Believe It Or Not by Dr. Martin Roberts

Oh yes, the cleanup; I imagine a toothbrush (or two) would come in handy for messy stains. Remember the three children of these Doctors shared only one toothbrush.

Doctors must be in the top 1% of hygiene conscious...but one toothbrush between three children...euwk

A used toothbrush is quite handy for cleaning inbetween tiles...according to the missus

mathew a used tooth brush is very good at getting between tiles clean done it myself -- dip in bleach works a treat

I use one to brush the dust off the filter on my small upright electric carpet sweeper.

cass wrote:mathew a used tooth brush is very good at getting between tiles clean done it myself -- dip in bleach works a treat

Yes, I've done that too. In fact I keep a used toothbrush in the bathroom and the kitchen for cleaning in those hard to get at places!

Panda wrote:I think the U.S.A. Has excellent forensic facilities, in fact FSS were so incompetent that several U.K. Police Stations had their own forensics Dept and FSS has now been sold to an American Company. Whoever arranged to have the samples sent to FSS knew what they were doing.

At the time the samples were sent to the FSS the FSS was generally recognized to be the leading organization of its kind with specialized knowledge particularly in the field of low-copy DNA - extremely important in this case. It was only after the about turn or McCann samples fiasco, for which there are good grounds to believe that pressure from the British government of the day was involved, that the FSS lost all credibility as an independent scientific institution and had eventually to be closed. In other words the government intervention in the McCann case ruined the business - as many of us at the time pointed out that it would. No blame whatsoever can be placed at the PJ's door for what happened; how were the PJ to know that the British government of the day was prepared to sacrifice the reputation of the leading forensic lab in the world in order to torpedo the case against the 'McCanns?

T4two wrote:

Panda wrote:I think the U.S.A. Has excellent forensic facilities, in fact FSS were so incompetent that several U.K. Police Stations had their own forensics Dept and FSS has now been sold to an American Company. Whoever arranged to have the samples sent to FSS knew what they were doing.

At the time the samples were sent to the FSS the FSS was generally recognized to be the leading organization of its kind with specialized knowledge particularly in the field of low-copy DNA - extremely important in this case. It was only after the about turn or McCann samples fiasco, for which there are good grounds to believe that pressure from the British government of the day was involved, that the FSS lost all credibility as an independent scientific institution and had eventually to be closed. In other words the government intervention in the McCann case ruined the business - as many of us at the time pointed out that it would. No blame whatsoever can be placed at the PJ's door for what happened; how were the PJ to know that the British government of the day was prepared to sacrifice the reputation of the leading forensic lab in the world in order to torpedo the case against the 'McCanns?

Yes, I'm sure that the FSS was yet another instance of collateral damage. They had to pretend for some reason that all basic precautions to avoid contamination had been breached. Which I cannot believe.
The samples were said to be contaminated by staff. That shouldn't even be a problem, as all staff have their full spectrum DNA on record and so it can easily be distinguished from a 'contaminated sample' . I think they chose that excuse when they were forced to change their first result because anyone with basic knowledge of the procedure would know it was rubbish.

As for the clothes requested by the GNR.
Processos Volume V

Pages 1335 – 1337

Witness Statement

Date: 2007-05-16

Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão

Occupation: GNR Officer

He has been a GNR officer since 1988. He holds the post of soldier and currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.

On 4th May he was called at about 01h15 when he was asleep at home, requesting him to appear at the Lagos GNR post as a small girl had disappeared. After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02h30.

When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCanns' apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the McCann couple. They just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.

So clothes that 'she had worn or used recently' were not available? Kate places this search at 'sometime in the morning' in the book, saying she was unaware of the dogs - then jumps on to 11.00 pm when the sniffer/tracker dogs were used. Blanket was gone by that time, the dogs got a 'Turkish towel' which as the GNR reports state several times 'supposedly' was used by the minor.

I can't understand why the FSS destroyed the samples saying the Portugese never asked for their return. Also, the PJ were impatient at the time it was taking for the FSS to send their report so as an experiment they sent samples to the FSS and to the Potugese Forensic. Dept. the Portogese sent their
Report to the Portugese Police within two weeks, the FSS took much longer.

Panda wrote:I can't understand why the FSS destroyed the samples saying the Portugese never asked for their return. Also, the PJ were impatient at the time it was taking for the FSS to send their report so as an experiment they sent samples to the FSS and to the Potugese Forensic. Dept. the Portogese sent their
Report to the Portugese Police within two weeks, the FSS took much longer.

This a myth,samples were returned to PT i will find later if no one else does...if the samples had no relevance to the case...for example a hair from previous tennant,then fss would destroy

Panda wrote:I can't understand why the FSS destroyed the samples saying the Portugese never asked for their return. Also, the PJ were impatient at the time it was taking for the FSS to send their report so as an experiment they sent samples to the FSS and to the Potugese Forensic. Dept. the Portogese sent their
Report to the Portugese Police within two weeks, the FSS took much longer.

The FSS had to grow the blood samples to a size which was sufficient to extract the DNA. Apparently this is a process which is extremely difficult and takes time. To add to the difficulty was the fact that not only were the samples microscopic but they had been subjected to cleaning agents containing bleach. I have no expert knowledge but I understand that the FSS was, if not the only then one of only a very few forensic laboratories able to do this kind of work. I'm prepared to accept that the time taken was necessary, but I do not accept the FSS' explanation for the difference between the first and second forensic reports. In my opinion this is what ruined the FSS worldwide reputation.

matthew wrote:

Panda wrote:I can't understand why the FSS destroyed the samples saying the Portugese never asked for their return. Also, the PJ were impatient at the time it was taking for the FSS to send their report so as an experiment they sent samples to the FSS and to the Potugese Forensic. Dept. the Portogese sent their
Report to the Portugese Police within two weeks, the FSS took much longer.

This a myth,samples were returned to PT i will find later if no one else does...if the samples had no relevance to the case...for example a hair from previous tennant,then fss would destroy

If anyone can find it it will be Not Born Yesterday.it is true though that Stuart Prior raved about the 15 of 19 markers being enough to bring charges in the U.K. and the FSS altered their first Report.

I was recently reading a book which was set in Sweden and dated long before the fiasco with the McCanns. In this book after much forensic analysis in Sweden and not having obtained they wanted. It was suggested that they sent the evidence to the best in the world, which was the one in Birmingham and that they were the only ones that could come up with what was needed.

It was just fiction but there it was anyway, the fact that they were regarded as the best in the world. How terrible that their reputation is now in tatters because of the McCann's

Panda wrote:

matthew wrote:

Panda wrote:I can't understand why the FSS destroyed the samples saying the Portugese never asked for their return. Also, the PJ were impatient at the time it was taking for the FSS to send their report so as an experiment they sent samples to the FSS and to the Potugese Forensic. Dept. the Portogese sent their
Report to the Portugese Police within two weeks, the FSS took much longer.

This a myth,samples were returned to PT i will find later if no one else does...if the samples had no relevance to the case...for example a hair from previous tennant,then fss would destroy

If anyone can find it it will be Not Born Yesterday.it is true though that Stuart Prior raved about the 15 of 19 markers being enough to bring charges in the U.K. and the FSS altered their first Report.

yes the 15 out of 19 markers -- enough for a conviction outside portugal

kitti wrote:They had time to bleach the apt...mr amaral has said that the DNA was degraded due to cleaning....


The child didnt sleep in the bed that night, wasn't put to bed that night.


It was a problem fnding DNA off Madeleine in that apt...ok, the twins DNA could off been mistaken for madeleines BUT surely they could off got a DNA profile from her clothes....where were the clothes she supposedly wore in the 'last pic'?


Where were madeleines clothes, any clothes, even washing them would off left some DNA from her or are the Mccanns saying that the girls shared clothing so couldn't get a full DNA sample... We know they shared shoes Kate McCann has said so but surely not clothes in pdl or did the pj want a full DNA sample and that could only be found in the UK....but how can they be sure it was madeleines and not amalies....

Kitti, the cleaner cleaned on the monday and the wednesday and I know that they are very fond of bleach and also ammonia in Spain and Portugal. Could the blood be from the saturday/sunday and it was the cleaner who, unbeknown to her, degraded it with her own mopping and damp dusting?

Oops...had posted this before on here

Return of samples.

Cross-reference to Lowe(final) and Palmer reports:
Delivery 286: 24 items listed
- All referenced in Lowe(final);
- Items 1-20 all NON-perishable; No record found of their having been returned to PT;
- Items 21-24 perishable - profiles obtained from 3; bush unfruitful.
Delivery 286A: 33 items listed
- All referenced in Lowe(final);
- Items 1-15 A&B (30 items) all perishable;
- Items 16 (2 pieces) and 16B (curtains) not perishable; No record found of their having been returned to PT.
- Item 16 (one blue curtain) and 16B (white curtain) not tested.
Delivery 286B: 1 item listed
- Referenced in Lowe(final);
- (curtain section) not perishable and not tested. No record found of it having been returned to PT.
Delivery 286C: 34 items listed
- Items 1D, 2E, 10, 12 and 14 (profile) referenced in Lowe(final);
- Items 1-9, 11 (all hairs and fibres) referenced in Palmer report;
- Items 13 and 15 not referenced in either report;
- Item 14 perishable;
- Items 1-13 and 15 non-perishable: and record found of their return to PT.

Overall Summary:
- 92 items listed;
- 90 items referenced in the two reports;
- 35 items perishable, presumed consumed, stored or destroyed per FSS rules;
- 33 non-perishable items: record found of their return;
- 24 non-perishable items: no record found of their return;
- 3 items not tested;
- 2 items not referenced in either report (286C: 13 and 15).

Question: Are there other return records for deliveries 286 (20 items), 286A (3 items) and 286B



A - Perishable Samples

Certain samples constitute a potential health risk. With the concurrence of the Home Office, it has been decided that such samples
will not be submitted to the Courts unless specifically requested by the Defence (This is an extension of the procedures for the
disposal of blood samples previously agreed by the Lord Chief Justice, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the former Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate.)

The Laboratory has examined one or more of the samples listed below. They will not be returned to you but will be destroyed
in due course unless we are requested by the Defence to preserve them. You should notify the Defence Solicitors in accordance
with Home Office Circulars 40/73 and 74/82, which allow a period of 21 days in which notice in writing must be given,
by the defendant or his legal representative, to the laboratory to prevent the samples being destroyed.

- Blood samples
- Saliva samples
- Swabs from body orifices
- Other swabs bearing potentially hazardous material
- Vomit, faeces, urine, etc

The above list includes perishable personal samples, the destruction of which is required by Section 64 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, (1984).


B - Non-Perishable Personal Samples

The destruction of other, non-perishable, personal samples is required by Section 64 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, (1984). These include:

- Control head hair samples
- Control pubic hair samples
- Finger nail samples
- Casts, e.g. of teeth or feet

Except as below these non-perishable, personal samples are returned to you as parts of exhibits for production at court etc. The laboratory is not responsible for their destruction.

The part of these samples, which were removed for examination, will be retained by the laboratory for the period of time as specified in the 'Memorandum of Understanding for Retained Materials' (3, 7 or 30 years) from the date of this notice to allow access to other legitimate parties. After this period, in the absence of written instruction to the contrary, the retained samples will be destroyed and a record made of their destruction.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm#p10p2642-2652

Would the cleaners take the curtains down and clean them whilst the apt was being used?

T4two wrote:

Panda wrote:I can't understand why the FSS destroyed the samples saying the Portugese never asked for their return. Also, the PJ were impatient at the time it was taking for the FSS to send their report so as an experiment they sent samples to the FSS and to the Potugese Forensic. Dept. the Portogese sent their
Report to the Portugese Police within two weeks, the FSS took much longer.

The FSS had to grow the blood samples to a size which was sufficient to extract the DNA. Apparently this is a process which is extremely difficult and takes time. To add to the difficulty was the fact that not only were the samples microscopic but they had been subjected to cleaning agents containing bleach. I have no expert knowledge but I understand that the FSS was, if not the only then one of only a very few forensic laboratories able to do this kind of work. I'm prepared to accept that the time taken was necessary, but I do not accept the FSS' explanation for the difference between the first and second forensic reports. In my opinion this is what ruined the FSS worldwide reputation.

thanks for the explanation T4two, but I seem to remember Lowe's first report was quite damning for the McCanns but it was then retracted ....very odd!
Also, from matthews find, this is interesting if the SY Review wanted to check on samples if they are still there now that the American Company has bought FSS., they could presumably have been handed over to a Police Station with Forensic facilities.
"The part of these samples, which were removed for examination, will be retained by the laboratory for the period of time as specified in the 'Memorandum of Understanding for Retained Materials' (3, 7 or 30 years) from the date of this notice to allow access to other legitimate parties. After this period, in the absence of written instruction to the contrary, the retained samples will be destroyed and a record made of their destruction"

@ Matthew

So the parts of the non perishable items not used by the FSS should be with the PJ? Hmmmm.

- and the non perishable samples tested by the FSS could be retained for 3, 7 or 30 years? Hmmm again. So quite a lot can be tested and in fact since 2007 it has become possible to extract useful DNA from hairs without roots. It was not possible in 2007.

I'm perking up here!

Panda wrote:

T4two wrote:

Panda wrote:I can't understand why the FSS destroyed the samples saying the Portugese never asked for their return. Also, the PJ were impatient at the time it was taking for the FSS to send their report so as an experiment they sent samples to the FSS and to the Potugese Forensic. Dept. the Portogese sent their
Report to the Portugese Police within two weeks, the FSS took much longer.

The FSS had to grow the blood samples to a size which was sufficient to extract the DNA. Apparently this is a process which is extremely difficult and takes time. To add to the difficulty was the fact that not only were the samples microscopic but they had been subjected to cleaning agents containing bleach. I have no expert knowledge but I understand that the FSS was, if not the only then one of only a very few forensic laboratories able to do this kind of work. I'm prepared to accept that the time taken was necessary, but I do not accept the FSS' explanation for the difference between the first and second forensic reports. In my opinion this is what ruined the FSS worldwide reputation.

thanks for the explanation T4two, but I seem to remember Lowe's first report was quite damning for the McCanns but it was then retracted ....very odd!
Also, from matthews find, this is interesting if the SY Review wanted to check on samples if they are still there now that the American Company has bought FSS., they could presumably have been handed over to a Police Station with Forensic facilities.
"The part of these samples, which were removed for examination, will be retained by the laboratory for the period of time as specified in the 'Memorandum of Understanding for Retained Materials' (3, 7 or 30 years) from the date of this notice to allow access to other legitimate parties. After this period, in the absence of written instruction to the contrary, the retained samples will be destroyed and a record made of their destruction"

Yes - that's exactly what I am saying did for the reputation of the FSS. In fact as I recall there was a report that the Italian police stopped using the FSS at that time for that very reason.