who had retired life;

aai) activities described above were carried out by the defendants in concerted efforts and intentions, deliberately, free and conscious, and knowing those behaviors are punished by law;

aaj) as well as regards the taking of life in DC, your direct family (daughter and niece), which they did by force, taking advantage of the same can not defend itself (taking into account the age and physique ) and employing well know that the force, with regard to where they reached the vital body (head) repeatedly and violence, causing the head embatesse lower wall, it could take life, which result agreed , yet this does not cease its activity;
aal) not hindering such a circumstance the less to be dependent on the mother and family of both direct and should be defended by them and not the victim;

aam) so too deliberate, free, conscious and knowing the criminality of conduct, carried out the action described above to cut the body of CC, showing total insensitivity, knowing that so offended the community due respect to the dead, acting with a view to the body of CC would no longer be found, hiding it in a place not suitable for this purpose, so try not to be blamed for his death;

aan) the defendant BB does not have a criminal record;

aao) the defendant AA, in addition to the abovementioned conviction in e), was also convicted in 1995 for a final judgment and the commission of a crime of robbery, in pity, concurrent with the sentence imposed for the crime of attempted murder, 3 years and 8 months in prison, in 2001, a crime by driving the vehicle illegally, was sentenced by final judgment, the penalty of a fine of 90 days, and in 2003, the practice of a crime of illegal vehicle driving, was sentenced by final judgment, the penalty of six months and 15 days imprisonment, suspended on probation upon fulfillment of conditions, from the suspension to be revoked;

aap) as qualifications, the defendant has the BB 3rd class, never had any profession and married 18 years;

aaq) as qualifications, the defendant has the AA grade 4 and since leaving school started working, but always working undifferentiated services and no employment;

aas) the defendants were born within a family (parents and nine siblings), which highlighted the alcoholic habits of the father and the economic difficulties.

++++++++++++++++

[After I posted this comment on Jill Havern's forum, a poster called mira2 posted the following comment]

Tony,

The case of Joana was nothing remotely to do with Madeleine McCann.

Joanna's case is a tool being used by McCann Inc. to discredit the only person who can bring justice to Madeleine.

The real story about Joana and her life needs to be told for the world to understand how sick her mother was, and let it be told the real story about Joana's brothers and sisters, then see how long it takes for Saint Kate to distance herself. I know that here are restrictions on reporting here due to the minors rights, but there has to also be a safeguard that prevents anyone abusing those restrictions ?

 

[Tony Bennett]

Pretty young blonde girl tragically disappears. English speaking world is shocked. No one really has access to the facts...

On the contrary, J_Moore, in this case we have an abundance of facts.

During the summer of 2008, the Portuguese Police released, on a series of DVDs, 11,000 documents in this case, in both Portuguese and English. These documents contain a great many facts, not least a whole series of contradictions and changes of story as between the McCanns and their 7 friends who were out there with them.

In addition, some of us have researched many other facts. One of my special interests has been how the McCanns have spent the £3 to £6 million which they have raised from a very generous British public.

During 2007, the McCanns' leading private investigator was Antonio Giminez Raso. But in February 2008, he was arrested and thrown into jail on suspicion of theft of £25 million of cocaine from a boat in Barcelona Harbour and corruption in public office - he was a senior inspector in the Spanish police at the time the theft took place. He was accused of leaking information for money to a 27-strong and particularly vicious criminal gang. Admittedly he was found not guilty this year, after spending 4 years in jail, but not before the judge stated that he and several other detectivers had been 'far too close' to senior gang members.

In 2007, the McCanns switched to Kevin Halligen as their lead investigator, employing him for 6 months at a cost of £500,000 plus expenses. However, he was on the run at the time from the U.S. authorities for a major £1.5 million fraud, and after working for the McCanns, he wnet to ground. He was eventually spotted living it up in a £700-a-night Oxfordshire hotel, from where he was immediately taken to one of Britain's top security prisons. There he fought a losing 3-year long battle against extradition - he was bundled across to the U.S. last month, where he faces a major fraud trial.

Such are the characters that the McCann Team have used in their 'search' for Madeleine.

By the way, their 5-year-long, £3 - £6 million private investigation has so far yielded the following information about who might have taken Madeleine, and where she is:

Nothing.

It is because of the facts of this case, not the absence of them, that we keep on going, and keep on digging.

 

[sadie]

Please can somebody tell me how to post photographs/images on this forum?

Simple language pls and step by step if you would be kind enough.

My understanding of computers is very limited.