Madeleine McCann investigation 'cost £10 million to date'

Vonhelmet said:
Given that spilled blood will itself decay I'd say that there's not much distinction to be made there. Besides, a dog can find a live person, so without knowing exactly what the chain of events was it's entirely possible the dog determined madeleine - live or dead - had been in the car and then further investigation by humans turned up the blood in the boot.
Click to expand...

Which is why I'm sure that the dogs are trained to sniff out something other than blood.

Dogs have what, tens of thousands, maybe millions of scent receptors.

When our organs all stop, who knows what chemical processes then kick off. Maybe these minute changes to a body, are what the dogs are trained to sniff out?
 
Vonhelmet said:
Maybe you should read up on sniffer dogs rather than just idly speculating about them.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should take your own advice. Sniffer drops are trained to find people alive, people dead, carrying drugs, carrying food, carrying explosives etc. Dogs that are trained to find people who are alive are trained in a completely different way than a dog trained to find a dead body or traces of a body.
 
jjwf said:
Maybe you should take your own advice. Sniffer drops are trained to find people alive, people dead, carrying drugs, carrying food, carrying explosives etc. Dogs that are trained to find people who are alive are trained in a completely different way than a dog trained to find a dead body or traces of a body.
Click to expand...
Indeed, so without knowing what type of dogs were being used of what they were looking for it's all rather speculative. Do you know what they were looking for specifically?
 
Vonhelmet said:
Indeed, so without knowing what type of dogs were being used of what they were looking for it's all rather speculative. Do you know what they were looking for specifically?
Click to expand...

The dog used was trained to find bodies or traces of. I wonder why they got a hit in the boot of the car?
 
I swear you could write a bot to post the same things in this thread every few months and nobody would realise it was a bot.
 
My theory is this:

They wanted to go out on the lash and gave their kids some sleeping tablets so that they would behave themselves and sleep through the night. Maybe they both gave Madddie a tablet by mistake or something, maybe Maddie was already unwell and this is why the tablets proved to be fatal for her. The friends at their table went to go check on their own kids and in doing so checked on the MCCanns as well. This is where it all went pete tong and actions were taken to hide any evidence. Things got out of control, the media got involved, and by this time they were past the point of no return, so had to keep up the appearance that it was a kidnapping. I think that over time this event has turned them in to two very bitter people with a massive hole in their lives and a big black mark on their conscience. They did everything they could to hide the truth because although they didn't murder their daughter as such, that's how the press would see it and their lives would be ruined. I don't think they killed their daughter, I think it was an accident either due to carelessness, neglect or blatant selfishness.




That said, if you read some of the things all over the internet I'm surprised we haven't had anyone play the Voodoo card yet. The amount of far fetched bow locks surrounding this case is unbelievable. Like the fridge for example. Who the hell blogs about a broken fridge in their resort room? I mean come on, really?
 
Greebo said:
Well didnt their lawyers spend loads of time and money to get the dog sniffer evidence disputed?
Click to expand...

Yes they did, they spent **** loads of donated cash trying to dispute the evidence which failed.

Vonhelmet said:
Sorry, you're going to have to explain. Why couldn't we charge them for abandonment or neglect or whatever?
Click to expand...

As it didn't happen in the UK they could not have been charged in the UK with that offence but could have with others. There were other possibilities open to the UK authorities, but they were deemed not in the public interest which was wrong.
 
Why do people care so much about this? It's as if the story is pushed so people don't get angry about other things.

Compare 10million to all the corparate tax avoidance, I mean... How many kids lives are being affected by austerity right now? So much money being funneled away from the people.
 
Threepwood said:
Why do people care so much about this? It's as if the story is pushed so people don't get angry about other things.

Compare 10million to all the corparate tax avoidance, I mean... How many kids lives are being affected by austerity right now? So much money being funneled away from the people.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant.
 
Because Corporate tax is broad and this is narrow, one requires different focus while the other requires that the Police don't waste resources on a single child.
 
Police wasting resources is a broad matter too. There are also narrow tax avoidance subject matter.

I don't understand why this has massive thread and attention when other things do not.

Makes me get a bit lost with thoughts about where media attention is focused and where it isn't.

I guess it is a more emotive subject, but it does not take much imagination to see a link with austerity and a reduction in child welfare here at home.

Not just children either. /moan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom