Interesting links there; thanks for posting them.
One of the posts lists this:
THE EVIDENCE
1. In the Ocean Club Apartment
a) cadaver odour was detected by the English dogs behind a couch in the living room, close to a window that leads to the apartment’s back area
b) blood (a very small amount) on that window’s curtains; the curtains and the wall were washed
c) collected fingerprints belong only to the couple and their friends; there are no fingerprints from Robert Murat, the case’s first arguido
d) searches with dogs in the other apartments of the same block at the resort did not yield these results, only the McCann’s
The cadaver odour that was detected by the dogs indicates that the parents were with Madeleine after her death, and therefore must know what happened. This because, as they say, they were in the apartment until dinner time, at 8.30 p.m. It takes at least two hours for a corpse to release odours that can be detected by the dogs
2. In the Renault Scenic car (rented by the McCanns on May 27)
a) cadaver odour was detected by the dogs
b) a very reduced sample of human fluid, in the car boot. After being analysed in Birmingham, this fluid registered, according to the PJ’s director, Alipio Ribeiro, results that do not allow a 100% correspondence with Maddie’s genetic profile
c) hair that is compatible with Maddie’s genetic profile; there is doubt about whether they landed there by ‘transference’
3. In the Vista Mar villa (rented by the McCanns)
a) cadaver odour, detected by the dogs on clothes that belong to Kate, and on the pink soft toy
b) an English book, normally used by police, that focuses on the different types of crimes, as well as on what clues should be looked for to identify its perpetrators
c) a bible, on Kate’s bedside table, open at the Old Testament, at the passage that tells the death of King David’s son (God punished David with the death of his son, in order to force him away from sin and to return onto the path of good)
d) Kate’s diary, in which she writes about daily difficulties, in dealing with her children
4. Contradictions between the couple’s statements and those of their friends
a) Gerry says during dinner he got up to check on his children; restaurant staff says only two people from the group left the dinner table and those were Russell O’Brien and Matthew Oldfield
b) Russell arrived late for dinner and left at some point: he said his daughter had vomited and he was waiting for someone to change the bedsheets; the hotel staff say nobody requested clean bedsheets
c) Jane, Russell’s wife, says she saw a man passing on the resort’s street, carrying a child. An Irishman, who was at the same time in the same spot, says he saw nobody pass
In my opinion, I think the apartment evidence and the dog responses are damaging, as well as Gerry’s lie about the vomit and the sheets. I wonder why the media hasn’t reported it.
For goodness sake! It was RUSSELL not Gerry!
“results that do not allow a 100% correspondence with Maddie’s genetic profile”
DNA evidence has the most punch these days. If the DNA isn’t hers, and there’s frankly no way it can be, then associated evidence is also brought into question. There may be a cadaver odor in the car, but if the DNA doesn’t match the missing child’s then all that odor becomes is an unanswered question.
I’m assuming that humans release a different “cadaver odor” than other animals, and they’re sure it’s a human the dogs were smelling?