The Australian "Madeleine McCann" case

Freedom wrote:Caucasian has been stated previously.

I realise they said probably Caucasian and it was reported to be a female child, but the 2 reasons I gave are the only ones I could think of that could rule M out without DNA testing. Both seem unlikely though, so how else could she be ruled out?

chirpyinsect wrote:

Freedom wrote:Caucasian has been stated previously.

I realise they said probably Caucasian and it was reported to be a female child, but the 2 reasons I gave are the only ones I could think of that could rule M out without DNA testing. Both seem unlikely though, so how else could she be ruled out?

The only thing I can think of is hair colour perhaps

This is a very interesting, thought provoking and heart breaking story in itself given the way the msm are reporting on Calais this week. But it's also worth reading for the explanation of how info on missing persons including DNA profiles is communicated between counties. Definately no need for a trip down under at this stage.


http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2015/07/boys-who-could-see-england

chilli wrote:Definitely no need for a trip down under at this stage.

SPOILSPORT !

Bubblewrapped wrote:“A DNA profile is also being taken of the child, however, that will take longer.”

How can they say with 100% certainty its not Madeleine then....

Because they already know with 100% certainty, what DID happen to Madeleine?

Resistor wrote:

Bubblewrapped wrote:“A DNA profile is also being taken of the child, however, that will take longer.”

How can they say with 100% certainty its not Madeleine then....

Because they already know with 100% certainty, what DID happen to Madeleine?

Yes. What we don't know is whether they have any intention of trying to prove it, or are just looking for an alternative ending to the investigation.

froggy wrote:

Resistor wrote:

Bubblewrapped wrote:“A DNA profile is also being taken of the child, however, that will take longer.”

How can they say with 100% certainty its not Madeleine then....

Because they already know with 100% certainty, what DID happen to Madeleine?

Yes. What we don't know is whether they have any intention of trying to prove it, or are just looking for an alternative ending to the investigation.

But they can't say for certain at the moment exactly how many people were involved in what did happen to her.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:
But they can't say for certain at the moment exactly how many people were involved in what did happen to her.

Nor which people were then actively involved in the cover story, and which were merely stupid.

It might be, for example that the mothers genuinely believed the original story, ludicrous though it was,
but on arrival at PdL realised that it didn't hold water, which is why they were sent home.
They should be treated as witnesses, not suspects.
As with one of more of the "Fund" trustees in the early days.
Mitchell on the other hand is deeply involved in many aspects, and would have to be treated as a suspect in the Conspiracy,
- if there were one - and interviewed under caution.

Peter, IMO you're absolutely right about the "mothers" [on the Granny Home Express].

I can imagine the difficulties of "loyalty" in between family and friends. However, way back I once asked my Maman, what she would do, if she knew or even suspected something criminal in the family. She said, without hesitation: "As much as it would pain me, it would actually rip my heart out, but I would talk to the police." Unfortunately not everyone has my mothers compass & determination :-(

I was just having similar thoughts.

If it was me in such a situation, I don't think that there is any way that I could have lived with myself for being complicit in such a hoax.

PeterMac wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:
But they can't say for certain at the moment exactly how many people were involved in what did happen to her.

Nor which people were then actively involved in the cover story, and which were merely stupid.

It might be, for example that the mothers genuinely believed the original story, ludicrous though it was,
but on arrival at PdL realised that it didn't hold water, which is why they were sent home.
They should be treated as witnesses, not suspects.
As with one of more of the "Fund" trustees in the early days.
Mitchell on the other hand is deeply involved in many aspects, and would have to be treated as a suspect in the Conspiracy,
- if there were one - and interviewed under caution.

I agree with everything you've said PM, this investigation must go very wide and deep as to who knew what and when, who was covering for whom, who was involved in the Fund and was using money from it for their own enjoyment or "business" opportunities, no wonder it's taking so many years to come to a trial.

Freedom wrote:I was just having similar thoughts.

If it was me in such a situation, I don't think that there is any way that I could have lived with myself for being complicit in such a hoax.

***
Hi Maman II :-)

Freedom wrote:I was just having similar thoughts.

If it was me in such a situation, I don't think that there is any way that I could have lived with myself for being complicit in such a hoax.

But if it meant your remaining grandchildren being taken away and put in care, what would you do then?

I'm thankful that the situation hasn't arisen and I'm sure never will.

If it had, I hope that I or the other grandmother would have been able to take in the children ourselves.

Freedom wrote:I'm thankful that the situation hasn't arisen and I'm sure never will.

If it had, I hope that I or the other grandmother would have been able to take in the children ourselves.

That is not always the case, there has been a huge outcry in the press recently that grandparents were too old to be able to foster/adopt a grandchild(ren) and they were put into foster care, I can't remember the full story now, it was in the DM I think late last week.  I will find the link later.

ETA: I've just found the link with a quick search on Google, it refers to a Mother who has mental problems and her daughter was taken away, the Grandparents were denied custody of their granddaughter -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3170134/Grandparents-blocked-adopting-three-year-old-granddaughter-hit-wicked-treatment-shouldn-t-happen-civilised-society.html

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/madeleine-mccann-ruled-out-remains/2015/07/31/id/664863/


Special:
The newspaper said the fabric used in the quilt came from New York.

Not saying this is any thing to do with Madeline, Alchemy prints ?

labelnewyork.com/Symbolic Clothing - Zodiac, Free Masonry, Alchemy, Islam, and More. Home · My Account ... Stand out from the crowd by wearing Label New York. Find out more ...

Markus 2 wrote:http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/madeleine-mccann-ruled-out-remains/2015/07/31/id/664863/


Special:
The newspaper said the fabric used in the quilt came from New York.

Not saying this is any thing to do with Madeline, Alchemy prints ?

labelnewyork.com/Symbolic Clothing - Zodiac, Free Masonry, Alchemy, Islam, and More. Home · My Account ... Stand out from the crowd by wearing Label New York. Find out more ...

The cloth was maybe made in New York, but could have been bought from anywhere. I have loads of American fabrics in my quilting stash, and the nearest I've ever been to New York is the Maybelline counter at Boots. It's just a quilt with pictures on that the kid probably liked. Any fabric shop will sell you the pattern and a selection of fabrics to make your own. Let's not start seeing all sorts of Freemasonry, Satanism, Mossad, Wicca and goodness knows what else in a simple baby quilt. We had enough of that nonsense in the other place!

Not saying there is anything in this but it exists and if you do your homework you will see that these designs have occult meanings. Alchemy design should give you the clue as well as the images and I imagine  some people would buy these prints without any knowledge of what they are buying .  As Goncalo Amaral said ,secret societies I believe, or something of that description and not everybody is clued up to this but I think the veil is starting to slip.

Acknowledge it could have been shipped anywhere but

Label New York - Symbolic Clothing - Astrology ...
Symbolic Clothing - Zodiac, Free Masonry, Alchemy, Islam, and More. Home · My Account ... Stand out from the crowd by wearing Label New York. Find out more

So if it is one one of their designs , has nothing to with the above has it.

Maybe they have already matched the dna and its someone they already know about ,just that we don't know yet ?and it wasn't match to said child ?joyce1938

joyce1938 wrote:Maybe they have already matched the dna and its someone they already know about ,just that we don't know yet ?and it wasn't match to said child ?joyce1938

You could be right, joyce. I doubt they will advertise what information they are holding, they would be giving away details to a perpetrator, if there is one. Just because we're all on the internet day after day it doesn't mean we have any right to what the police know regarding a crime.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Freedom wrote:I was just having similar thoughts.

If it was me in such a situation, I don't think that there is any way that I could have lived with myself for being complicit in such a hoax.

But if it meant your remaining grandchildren being taken away and put in care, what would you do then?

I'm with Freedom & Châtelaine's Maman on this one. I would have to do the right thing but I would fight tooth and nail to stop my grandchildren going into care.

In my opinion, by allowing Kate and Gerry to get away with whatever they did, Madeleine's grandparents are putting Sean and Amelie at risk of the same fate. By allowing the hoax to continue, the grandparents are leaving the twins in a toxic environment which will leave deep psychological scars.

To me it's a question of picking sides. Do you protect the adults who's actions have caused all of this or do you protect the children who are completely innocent?

Having said all that, there are situations where going into care is the best option. No-one could possibly say that Shannon Matthews or Fred West's children would have been better off staying with the family.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

joyce1938 wrote:Maybe they have already matched the dna and its someone they already know about ,just that we don't know yet ?and it wasn't match to said child ?joyce1938

You could be right, joyce.  I doubt they will advertise what information they are holding, they would be giving away details to a perpetrator, if there is one. Just because we're all on the internet day after day it doesn't mean we have any right to what the police know regarding a crime.

There's also the possibility that they haven't matched dna or identified the child but are eager to avoid a media storm so have denied that it could be Madeleine for no other reason than the distance from Portugal.

I don't think this is the case but we need to keep all options open.

Poe wrote:
I don't think this is the case but we need to keep all options open.

My guess is still that OG rang them and said "forget it. We know know more than we are saying"
Just as did Dr Amaral, his successor, Mike Harrison, Eddie, Keela, DC Grime,
and even the Mccanns themselves who just laughed when they were told of a sighting. That was the most telling bit of body language.

@PeterMac.

Your guess is my hope in that it would mean that the police are closer to solving the case than we know but, then again, it isn't my hope because if the bones don't belong to Madeleine then we have a second toddler victim .