Madeleine McCann: Detective who said parents faked abduction wins libel case

First topic message reminder :

I know this ruling happened in Portugal but I've posted here as it's just as much English news)


Madeleine McCann: Detective who said parents faked abduction wins libel case

The Portuguese detective who accused Madeleine McCann's parents of faking their daughter's abduction has won his appeal against a libel ruling.

Goncalo Amaral had been ordered in April last year to pay Kate and Gerry McCann €500,000 (£394,000) in damages.

The McCanns had stated they would put all the pay out money back into the search for their missing daughter, MailOnline reports.

The former detective has been embroiled in a libel battle after he wrote and published a book called The Truth of the Lie in 2008 where he claimed the McCanns lied about Madeleine's kidnapping after the three-year-old died in their Algarve apartment in 2007

The McCann's lawyer, Isabel Duarte, responded to this latest decision by saying: "I have just learnt that the three appeal court judges have decided to overturn the original decision in favour of my clients.

"It was a unanimous decision. The original decision has been revoked.

Search for Madeleine McCann continues
"I and the McCanns are obviously disappointed but I am not surprised because one of the judges ruled in favour of a previous appeal overturning a ban on the book."

Detective Chief Superintendent, Mike Duthie, from Scotland Yard's homicide squad said there was still hope Madeleine could be found alive.



Home Secretary, Theresa May, granted the Metropolitan Police a £95,000 budget to continue the hunt for the missing child for another six months.

@@@@@@@@@@@

Good news as far as I'm concerned. Everyone should have the opportunity to read what a police officer has to say about such a high-profile case.

Raggamuffin wrote:I've also read that this chap is now going to sue the McCanns.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-to-be-sued-for-damages-by-portuguese-detective-who-won-case-over-a6992566.html

Good. I hope he sues them from arsehole to Christmas.

I have read the book and I have read extensively about this case. I have not seen one single piece of evidence of an abduction.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I'd already read about the sniffer dog and the car, but when you mentioned the car I wanted to check when they hired it, so I googled it. There are all kinds of stuff about blood/DNA/bodily fluids being allegedly found in it.

The mccanns hired a car about 3 weeks after the girl vanished...


This car was almost new and had never previously known to have had anyone dead in it etc...



But was later found to contain human remains of dna/bodily fluids with an almost exact match to the missing girl...


Two sniffer dogs also positively identified car... one trained to detect human blood/fluids... the other trained to detect dead bodies!!!

Hence my earlier question. Where was the body supposed to have been for those three weeks?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



The mccanns hired a car about 3 weeks after the girl vanished...


This car was almost new and had never previously known to have had anyone dead in it etc...



But was later found to contain human remains of dna/bodily fluids with an almost exact match to the missing girl...


Two sniffer dogs also positively identified car... one trained to detect human blood/fluids... the other trained to detect dead bodies!!!

Hence my earlier question. Where was the body supposed to have been for those three weeks?

Tunnels under the church. The vicar gave them a key so they could come and go as they pleased

Miffs2 wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Hence my earlier question. Where was the body supposed to have been for those three weeks?

Tunnels under the church. The vicar gave them a key so they could come and go as they pleased

Where was the body before they got those keys?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:
Tunnels under the church. The vicar gave them a key so they could come and go as they pleased

Where was the body before they got those keys?

Dunno? Wherever Gerry McCann was taking her when seen by the Smith family?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:



The mccanns hired a car about 3 weeks after the girl vanished...


This car was almost new and had never previously known to have had anyone dead in it etc...



But was later found to contain human remains of dna/bodily fluids with an almost exact match to the missing girl...


Two sniffer dogs also positively identified car... one trained to detect human blood/fluids... the other trained to detect dead bodies!!!

Hence my earlier question. Where was the body supposed to have been for those three weeks?

Raggs... do you believe there is enough evidence to support the theory that the car was used to transport the dead girls body or not...?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:
Hence my earlier question. Where was the body supposed to have been for those three weeks?

Raggs... do you believe there is enough evidence to support the theory that the car was used to transport the dead girls body or not...?

  Someone pull the internet connection for this LAME - HYSTERICALLY DRIVEN - LAME rational that is falling out of Tommy's head onto his hands and being typed out here for all to   at! 

A.) "never previously known to have a dead body"; Yipper, now that's a question that might need to be updated and included for any future car rental company!  Do You Plan On Moving/Transporting Any Human Remains '???' and if so would you please be sure to let the rental agency know so we could make appropriate auto detail cleaning arrangements? --- YIPPER, I see that as a highly plausible question that needs immediate attention

B.) "one trained to detect human blood/fluids... the other trained to detect dead bodies" when and if you ever have the time to define the training methods for THAT SPECIFIC type of dog...or please come back and enlighten all of us here  
Or better yet --- give me a dissertation on the scientific way a 'BODY' could decompose and not leave any 'blood/fluids' around to saturate the general area that the body has been dumped/moved/jiggled/touched --- PLEASE, inquiring minds are needing to know?

C.) "support the theory"...  hmmm, first you CLAIM it's all FACT {read da book} and now your demanding a answer about your "support of the THEORY"    For a member that can't seem to read my avatar/nickname and whines when members IGNORE your sorry arse...you do provide a certain amount of hysterical front row seat humor!   Homer Simpson type humor >  

If you want to learn about training methods Google is your friend.
Eddie was a cadaver dog, Keela was trained in blood detection.

Miffs2 wrote:If you want to learn about training methods Google is your friend.
Eddie was a cadaver dog, Keela was trained in blood detection.

Eddie the supposed cadaver dog claimed to be highly trained though this shown to be flawed, if you read the evidence was problematic. Missing items many times to then later alert why the Police did not take this seriously, as unreliable. She even had to be coached towards the car by the owner. So yes people should read how all these issues were highlighted in the evidence and how people go off animals as if they are infallible is a flawed reason in itself

Specsaver... wtf are you waffling on about..!?


Nobody had ever died in apartment before or in hire car... the police checked!!!


The hire car was rented 3 weeks after girl vanished


2 sniffer dogs were used... one trained to detect death and other trained to detect blood/bofily fluids.... both indicated the car... fluids were found in boot of car... tested and almost exact match to missing girl.


I would say that was evidence to support the theory


You obviously know nothing about the case... I suggest you read the detectives book which is a detailed account of all the facts.

2 dogs were used and as seen the evidence was poor where the dog had to be coached to go to items where it missed them many times previously, which brings into question the reliability of the dog, who in a previous case also screwed up.
Again animals are not fool proof and to think they are is why people make mistakes and again he self taught this animal, which leads lots to be questioned over how good this dog was. I do not want to dish the dog, but going off claims made is not the bases for any facts, especially when the Police themselves raised these very points

Miffs2 wrote:If you want to learn about training methods Google is your friend.
Eddie was a cadaver dog, Keela was trained in blood detection.

And I'll allow that you would find such highly trained dogs in Portugal ??? Highly UNLIKELY...
And given the obtuse method that you've chose to 'Chicken or the Egg' this discussion when it comes to what/when/how a human life form becomes a C A D A V E R. 

 Sweet Jesus...seriously SOME people place so much expertise upon any given report about 'DOG' searches when it's been proven that SOME TRAINERS just aren't all that and the bag of chips that they profess to be! 

Should you want proven reliable source and proven results and something educational to watch >>> http://cadaverdog.com/  let your fingers be your guiding light.

And as I've stated numerous times: a 'HIT' doesn't mean that it was the little girls body!  But just keep cheering the former officers 'BOOK' as if it's the Holy Grail of TRUTH...it's making him very wealthy - INDEED

Director of Search Team is Charged with Faking Evidence
Knight Ridder Newspapers - by David Ashenfelter
Posted on Mon, Jun. 23, 2003
(KRT) - A Midland, Mich., woman who has received international acclaim using a cadaver-sniffing dog to crack homicide cases was charged in federal court Monday with planting evidence at crime scenes.
http://leerburg.com/fake.htm 

You really are a twat specsaver... you obviously know nothing about this case.

Tommy Monk wrote:You really are a twat specsaver... you obviously know nothing about this case.

And for your ASS-swiping my name; I'd suggest that you pull your head out and come up for some fresh air ~~~ might change your FOUL MOOD and provide you with a brighter perspective on the world.


Or not...and return to your immature WHINING 'how people don't acknowledge me!'...
Poor BABY!!! 

You obviously know nothing about this case.

  I fully understand how difficult it is to comprehend when you live with your head shoved up your own wahhh-zoo; but back up there when I posted {yes, fuckwit} that I'd used your link and read the first 2 chapters ---

Between the officers whining recount and printed verbiage about his own personal issues at home and with his BOSS and your rudimentary ASSsumptions and utter BS --- are you getting a cut from the profits for total book sales? 
Since you've found this 'Tell All' to be sooooo FACT FILLED and yet you keep asking other members questions ---   you have great depth for falling for any pure BS that you WANT TO BELIEVE in and close the door on the rational thought but throw the door wide open for fellow FUCKWITS to write crap for their own AGENDA! 
I don't have a dog in the verbal tug of war {not even a cadaver dog} but for you and your proven lack of consistent thought process, to keep screeching that this BOOK IS FACTUAL...is sufficient reason for me to DOUBT everything you post! 

The book is free to read online.

The first 2 chapters are just setting the scene and giving a bit of background etc...


Keep reading... it gets very interesting indeed!


I'm not asking anyone any questions... except if they have read the book.


And yes you are right... people LIE... especially the mccanns in this case!!!

So Tommy censuring debate.

If you are not answering questions then you make yourself redundant in this debate

Bye then

I said I'm not ASKING any questions dodge... as specsaver tried claiming I was...

Tommy Monk wrote:I said I'm not asking any questions dodge...

Please do us all a favor and 'PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ANAL TRACK'...

Raggs... do you believe there is enough evidence to support the theory that the car was used to transport the dead girls body or not...?

Good Grief...you're the sure fire topic killer and it's your own topic you've become owner of this by your willful rants and promotion for book sales ...

Raggs raised the possibility... I only wanted to know if she was basing that on evidence or not...


That was one question... and this is not my thread...

It does not matter who started the debate.

A debate will flow in what ever way it does

Best you get used to that and if you cannot answer questions and points raised you render yourself redundent

Specsaver... you are showing your stupidity by trying to claim to not be interested but then also carry on posting rubbish about it... and willful ignorance by refusing to read the book that tells the fact based story of the investigation.

https://youtu.be/RP30PRieuU4


Kate mccann... lying under oath...

Lol the video makes more poor claims off the dogs

Its embarrassing to watch and read such pitiful; drivel

Bodily fluids were found and examined by forensics...


Almost exact match to the missing girl.


Chances of it not being from her was a billion to one!!!


Found in the boot of the hire car that wasn't hired until 3 weeks after girl vanished.

Tommy Monk wrote:Bodily fluids were found and examined by forensics...


Almost exact match to the missing girl.


Chances of it not being from her was a billion to one!!!


Found in the boot of the hire car that wasn't hired until 3 weeks after girl vanished.

No they were not a match, if they were a match, it would have stated they were a match

Having similarities, is not a match, full stop

Again why has she not been declared dead?

Why have they not been arrested?

It was almost exact match!!!


A couple of the markers were too degraded to get readings from... but the rest was a Match!!!


And the chances of it coming from someone else is a billion to one!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:It was almost exact match!!!


A couple of the markers were too degraded to get readings from... but the rest was a Match!!!


And the chances of it coming from someone else is a billion to one!!!

Wrong, it was not a match, that is a fact.

The Dog also was unreliable based on the evidence taken where it ignored many of the items it later alerted to, showing that the dog, clearly may have easily alerted to something else. If the dog has missed the same item after evening sniffing this, then the Dogs reliability comes into question. Hence why even the Police stated as such in the reports

It was almost exact match!!!


A couple of the markers were too degraded to get readings from... but the rest was a Match!!!


And the chances of it coming from someone else is a billion to one!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:It was almost exact match!!!


A couple of the markers were too degraded to get readings from... but the rest was a Match!!!


And the chances of it coming from someone else is a billion to one!!!

You can keep claiming something not a match is a match all day long, that is not going to make it a match

End of story

Again the cadaver dog as seen was unreliable, based on the evidence and based on the errors stated.
The claims to its training is also easily showed to be flawed based off the owners testimony and again where the dog had made a previous error in another case

Well trained dogs are a different matter, this cadaver dog, was not properly trained and it showed in the evidence

Now again based on your supposed match and evidence, why has she not been declared dead?

Why have they not been arrested

If we're ever allowed to have our 'SIGNATURES' back...here's the perfect mantra for little Tommy:

READ DA BOOK
It's 'ALMOST' an exact match
Support of the THEORY = FACTS

  

sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Because I have other things to do, and reading about other bits doesn't take very long. You mentioned the hire car, so I googled it.

I get pretty fed with people going on about the McCanns.   His book was to try and cover up the fact that the Portugese police royally fucked up the investigation.  As far as I remember they didn't hire the damn car until 2 weeks after she disappeared and the truth is, from proper accounts of that time, they were spending all their time walking the streets looking for her.  No, they should not have left the kids alone, but that is hindsight.  When it happened British parents on holiday all over the world were doing exactly the same thing, and if they had used the hotel service, all that the hotel would have done was exactly what they did, sending someone to check every 20 minutes.   Those parents have the horror of not knowing what has happened to their child, whether she is dead or whether she was taken by the peado ring and has been suffering ever since.   They have spent their lives since trying to make sure she is not forgotten and has every chance to be found.   Most parents would have been to overcome with grief and would have withdrawn into themselves, so good luck to them.   I wouldn't be in their shoes for anything in the world.

And because you have said in this post exactly what I would have said if I could have been bothered...(though you said it better) have a .

Tommy Monk wrote:Raggs raised the possibility... I only wanted to know if she was basing that on evidence or not...


That was one question... and this is not my thread...

I forgot what the question was now.

I'll try and read the book Tommy, but I need a bit of time. Then I'll have to put it all in context with maps of the areas and other info. You might be sorry you asked me to read it in the end.

4EVER2 wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:If you want to learn about training methods Google is your friend.
Eddie was a cadaver dog, Keela was trained in blood detection.

And I'll allow that you would find such highly trained dogs in Portugal ??? Highly UNLIKELY...
And given the obtuse method that you've chose to 'Chicken or the Egg' this discussion when it comes to what/when/how a human life form becomes a C A D A V E R. 

 Sweet Jesus...seriously SOME people place so much expertise upon any given report about 'DOG' searches when it's been proven that SOME TRAINERS just aren't all that and the bag of chips that they profess to be! 

Should you want proven reliable source and proven results and something educational to watch >>> http://cadaverdog.com/  let your fingers be your guiding light.

And as I've stated numerous times: a 'HIT' doesn't mean that it was the little girls body!  But just keep cheering the former officers 'BOOK' as if it's the Holy Grail of TRUTH...it's making him very wealthy - INDEED

Director of Search Team is Charged with Faking Evidence
Knight Ridder Newspapers - by David Ashenfelter
Posted on Mon, Jun. 23, 2003
(KRT) - A Midland, Mich., woman who has received international acclaim using a cadaver-sniffing dog to crack homicide cases was charged in federal court Monday with planting evidence at crime scenes.
http://leerburg.com/

The dogs weren't Portuguese they were taken to Portugal.

Cadaver scent, detectable by the dog, occurs from 10 minutes after death

The McCanns made money, not Amaral

The woman planted evidence, not the dog.

Miffs2 wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:

And I'll allow that you would find such highly trained dogs in Portugal ??? Highly UNLIKELY...
And given the obtuse method that you've chose to 'Chicken or the Egg' this discussion when it comes to what/when/how a human life form becomes a C A D A V E R. 

 Sweet Jesus...seriously SOME people place so much expertise upon any given report about 'DOG' searches when it's been proven that SOME TRAINERS just aren't all that and the bag of chips that they profess to be! 

Should you want proven reliable source and proven results and something educational to watch >>> http://cadaverdog.com/  let your fingers be your guiding light.

And as I've stated numerous times: a 'HIT' doesn't mean that it was the little girls body!  But just keep cheering the former officers 'BOOK' as if it's the Holy Grail of TRUTH...it's making him very wealthy - INDEED

The dogs weren't Portuguese they were taken to Portugal.

Cadaver scent, detectable by the dog, occurs from 10 minutes after death

The McCanns made money, not Amaral

The woman planted evidence, not the dog.

He has made money and will make money

How do you think he could afford trials and appeals?

The dog was as seen by the video and written evidence clearly badly trained.
It even sniffed one of the toys, ignored it went off to other items and only later alerted to the toy.
That shows flaws, let alone how the dog was coached to come to the car.
Dogs are not foolproof and the fact you think they are based off a dog with only the owners claim to be expertly trained is flawed in istelf.
This is the problem with people who base most of their evidence claiming she is dead based off one single aspect
This poor dog, who's evidence when it boils down to, is based on faith and nothing more

4EVER2 wrote:If we're ever allowed to have our 'SIGNATURES' back...here's the perfect mantra for little Tommy:

READ DA BOOK
It's 'ALMOST' an exact match
Support of the THEORY = FACTS

  

The willful ignorance continues...

Tommy Monk wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:If we're ever allowed to have our 'SIGNATURES' back...here's the perfect mantra for little Tommy:

  

The willful ignorance continues...

Ignorance is not knowing the facts of what happened to Maddie and nobody has those facts.

All we know is she disappeared

Raggamuffin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Raggs raised the possibility... I only wanted to know if she was basing that on evidence or not...


That was one question... and this is not my thread...

I forgot what the question was now.

I'll try and read the book Tommy, but I need a bit of time. Then I'll have to put it all in context with maps of the areas and other info. You might be sorry you asked me to read it in the end.

You'll be glad you did read it...!

didge wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:
The dogs weren't Portuguese they were taken to Portugal.

Cadaver scent, detectable by the dog, occurs from 10 minutes after death

The McCanns made money, not Amaral

The woman planted evidence, not the dog.

He has made money and will make money

How do you think he could afford trials and appeals?

The dog was as seen by the video and written evidence clearly badly trained.
It even sniffed one of the toys, ignored it went off to other items and only later alerted to the toy.
That shows flaws, let alone how the dog was coached to come to the car.
Dogs are not foolproof and the fact you think they are based off a dog with only the owners claim to be expertly trained is flawed in istelf.
This is the problem with people who base most of their evidence claiming she is dead based off one single aspect
This poor dog, who's evidence when it boils down to, is based on faith and nothing more

Hope AmaralAmaral makes a fortune.

How do you know he can afford it?

Funny you don't accept what the dog found in the car.  The McCanns did, they tried to explain it away as sweaty shoes, spoiled meat or dirty nappies. Of course we all would take dirty nappies and rotten meat with them when they moved house

Miffs2 wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Where was the body before they got those keys?

Dunno? Wherever Gerry McCann was taking her when seen by the Smith family?

That alleged sighting was around 10pm, yes?

At around 9pm Gerry McCann checked on the children. At 9.30 Matthew Oldfield offered the check the children when he went to check his own. He didn't actually see the McCann children properly. At around 10pm Kate went to check and she raised that alarm at that time.

So if the man who the Smiths saw was Gerry McCann, he would have been missing from the table for some time and someone would surely have noticed. I presume he came back after the 9pm check? In addition to that, if Maddie was dead before 9.30, why would the McCanns have taken Matthew Oldfield up on his offer? They couldn't have known that he wouldn't actually look in the room properly. Also, if Maddie died after 9.30, why would the immediate reaction of Gerry McCann be to hide the body?

The mccanns also accepted the scent of death dog was right... but tried to explain that away too...!

Miffs2 wrote:

didge wrote:

He has made money and will make money

How do you think he could afford trials and appeals?

The dog was as seen by the video and written evidence clearly badly trained.
It even sniffed one of the toys, ignored it went off to other items and only later alerted to the toy.
That shows flaws, let alone how the dog was coached to come to the car.
Dogs are not foolproof and the fact you think they are based off a dog with only the owners claim to be expertly trained is flawed in istelf.
This is the problem with people who base most of their evidence claiming she is dead based off one single aspect
This poor dog, who's evidence when it boils down to, is based on faith and nothing more

Hope AmaralAmaral makes a fortune.

How do you know he can afford it?

Funny you don't accept what the dog found in the car.  The McCanns did, they tried to explain it away as sweaty shoes, spoiled meat or dirty nappies. Of course we all would take dirty nappies and rotten meat with them when they moved house

Again how much to you think trials and lawyers cost Nems?
What does it matter what the mcCanns think to the dogs actions?
What matters is both I and the police found the dog to be flawed and clearly not trained expertly based off the many inconsistencies.
You see you play off a falsehood, what people think.
How would you think based in the same situation if you believed your daughter had been kidnapped?
100% the same by any chance or do you never ever then use Empathic intelligence?

didge wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:



Hope AmaralAmaral makes a fortune.

How do you know he can afford it?

Funny you don't accept what the dog found in the car.  The McCanns did, they tried to explain it away as sweaty shoes, spoiled meat or dirty nappies. Of course we all would take dirty nappies and rotten meat with them when they moved house

Again how much to you think trials and lawyers cost Nems?
What does it matter what the mcCanns think to the dogs actions?
What matters is both I and the police found the dog to be flawed and clearly not trained expertly based off the many inconsistencies.
You see you play off a falsehood, what people think.
How would you think based in the same situation if you believed your daughter had been kidnapped?
100% the same by any chance or do you never ever then use Empathic intelligence?

All the available evidence points the same way.


There is no evidence at all to suggest otherwise.


Your opinion about the dogs is irrelevant.

Tommy Monk wrote:

didge wrote:

Again how much to you think trials and lawyers cost Nems?
What does it matter what the mcCanns think to the dogs actions?
What matters is both I and the police found the dog to be flawed and clearly not trained expertly based off the many inconsistencies.
You see you play off a falsehood, what people think.
How would you think based in the same situation if you believed your daughter had been kidnapped?
100% the same by any chance or do you never ever then use Empathic intelligence?

All the available evidence points the same way.


There is no evidence at all to suggest otherwise.


Your opinion about the dogs is irrelevant.

1) Subjective based on your own opinion

2) Then why has she not been declared dead?

3) Why have they not been arrested?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:
Dunno? Wherever Gerry McCann was taking her when seen by the Smith family?

That alleged sighting was around 10pm, yes?

At around 9pm Gerry McCann checked on the children. At 9.30 Matthew Oldfield offered the check the children when he went to check his own. He didn't actually see the McCann children properly. At around 10pm Kate went to check and she raised that alarm at that time.

So if the man who the Smiths saw was Gerry McCann, he would have been missing from the table for some time and someone would surely have noticed. I presume he came back after the 9pm check? In addition to that, if Maddie was dead before 9.30, why would the McCanns have taken Matthew Oldfield up on his offer? They couldn't have known that he wouldn't actually look in the room properly. Also, if Maddie died after 9.30, why would the immediate reaction of Gerry McCann be to hide the body?

How do we know what checks were made and when?

didge wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:



Hope AmaralAmaral makes a fortune.

How do you know he can afford it?

Funny you don't accept what the dog found in the car.  The McCanns did, they tried to explain it away as sweaty shoes, spoiled meat or dirty nappies. Of course we all would take dirty nappies and rotten meat with them when they moved house

Again how much to you think trials and lawyers cost Nems?
What does it matter what the mcCanns think to the dogs actions?
What matters is both I and the police found the dog to be flawed and clearly not trained expertly based off the many inconsistencies.
You see you play off a falsehood, what people think.
How would you think based in the same situation if you believed your daughter had been kidnapped?
100% the same by any chance or do you never ever then use Empathic intelligence?

 What matters is what you think?!  Only to you Didge only to you!

My child would not have been placed in that situation. EVER. 

I have no empathy for the McCanns, none what so ever

The ones that we should feel for are the poor children of that hateful pair.

Miffs2 wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That alleged sighting was around 10pm, yes?

At around 9pm Gerry McCann checked on the children. At 9.30 Matthew Oldfield offered the check the children when he went to check his own. He didn't actually see the McCann children properly. At around 10pm Kate went to check and she raised that alarm at that time.

So if the man who the Smiths saw was Gerry McCann, he would have been missing from the table for some time and someone would surely have noticed. I presume he came back after the 9pm check? In addition to that, if Maddie was dead before 9.30, why would the McCanns have taken Matthew Oldfield up on his offer? They couldn't have known that he wouldn't actually look in the room properly. Also, if Maddie died after 9.30, why would the immediate reaction of Gerry McCann be to hide the body?

How do we know what checks were made and when?

Didn't the people who the McCanns were with give evidence? I presume Matthew Oldfield wasn't actually lying about going to check. The point is that if Maddie was dead and the McCanns knew it, they would hardly accept his offer, would they?

Miffs2 wrote:

didge wrote:

Again how much to you think trials and lawyers cost Nems?
What does it matter what the mcCanns think to the dogs actions?
What matters is both I and the police found the dog to be flawed and clearly not trained expertly based off the many inconsistencies.
You see you play off a falsehood, what people think.
How would you think based in the same situation if you believed your daughter had been kidnapped?
100% the same by any chance or do you never ever then use Empathic intelligence?

 What matters is what you think?!  Only to you Didge only to you!

My child would not have been placed in that situation. EVER. 

I have no empathy for the McCanns, none what so ever

The ones that we should feel for are the poor children of that hateful pair.

The point is being missed again, what matters is the Police know the evidence of the dog is inadmissible.

You then get emotional and allow anger to seep into our discussion
Please do not, I understand how and why you are angered over this, but would rather your views without that clouded judgement.
That is not knocking but seeing your reaction Nems

Like I said, most people have judged more off the night of them being out at dinner leaving them home alone
I can understand that, but you misread my point on about what matters to me and the police, because it is what matters to me in the end what is important to whether I think they are guilty or not, and that does not include anyone else, as it would not for you

Raggamuffin wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:
How do we know what checks were made and when?

Didn't the people who the McCanns were with give evidence? I presume Matthew Oldfield wasn't actually lying about going to check. The point is that if Maddie was dead and the McCanns knew it, they would hardly accept his offer, would they?

There were hints of sexual abuse too.