A Bedtime Story - by Dr. Martin Roberts

Dr. Martin Roberts' latest article "A Bedtime Story" can be found at www.mccannfiles.com (scroll down)

EXCLUSIVE to mccannfiles.com

By Dr Martin Roberts
22 November 2013

A BEDTIME STORY

Olga Craig (Sunday Telegraph, 27.5.2007), wrote that when the McCanns moved to an apartment near to the one from which Madeleine was taken they "unpacked their missing daughter's clothes...laying out her pyjamas on what would have been her bed."

The Daily Mirror (19.9.2007): 'It is believed the entire Portuguese case rests on DNA evidence from body fluids which allegedly suggests that Madeleine's corpse was carried in the boot of the McCanns' hired Renault Scenic.

'But the McCanns say the fluids probably came from Madeleine's unwashed pyjamas and sandals which were carried in the boot when the family was moving apartments.'

[Kate McCann (under oath, to Lord Justice Leveson): "These were desperate times. You know, we were, having to try and find our daughter ourselves and needed all the help we could get and we were facing (we'll come onto the headlines) 'Corpse in the car.' How many times I read 'body fluids in the car,' and it gets repeated so often that it becomes fact. There were no body fluids."]

Kate McCann (Statement to police, 6 September, 2007):

'She noticed a stain, supposedly of tea, on Madeleine's pyjama top, which she washed a little later that same morning. She hung it out to dry on a small stand, and it was dry by the afternoon. Madeleine sometimes drank tea; nevertheless the stain did not appear during breakfast, maybe it happened another day, as Madeleine did not have tea the previous night and the stain was dry.'

Inventory of pyjamas owned and/or worn by Madeleine McCann between April 29 and May 3, 2007 therefore:

Three pairs - one unpacked (presumed clean), one soiled, one abducted after washing.

Three pairs of pyjamas for a week’s holiday? It won’t wash. Nor could Kate get the machine in 5A to do so.

"On Tuesday 1 May, after my tennis lesson, two maintenance workers came to have a look at our washing machine, which I couldn't get to operate."

Gerry appears to have been on crèche duty that morning. He signed in both Madeleine (9.30) and Amelie (9.20), although Sean's whereabouts are unconfirmed. Kate's tennis lesson was scheduled for 9.15 a.m. The maintenance workers arrived at 10.00. So either Kate McCann had attempted to operate the washing machine before, during or immediately after breakfast that Tuesday morning or she did so the day/evening before. In any event she had some washing in hand and knew better how to deal with it by the time she left to join Gerry at the tennis courts. Having attempted to deploy the washing machine on or before Tuesday morning, is she likely then to have deferred doing so for a week or more?

Returning now to Kate's statement regarding the tea stain, 'the stain did not appear during breakfast (Thursday), maybe it happened another day, as Madeleine did not have tea the previous night and the stain was dry.'

The stain on these pyjamas was unlikely to have arisen the previous night, as Madeleine did not drink tea that night. Nevertheless, she must have been wearing these pyjamas on the Wednesday night, and Tuesday night as well if 'maybe it happened another day', even Monday night if Tuesday morning/evening are considered to have presented opportunities for tea drinking and/or pyjama staining. We may gloss over the question of how Kate managed to not see the stain before Thursday morning in that case, in favour of one the McCanns clearly did not anticipate when they put their September 2007 proposal to the Daily Mirror, that 'Madeleine's unwashed pyjamas ... were carried in the boot when the family was moving apartments.'

What unwashed pyjamas?

The only pyjamas that can have been worn by Madeleine between the Tuesday and Thursday nights were the pink 'Eeyore' set that was washed, for the purpose of stain removal, before disappearing along with the child. It would of course be entirely reasonable to suggest that she wore a different pair for the first three nights of her stay in Praia da Luz, i.e., Saturday, Sunday, Monday, and that these may well have been soiled by then. But we know, because she has already told us, albeit indirectly, that Kate was keen to do some washing as early as Tuesday morning.

Are we therefore to suppose that, after so short a period, and with concomitantly so little soiled clothing as a result, Kate would not have washed whatever other pair(s) of pyjamas Madeleine might have been wearing during those first three days? And since Madeleine was not present to wear pyjamas of any description after May 3, there can have been no soiled, i.e., unwashed pyjamas of hers in evidence from that date onwards, whether in the Ocean Club apartment or the boot of the Renault Scenic.

Hence the notorious 'body fluids', perjured into nothingness during the 2011 Leveson Inquiry, were probably not introduced by Madeleine's soiled pyjamas after all, as her various pyjamas (assuming she had more than one set), should either have been washed earlier or else unused. However, we must not overlook the fact that Kate was able to suggest at least one other potential source for those absent body fluids.

'But the McCanns say the fluids probably came from Madeleine's unwashed pyjamas and sandals which were carried in the boot when the family was moving apartments.'

These sandals, perchance?

"...she looked so gorgeous in her little T-shirt and shorts, pink hat, ankle socks and new holiday sandals that I ran back to our apartment for my camera to record the occasion. One of my photographs is known around the world now: a smiling Madeleine clutching armfuls of tennis balls." (Kate McCann, in 'Madeleine')

Sandals worn with socks covering the feet?

Silly me. That photograph was taken on Tuesday, before the afternoon beach trip, when Madeleine may have taken her shoes and socks off, although she didn't enjoy the wet sand. Maybe mum and dad didn't bother to put the socks back on her feet before returning her to that already empty crèche for the last hour and a half.

At least we know how Madeleine dressed for tennis that Tuesday morning. We have Kate's photograph to prove it. We do not of course have Jane Tanner's photograph from either the Wednesday or the Thursday, since Kate had already taken it. But we do have both her own and Rachael Oldfield's description of Madeleine's involvement in tennis after Tuesday. And how was Madeleine typically dressed for tennis? In 'ankle socks and new holiday sandals' was how.

And from this combination of clothing we are invited to infer that 'body fluids' were deposited, first onto the inner sole of a pair of sandals, then transferred, via the under sole no doubt, onto a solid surface in the back of a car.

It would appear, on reflection, that Kate McCann was correct when she declared, while under oath, 'There were no body fluids', at least none that might have originated with recently washed pyjamas, or sandals worn over ankle socks. However, the behaviour of a blood detecting sniffer dog suggests, and the FSS examination of cellular material confirms, that there was body fluid in the wheel space of the McCann rental vehicle, albeit in miniscule amounts. So where did it come from?

Secondary options were also put to the Daily Mirror all those years ago (19.9.2007), in the form of 'dirty nappies belonging to twins Sean and Amelie, who have similar DNA to their four-year-old sister' while 'at least 30 people connected to the family, including close relatives, used the Renault before police searched it.'

What manner of desultory people would toss unwrapped, or worse yet unfolded nappies, lining downwards, into the rear of a rented vehicle, alongside the spare wheel? The stench alone would have put any one of the car's thirty plus (!) users off of changing the tyre!

On a less flippant note, the Portuguese police were minded to 'lift' biological debris from the Renault Scenic at the suggestion, so to speak, of a sniffer dog, whose forte was the detection of blood residues – human blood residues, which in itself puts paid to the fall back positions of either 'weepy nappies' or careless passengers. Unless the McCann twins suffered from internal bleeding or haemorrhoids, and/or an overly inquisitive passenger or two cut themselves whilst trifling unnecessarily with the car jack, there seems to be no reasonable explanation for the presence in the vehicle of the body fluids examined by the FSS, especially that detected by the dog.

No soiled pyjamas. No skin cells on sandals. No bloody stools. No bleeding passengers. Hence 'no body fluids', according to Kate McCann. The same Kate McCann who knew immediately her daughter had been, er, 'taken'. Perhaps Gerry McCann, when loading the car with leaflets for the highly publicised journey to Huelva, accidentally cut himself on Occam's razor.

'or an overly inquisitive passenger or two cut themselves whilst trifling unnecessarily with the car jack'


haha

The last line's my favourite :)

Wintabells wrote:The last line's my favourite :)

Thanks wintabells, it's not Dr Martins' usual style though is it ? He is usually so incisive .

Excellent post.  This is something which has always had me stumped.  The ardent pro's on Twitter always try to explain away the presence of human 'liquids' in the car boot by using the nappy excuse, or saying the debris is 'live human matter' (their quote not mine).  Not once has anybody denied the presence of these fluids.

I've had my car four years and driven my kids on countless 'long haul' trips, yet I'm pretty damn certain if I had a visit from a EVRD dog, it would NOT alert to any human fluids in the boot of that vehicle.

So how the heck did human matter with DNA (similar) to Madeleine's get down into the spare wheel space???

That reads like a Q.C. wrote it.

wantthetruth wrote:Excellent post.  This is something which has always had me stumped.  The ardent pro's on Twitter always try to explain away the presence of human 'liquids' in the car boot by using the nappy excuse, or saying the debris is 'live human matter' (their quote not mine).  Not once has anybody denied the presence of these fluids.

I've had my car four years and driven my kids on countless 'long haul' trips, yet I'm pretty damn certain if I had a visit from a EVRD dog, it would NOT alert to any human fluids in the boot of that vehicle.

So how the heck did human matter with DNA (similar) to Madeleine's get down into the spare wheel space???

My daughter's car is 2 years old and has had two children being driven around rather a lot. There may be various bits of detritus in that car from little snacks and drinks, wellies, toys etc., but no dog would alert to the car!

wantthetruth wrote:Excellent post.  This is something which has always had me stumped.  The ardent pro's on Twitter always try to explain away the presence of human 'liquids' in the car boot by using the nappy excuse, or saying the debris is 'live human matter' (their quote not mine).  Not once has anybody denied the presence of these fluids.

I've had my car four years and driven my kids on countless 'long haul' trips, yet I'm pretty damn certain if I had a visit from a EVRD dog, it would NOT alert to any human fluids in the boot of that vehicle.

So how the heck did human matter with DNA (similar) to Madeleine's get down into the spare wheel space???

Errmmm... In a Blue Sports bag?

malena stool wrote:

wantthetruth wrote:Excellent post.  This is something which has always had me stumped.  The ardent pro's on Twitter always try to explain away the presence of human 'liquids' in the car boot by using the nappy excuse, or saying the debris is 'live human matter' (their quote not mine).  Not once has anybody denied the presence of these fluids.

I've had my car four years and driven my kids on countless 'long haul' trips, yet I'm pretty damn certain if I had a visit from a EVRD dog, it would NOT alert to any human fluids in the boot of that vehicle.

So how the heck did human matter with DNA (similar) to Madeleine's get down into the spare wheel space???

Errmmm... In a Blue Sports bag?

This is something which really needs to be addressed.  Obviously fluids don't seep from sandles or pyjamas, and even if (big IF) there was nappy fluid leaking it surely wouldn't get all the way down into the spare wheel cavity.

What explanation can TM provide for this find?

NONE!

One of the shills mentioned on Twitter the other day that cadaver odour had wafted into 5a through an open window.  It beggars belief!!

Could happen...we have all driven passed mortuaries in the past with our windows open.


Why don't they just say, look, the sent came from cemetery they drove past last week.

Your on holiday for a week how many pairs of pyjamas do you need ?

Seeing as kate couldn't be bothered to pack enough tooth brushes for the kids.

And who really wants to use a washing machine,what an odd couple these are,or maybe kate's just a nutty half wit !