Outrageous

 

(CMTV [Correio da Manhã TV], July 2, 2014)

(Transcript Joana Morais/Textusa)

“CMTV News anchor - The questionings at the Judiciary Police headquarters in Faro, requested by the Scotland Yard within the scope of the investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance, continue today. After the four arguidos, witnesses will give their statements as requested by the British police.

Unknown reporter [Voice Over] - Hairs found on Sergey Malinka's sofa had a very similar DNA with Madeleine McCann’s. This is the main argument that Scotland Yard has presented to the Public Ministry in order to constitute as arguido the man born in Russia but living for many years in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve.

With him, there are 3 other men, now also arguidos at the request of the English police: José Carlos Silva, Ocean Club driver in March [Sic, May] 2007, when Maddie disappeared from the resort; Pedro [sic, Paulo] Ribeiro, who the English classify as a drug-addict and schizophrenic and also Ricardo Rodrigues, a young man who at the time was close to Pedro [sic, Paulo] Ribeiro.

These three men made a series of phone calls regarded as suspicious on the night of March [sic, May] 3 2007, when Maddie disappeared.

Scotland Yard believes the three planned a burglary to the apartment and when surprised by the little girl, they murdered her and took away her body.

The arguidos were all questioned on Monday [sic, on Tuesday] at the Judiciary Police headquarters in Faro. This Tuesday [sic, this Wednesday] the questionings will continue, now of the 8 witnesses [sic, 11] requested by the Scotland Yard.

The English brought with them again to the Algarve the sniffer dogs specialised in detecting cadavers. The idea is for the animals to inspect the cars owned by the four arguidos back in 2007.

These proceedings are likely to go on until Friday.”

This, dear readers, has now made things become SERIOUS. REALLY SERIOUS.

This is taking the game to a whole new level. A whole new dark and ignominious level.

With this latest show, in our opinion, Murat is thrown (back) into the frying pan as he is the only link Malinka has to this case, and the Ocean Club by implicating one of its drivers leaving the suggestion that’s how the body was moved that night from the first to the second location.

There are means to achieve an objective and those chosen by SY to achieve the above has two VERY SERIOUS implications.

One thing is to find a way to tell PJ that you are willing to throw Murat and the Ocean Club into the bonfire another, completely unacceptable on all counts, was to do it in the totally reckless manner in which SY did.

The first SERIOUS implication is the apparent invention of evidence.

If what is reported is true, it was the fact DNA in hairs found on Malinka’s sofas was very similar to Maddie’s that made him an arguido.

A status he was not given back in 2007.

The question that has to be asked is, what hairs? What hairs were found in Malinka’s sofas and when were they collected? When were they tested for DNA? Where are the “very similar” results?

We have in PJ Files that hairs were collected from 2 sofas outside apartment 5A and the Burgau apartment:

“Photos 6 to 10: Various views of the two-seat sofa referred to as evidence item no. 2

Photos 11 to 15: Various views of the single-seat sofa referred to as evidence item no. 3

(…)

In a first phase there proceeded the recovery of various hairs existing on the referred sofa pieces, using tweezers appropriate for the task, they [the hairs] having been placed in a paper envelope in accordance with procedures issued by the LPC Biology Section.

These recoveries were referenced as trace evidence numbers 1, 2 and 3 in accordance with the reference tags placed on the sofa.”

(…)

In the examination performed on the three pieces of sofa, in the garage of the Portimao DIC of the Policia Judiciaria, there were detected and collected various hairs, as better described in the body of this report, they having been referenced as trace evidence numbers 1, 2 and 3, which were delivered to the LPC Biology Section under delivery note 199/2007-CR/L, copy attached, for them to be preserved for future/possible expert examination.”

Nowhere does it say that these 2 sofas belong to Sergey Malinka. They are referred to only as “Sofas located in in the garage of the CID Portimao”.

We have read that Sergey had his computers seized for forensic investigation but haven’t read anywhere that his sofas has suffered the same fate, having ended up in a PJ garage.

It would be strange to have had Malinka’s 2 sofas hauled to a garage and leave the ones in apartment 5A where they were.

We don't know to who these sofas belong to but, as always, we will disregard logic and will suppose that the CID garage sofas are the property of Sergey Malinka.

The LPC [Laboratório de Polícia Criminal], on 31MAR2008, writes this about the hairs found in these particular sofas:

“…with respect to the sofas that are in the garage of the DIC Portimao:

- 3 labelled envelopes with delivery note no. 420B/2007-CR/L:

Vestige:

Vg1 - "Sundry head-hair collected from the sofa having one seat"- 7 hairs.

Vg2 - "Sundry head-hair collected from the sofa having two seats"- 2 hairs.

Vg3 - "Sundry head-hair collected from the sofa having one seat" - 2 hairs.

(…)

4- Study of mitochondrial DNA

The vestiges delivered on 08/11/2007 and on 14/12/2007:

Mitochondrial DNA results were obtained in 137 hairs (roots and/or stems) from the 187 analysed. It was not possible to obtain any results from 46 hairs, and in 4 cases incomplete sequences were obtained.

5- Total of the samples studied:

Since May 2007, the following samples were analysed in the GENETIC AND BIOLOGICAL FORENSIC SERVICES offices of the North, Central e South Delegations of the Instituto Nacional of Medicina Legal:

- 25 reference samples.

- 447 vestigios, comprising:

>> 444 hairs, of which 432 were human;

>> 1 mark on a counterpane;

>> 2 objects from a car boot.

Of the 432 human hairs (roots and/or stems), 315 provided the results reflected in Table 2.

(…)

Ea      1       1 Sofa 1-seat; CID garage(Vg1)

(…)

X           2       1 Bedroom entrance Ocean(Vgl) and 1 sofa 1-seat; garage(Vgl) (…)

(…)

15 Haplotypes different from each other and from those above:

(…)

1    Sofa of 1-seat; garage(Vgl)

(…)

1    Sofa of 2-seats; garage(Vg2)

(…)

1    Sofa of 2-seats; garage(Vg2)

(…)

- The Haplotypes identified by the letters B, E, Ea, V, V*, X, Y, Z, AA, AAa e AA* are different from those above and distinct from the reference samples, having the same Haplotype been found in distinct locations:

Haplotype B - apart. Ocean Club and apart. Burgau

Haplotypes E, Ea - apart. Ocean Club and sofa of 1-seat in the garage in Portimao

Haplotypes V, V* - apart. Ocean Club and vehicle Renault

Haplotype X - apart. Ocean Club e sofa of 1-seat in the garage in Portimao

Haplotype Y - apart. Ocean Club e sofa of 1-seat in the garage in Portimao

Haplotype Z - Residencia Liliana e sofa of 1-seat in the garage in Portimao

Haplotypes AA, AAa, AA* - apartment in Burgau and vehicle Passat”

It’s a lot of technical wording but it is very clear is that the hairs found in the “sofas located in in the garage of the CID Portimao” were analysed for DNA by the LPC in 2007.

Nowhere does it refer a match of any of them to Maddie. Or of any similarity.

It’s not credible to think that a forensic police would overlook a potential match to the victim in question, Madeleine McCann.

John Lowe, in his FSS reports, does not mention these hairs.

He does however, in 03SEPT2007, go into elaborate detail to explain that 15 out of 19 DNA components cannot be considered safely “similar”:

“Firstly, here are the last three results you are expecting

An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.

There is no evidence to support the view that Madeline MCCann contributed DNA to the swab 3B.

A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.

Why - ...

Well lets look at the question that is being asked

"Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab "

It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample.

What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine and legitimate; because Madeline has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeline merely appears to match the result by chance. The individual components in Madeline's profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline's profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Birmingham, myself included. it's important to stress that 50% of Madeline's profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles.

Therefore, we cannot answer the question: is the match genuine or is it a chance match.”

So if any possible match was to have been found between Maddie’s DNA and the one found in the CID garage sofas it would have been reported and the similarities detailed and discussed.

Note that at least 1 of the CID garage sofas shares 3 haplotypes with those found in apartment 5A (haplotypes E,Ea, X and Y) and another with a haplotype found in Vivenda Liliana, Murat’s Villa (haplotype Z).

So for now SY to come and accuse Malinka of having hairs on his sofa with DNA similar to Maddie, it can ONLY mean that the CID garage sofas weren’t his and we MUST be talking about other sofas and about a new set of hairs.

Hairs that were not collected in 2007. Those were tested.

And most of all in UK were destroyed:

“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.”

So only the samples with completely different haplotypes remain, if they remain, stored somewhere.

Remember, having been considered that 15 out 19 DNA components were not enough to charge the McCanns with anything, the DNA found in these “new” hairs MUST have more than 15 out 19 DNA components.

To say now that these are the hairs that now have DNA very similar to Maddie's is to state openly and brazenly that the Portuguese Forensic service and its professionals were absolutely incompetent in the most important case that has ever crossed their hands.

So they cannot be these hairs. They must be a new set of hairs that has now made Malinka to be an arguido.

When were they collected? In 2014? When? To go and search a house in Portugal one needs a warrant. We have never heard that Malinka’s place was searched lately.

In fact, we don’t think it hasn’t been searched since 2007.

So what hairs are these?

Malinka was made arguido on Monday, 01JUL14. His house couldn’t have been searched before that. On Tuesday we’re told that DNA is very similar. Impossible.

It can only be invented evidence. That’s the conclusion we have reached and, obviously, we stand corrected.

Let’s hope it stays invented and is not materialised in some document. Then it’s no longer invented evidence but a produced one.

For British authorities to invent evidence it can only be because of despair. Someone somewhere has lost sight of reason.

This, if true, is outrageous. A nation being morally and intellectually dishonest. This is so serious that we sincerily hope we can retract all said in present post for having been proven wrong. We will wait for such proof.

The second VERY SERIOUS implication about this episode is the constitution of the other 2 arguidos: Pedro Ribeiro and Ricardo Rodrigues.

Both poor and cannot afford lawyers. One apparently with mental issues and another 16 yrs old at the time.

Easy to pick on. Easy to guarantee their silence. After all, they’re only suspects. No one is accusing them of anything.

We cannot at this point in time see any relationship between these two and Maddie’s case. We seriously doubt we will ever see.

It seems that the British are poking an animal thinking it won’t respond. Taunting it with a xenophobic stick in its ribs until the sore infects.

Please do not later complain about its vicious bite.

Pic from JH Forum

 The graffiti on that Praia da Luz wall was a warning. Please continue at own risk.

A teacher once told me “do be very careful to let the dogs out, for they may turn on you and chew your own legs up.”

Stupidity is what drives people into stupidity.

We will now return to our holidays.

Post Scriptum:

To confirm the warning signs of a pressure pot that is threatening to explode:

(with thanks to Joana Morais)

Cell phone photo of road sign taken by a Praia da Luz resident

Second photo being used as profile avatar in protest

Two more #StopMcCannCircus photos from two other Luz residents fed up with Met Police show off

Another #StopMcCannCircus sign photo from an angry Luz resident

As pessoas na Praia da Luz dizem: #SomosTodosPedintes Pedimos Paz!

People in Praia da Luz say: #WeAreAllBeggars 
We ask for Peace!

And from the Mirror (Jul 06, 2014 21:00):
 

“Madeleine McCann: Angry backlash to British police presence as signs are daubed with graffiti”