1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part IV

D – Dog searches and Constitution of Gerald McCann and Kate Healy as arguidos

In an attempt to advance towards the discovery of Madeleine’s whereabouts, a Report was written by Mark Harrison, National Counsellor for searches at the level of all police agencies in the United Kingdom, concerning Missing Persons, Abduction and Homicides, with his role comprising the counselling in relation to those people.

Thus a request for help in counselling at the level of searches was made, with part of that help being made through the action of dogs that are trained to detect mortal victims (VRD), and dogs with advanced training in tracing very small samples of human remains, bodily fluids and blood, in any environment or terrain (EVRD).

From the searches with the dogs [19], whose video recordings are appended to the files, the following resulted:

1 – The tracking dog named “Eddie” (dog that signals cadaver odour) “marked” (signalled) inside the couple’s bedroom, in apartment 5A, in an area next to the wardrobe (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);

2 – That same dog “marked”, in the same apartment, an area near the living room window, which has direct access to the street, behind the sofa (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);

3 – Still inside the apartment, the dog “marked” a garden area, in a square corner, vertically to the balcony (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);

4 – In the “Vista do Mar” villa, the house that was rented by the McCanns after leaving the Ocean’s Club, the dog “marked” the area of a wardrobe that contained inside the soft toy that belonged to Madeleine McCann (cf. page 2099 and/or annex 88);

5 – In the examination of the clothes, which was carried out in a pavilion in Lagos, this dog signalled/”marked” pieces of clothing that belong to Kate Healy (cf. page 2101 and/or annex 88);

6 – This dog signalled the lower outside area next to the driver’s door of the Renault – 59-DA-27 – that was rented by the McCanns (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);

7 – Finally it “marked” the key/card of that vehicle when it was hidden under a fire prevention sand box (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);

8 – The tracking dog named “Keela” (dog that detects the presence of human blood), “marked” an area in the living room, in apartment 5A, which had already been “marked” by “Eddie” (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);

9 – After the tiles which this dog had signalled during a first inspection, and which are mentioned under the previous item, were removed, the dog signalled the same area again (cf. page 2190 and/or annex 88);

10 – It made another “marking” on the lower part of the left hand side curtain of the window that we have been referring to (cf. page 2190 and/or annex 88);

11 – It “marked” the right lower lateral part of the inside of the boot of vehicle 59-DA-27 (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);

12 – Further concerning the vehicle, “Keela” “marked” the storage compartment, on the driver’s door, which held the vehicle’s key/card (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);

13 – This dog also marked the key/card when the same was hidden under the fire service sand box, inside the parking lot.

The viewing of these videos, whose contents is very impressive, becomes essential to understand the dogs’ action and signalling, more than by any words.

These dogs, which had already been used on multiple occasions by the Scotland Yard and by the FBI with positive results, are evidence collection means and do not serve as evidence; any residue, even if invisible to the naked eye, which is collected using this type of dogs, has to be subject to forensics testing in a credentialed laboratory.

Martin Grime, the dogs’ instructor himself [20], mentions in his report: “Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime investigations”; or scientist Dr John Lowe [21] who refers that the FSS has no scientific support about the use of the dogs as a fundament for the collection of biological residues and that normally take the handler’s word for certification, that asserts that the dogs are more sensitive than any chemical technique or other techniques that are normally used by crime scene sector experts.

In that sense, forensic examinations were performed in the areas and on the objects that were marked and signalled by the blood dog, especially in a credentialed British lab (Forensic Science Service - cf. Appendixes I and VII – FSS Final Report), and also, some of them, at the National Institute for Legal Medicine (cf. Appendix I), whose final results failed to corroborate the canine markings, that is to say that cellular material was collected, which was nevertheless not identified as belonging to a specific person, and it was not even possible to establish said material’s quality (namely if it could be blood or another type of bodily fluid).

It should be stressed that the option towards that Laboratory was and remains obvious taking its prestige, its independence and its scientific reputation into account, although on an initial approach there seemed to be the possibility of compatibility between MADELEINE’S DNA profile and some of the collected residues (of which those that existed in the Renault Scenic vehicle that was rented by the McCann couple were in great quantity), taking the contents of the fax that is reproduced below exactly as it appears in the files, into account (pages 2620 and following)

From: "Prior Stuart"
To: "Task Portugal"
Sent: 04 September 2007 10:14
Subject: FW: Op Task - in Confidence

From: Lowe, Mr J R
Sent: 03 September 2007 15:01
To: stuart prior
Subject: Op Task - in Confidence


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 Madeline 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 contnbutors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/conclusion.


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 a chance match.

The same applies to any result that is quoted as being too complex for meaningful inclusion/interpretation

What questions will we never be able to answer with LCN DNA profiling?

When was the DNA deposited?
How was the DNA deposited?
What body fluid(s) does the DNA originate from?
Was a crime committed?

These, along with all other results, will be formalised in a final report

Please don't hesitate to contact me if you require any further assistance

kind regards

but whose compatibility, as can be concluded from the above mentioned final FSS report, was not confirmed after the performance of lengthy and complex tests.

Previously to these indications, is the circumstance that the Parents were the last known persons who had been with Madeleine, alive and traced, a circumstance that in itself made them subject to investigation.

On the other hand, there was information, which was not confirmed afterwards, that the McCanns, while focused on stating an abduction theory, had contacted the British media (Sky News), before calling the police authorities.

Confronted with these elements, namely the possibility of the existence of a cadaver in the apartment and in the vehicle that was used by the parents, founded suspicions of their involvement were raised.

As they were summoned to depose again, while there was no plausible explanation for those situations and as they were to be confronted with the dogs’ findings and with the lab information, which were susceptible of rendering them responsible as authors of crimes (at least, of neglectful homicide and of concealment of a cadaver), they were, obligatorily and inexorably, made arguidos, in strict obedience to article 59 nr. 1 of the Penal Process Code; thus the disposition from nr. 4 of article 58 (presently 5) – its new redaction was not in force yet, taking into account that they were made arguidos on the 6th of September 2009 – and on the other hand they could benefit from arguido status, with all the rights and guarantees of defence that are inherent to it, despite the stigma that is associated with it, which is techno-juridically misadjusted. In effect, the constitution and questioning as arguidos, while used to confirm indications towards the committing of crimes, are also used, with equal strength and reason, to infirm indications and to eliminate suspects.

As judicially stressed in the sentence dated 06.10.1990 by the then Judge of the Police Court of Lisbon. “The authority that directs the inquiry is not free to postpone the moment when a witness passes into arguido status (…) if diligences are being performed, which are destined to prove her imputation, that affect her personally (…)”
Colectânea de Jurisprudência, 1990, vol. IV. p.323 and following.

The constitution of Gerald and Kate McCann as arguidos at that moment is nothing more that the practical fulfilment of the right to defence of those arguidos, which is to say, to ensure their concrete rights to “co-determine or conform the process’ final decision. Said rights assume consistency and effectiveness, according to the new Code, right after the moment of constitution as an arguido, and therefore, still during the inquiry and the instruction.” - Professor Jorge de Figueiredo Dias, "Sobre os sujeitos processuais no novo Código de Processo Penal" Jornadas de Processo Penal, CEJ, Livraria Almedina, 1988, p 28.

Therefore, under the light of interpretation of the elements that constituted the process at that date, there is no doubt whatsoever concerning the legitimacy and legality of their constitution as arguidos, as it is also certain that any investigation has its own dynamics and the continuous flow of elements into the files may alter the situation, as it has, and no judgment or presumption of guilt can be extracted from such a process act.

[19] Cf. digital drives contained in Appendix III
[20] Page 2271
[21] Questioning file on page 3899"

in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4628-4636 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)


The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part I
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part II
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part III
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part IV
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part V
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VI
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VII
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VIII

PDF File via Expresso


  1. Going back to a few days after maddies disappearance. The interview with Kates mother where she said that maddie had a sleep problem...Kate used to sedate maddie thats how we know she would not have wandered off. Some remember this interview very clearly some do not.

    I have found the system of autopsy and how a strand of long hair can give a years information . Another reason the mccanns maybe could not let maddies body be discovered. I am also reminded of Mccann and his blog how the twins sqeezed in a couple of haircuts..before they said the twins had been tested for drugs....


    Autopsy blood workups are routine. The sample is usually taken from deep inside the body’s heart chamber and tests determine what compounds are present in the bloodstream. Some drugs like cocaine break down in the body quickly and are hard to detect. But most drugs stop metabolizing when the person dies and so the traces found in the bloodstream are indicative of what was present at the time of death. The forensic investigators also examine urine, bile and tissue samples from the liver, heart, spleen and kidneys. The information gathered fits together like pieces in a cause-of-death puzzle.

    Hair is especially revealing, holding on to what the body has ingested like rings on a tree. Since scalp hair usually grows about half an inch a month the longer the body’s hair the more information can be found. A six inch hair will reveal a full year’s worth of clues. Traces of each drug used will be stored in the hair shaft and the coroner’s office will be able to list every one, be they prescription or illegal drugs, and when they were used


  2. "..It should be stressed that the option towards that Laboratory [FSS Birmingham] was and remains obvious taking its prestige, its independence and its scientific reputation into account..."

    "Independence"? Pah!

    The FSS may be a private company but, as far as I understand, it relies on direct money from government and government contracts (taxpayers' money!)for its continued existence. I strongly suspect the Home Office demanded and received a report from the FSS in this case, before any results were passed on to the PJ via Leicestershire Police.

    Furthermore, the FSS has been subject to inquiries into its failings in at least three serious criminal (murder) cases in recent years, so I would suggest its "prestige" and "scientific reputation" falls far short of the credit given to it in the archiving despatch above.

    I suspect the decision to use FSS Birmingham (rather than an independent laboratory outside PT or UK) for the analysis of the forensic samples in this case was made by 'certain persons' at a higher level than those who were actively involved in the investigation.

  3. wonder to see if all other cases were the dogs have been involved will be re-openned and judge again.

    wonder to see how many other samples arrived to FSS Lab on the same condition, and from that ones, how many got a similar report.

    wonder to see how many convicted criminous are in prison with evidences showing 100% matching alelles from their victims.

    Even if the samples collected in the Renault scenic showed a contamination and can be provided by 2 or 4 more people, on top of Madeleine.... there is a question: Madeleine DNA was there and it was suposed not to be because she disapeared 20 days before.

    wonder to see how the Mccann's statement about the samples found in the Renault scenic( blood from meat leaved there) I supose Chicken, porc or beef meat, fit on the report of the FSS LAB. There is not a single word about what the Mccann's spread in the Media to explain what the dogs and the police find in the car. The report remain silent about animals DNA... Who is lying, the Mccann's or the FSS, or both? SOMETHING IT IS REALLY WEIRD AND NOT MATCHING AT ALL!!! THEY ARE ALL TRYING TO TROW SAND AT PUBLIC EYES. BUT, we still attentive looking how far the corruption went to avoid a little girl geting justice.

  4. anonymous @ 31/07/09 23:37 wrote:-

    "wonder to see how the Mccann's statement about the samples found in the Renault scenic( blood from meat leaved there) I supose Chicken, porc or beef meat, fit on the report of the FSS LAB. There is not a single word about what the Mccann's spread in the Media to explain what the dogs and the police find in the car...."

    I found Team McCanns' extraordinary reaction to the news about the EVRD and Blood dog alerts and forensic samples from the Renault Scenic very revealing, to say the least!

    It was a relatively new hire car with a short rental history. Surely the most obvious and normal reaction from an innocent couple with a missing child would have been alarm and distress? Something along the lines of:-

    "Who in hell hired this car before us??? Find them now!!! Pleeeease?!?!

    Not the McCanns! Apparently they reacted defensively with a string of irrelevant excuses about their transporting of soiled nappies, rotting food, fish and meat grocery shopping, Madeleine's sandals, toys etc., in an attempt to dismiss the findings.

    It would have been a macabre coincidence if the vehicle the McCanns hired 25 days after Madeleine's disappearance had been hired by 'her abductor' in the interim but the McCanns apparently showed no interest in this possibility; just as they'd shown no interest in the first arguido vis a vis any information he may have possessed concerning the whereabouts of their missing daughter - preferring to press ahead with their fundraising and Grand Tour instead!

  5. Thank you Joana and Astro for all your hard work.

    From what I can gather, Block 5 was built in the 80s.

    A few questions:

    The apartment:
    - Could anyone refer me to where I might find details on the checks into potential previous deaths in that apartment in the files? Was there a systematic check of all records going back to the first occupancy or was it an informal questioning of various people? Thinking particularly of what Martin Grime describes as potentially "residual scent" near the cupboard/wardrobe, and which is apparently where Eddie first alerted, has there been a check into whether, for example, a mattress from a deceased previous occupant had been in that bedroom at some point? I am aware that Eddie did not alert to the beds, but if a mattress had had to be changed at some point, it could explain the scent in the bedroom and in the flowerbed as the easiest way of getting a mattress out would be via the bedroom doors opening onto the balcony and into the garden, as opposed to negotiating corners to the front entrance). I presume that the 12-year-old TS's grandmother did not die in that apartment, but where did she die? In a hospital bed, or in the care of family? If so, what became of that bed? Could it have been put back into the apartment with a view to selling or not? How long did she own that apartment? What happened to her husband? Who owned the flat before that?

    Behind the sofa:
    - Martin Grime states that Eddie reacts to both "volatile compounds" (I presume the so-called death scent) and dried blood. He says that Eddie can react "within minutes". However, I find this wording a bit ambiguous: does he mean that it takes Eddie a few minutes before he reacts or does it mean that he can detect what he's trained to detect a few minutes after a death has occurred?

    Was he reacting to "death scent" or dried blood in that area? On the one hand, he did not react to the other apartments (although presumably there could be specks of blood in them); on the other hand, there do seem to be quite a few specks in that particular area of the living room. However, I can find nothing in the FSS report that would indicate that the specks on the wall, on the back of the sofa or on the tiling or skirting boards that would indicate a match to the little girl's profile. One result did say (somewhere on the ground without specifying where) that alleles were found that corresponded to her profile without specifying how many. I believe it was Gonçalo Amaral (book, interview?) who stated that there 5 alleles, which would appear to be insignificant.

    Next bit re: walls (rest of comment won't fit)

  6. Sorry... continuing from previous:

    On the subject of walls:

    An article on Timesonline (August 16, 2007) http://www.mccannfiles.com/id11.html
    states that blood found on the wall of the children's bedroom belonged to a male of a “northeast European subgroup”. The article also states: "Detectives had already suspected that the blood came from a man who had injured himself while staying at the two-bedroom apartment AFTER (my caps) Madeleine disappeared".

    So far, I have found nothing in either the FSS or the INML reports to indicate that blood was found in the children's bedroom. Could this have been an incorrect labelling as to the location on this early partial result? The only witness statement I have found is a previous male occupant who cut himself shaving and continued to bleed for around 45 minutes BEFORE the McCanns occupied that apartment.

    The clothes (and Cuddlecat):
    I have searched in vain to find any kind of document in the files that Kate had in fact been in contact with any deceased persons during the course of her work. All I have been able to find is an article whose source appears to be the legal team (and another that states something along the lines that Kate is reported to have said....).

    Is it pure coincidence that the three items of clothing are the first three listed in the "living room" box?

    It is still not clear to me whether the Cuddlecat in the living room of the villa is the same Cuddlecat that Eddie alerted to in the villa dresser (I believe the Lisbon information analysis brigade wondered the same thing).

    The Scenic:
    I'm confused. What I have been able to view via the Internet (thanks to Duarte Levy) does not show Eddie reacting in the boot of the car. And yet, these extracts appear to show the salient moments. The only report that states the contrary that I have found so far appears to be a memo from Tavares de Almeida to Gonçalo Amaral, but I wonder if he did not confuse the two dogs (Grime did say that there was no need for Eddie to go into the car). I have still not found a document that states that TA was actually present that night. I have yet to find any other report (Grime, DDCB, etc) that states that Eddie reacted to the boot by barking, which is what he is trained to do.

    I have not found anything to substantiate media reports of "clumps" of hair in or around a spare tyre well. Yes, there were hairs all over the car, but I cannot find anything to suggest clumps. And I still cannot see a tyre well. Neither can I work out why it must have been a dethawing corpse (or related items) in the car (unless it was to explain the 15/37 allele confusion).

    Is there anything to suggest that Eddie was reacting to anything other than the electronic key that was in the storage well of the driver's door? If not, I am confused as to his reaction to the car key. On the one hand, I read that a few alleles that are compatible with Maddie's profile were found somewhere on the floor of the apartment - no one else seems to have died - therefore if the two dogs reacted, it is probably Maddie who died there.

    But then, a few alleles are found on the car key card that are compatible with Gerry's profile and Eddie reacted as well. If the same logic were to apply, would that imply that Gerry had also died at the beginning of August 2007?

  7. Sorry to throw a spanner in the works as I truely believe that blogspots are of great value to this case.

    However, I can't help but think that an inter-blogspot war is brewing. Possibly because of the lack of progress with the case leaving idle minds the opportunity of thought transference.

    This could be another reason why Clan Mccann have become silent. Idle minds creating blog havoc could be to their advantage - don't you see?

  8. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7518209.stm

    Murat interview


  9. I'm curious if Madeleine would have vomited somewhere in the appartment (she could have, after too much medication), would that have been detectable in any way?
    Or would both dogs not react to it if it had been cleaned up. And did the PJ surch for any such traces?

  10. Continued from this afternoon.....

    So do you see?

    I always thought that the biggest threat to Clan Mccann is the internet, being totally out of their control. Now, with blogsite theorizing, contradiction, inter-site critisism and bickering I would'nt be surprised if they are enjoying every moment, watching us all going round in circles knowing they are completely safe from any of our opinions.

    I hope I am wrong but it's a strong possibility.

  11. It is not difficult to find out if somebody died in the apartment, before Maddie and the PJ checket on it (Amaral's book).
    They did not ask the neighbours but they checked on it through the legal channels, the right way.
    A death in a hotel always becomes complicated.
    You get a doctor, an ambulance with nursers, very often the police,an undertaker, extra administration.All this is registered by every sector.
    If somebody else would have died in 5A, the PJ would have found it out, the Ocean Club direction would have registrated it and employés would remember it and made a statement.And, of course, the McCanns lawyers would have known it and protested.
    Besides, if another person was found dead behind the sofa, it would have been a case of police and doctors because it was a hotel.
    And the person would have been very little, to fit in the closet, in case of dying in there.
    You may not forget the British police were taking part of the investigations and they agreeded with the PJ conclusions.
    I have no idea about the flower bed but the police were honest enough to tell(or show) the dog's reaction.There must be some explanation.
    I stop here to read the rest you wrote.

  12. Where is Mitchell? SO SILENT!!!

    Have he been abducted by the same ghost who evaporated Maddie? OR THERE IS NO MORE IMAGINATION TO INVENTE AND SPREAD LIES?

    NO MORE MONEY TO PAY HIS MILIONNAIRE SALARY.... THE FUND IT IS ALMOST DRY, BUT MADDIE still there, happy on her abductor care and she will look to her parents.... In SEPTEMBER THE "HEWLETTS" WILL BE BACK IN THE NEWSPAPER FRONT PAGES helping the Mccann's to touch the heart of more innocent peoples, saling t-shirts, rubber bands, luggage logs and MOST IMPORTANT- THEIR DAUGHTER MEMORY AND DIGNITY, to provide to themselves and their special friends a 5 stars life, FULL OF DIGNITY.

  13. Since you seem to be going over old ground on this case, perhaps you should keep the note from John close to important informaton as it denotes Madeleine was Gerry's daughter or so the DNA indicate.

    By the way, what are your qualifications for investigating any criminal case? Where is Amaral these days and what is he doing??

  14. Amaral is probably spending some time with his wife and with their daughters.There are people who do like to spend some time with their kids, you know.


Powered by Blogger.