2007-09-10 08:52:59 · 31 answers · asked by pumpkinoune 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
according to Sky news a full DNA match from blood sample in the boot of the car
2007-09-10 08:59:45 · update #1
They didn't find a complete DNA match and nor did they find any blood in the boot of the car. So they can't charge them and nor will they ever charge them.
--edit--
Oh if only people had listened. Now all the thumbs downers look even more stupid. As I (and anyone with more than one brain cell) knew already, the Portuguese police have DISCOUNTED the full DNA match nonsense.
Stop listening to rumours and innuendo, people, and go on the few FACTS we have.
2007-09-10 08:56:55 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
May be the Mccanns got whiff of the proof and took flight before the protugese police could fulfil their own legal procedure and could bring formal charge against the couple. It is quite sudden the way they went home after proclaiming of not leaving till they cleared their name. Now if sky news story is correct and the parents are responsible, then their friends also should be investigated.
What is not very clear is where was the poor girl's body all along as they hired this vehicle few weeks after the disappearence. Could it be that the whole thing was hoax in the beginning, for generation of money and then the things went wrong somehow and she actually died later, which is why the time difference?
2007-09-10 09:20:38 · answer #2 · answered by debchat 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Portuguese police say they have found firm DNA evidence that the body of Madeleine was in the boot of the family hire car five weeks after she went missing sources have told sky news.so wait and see what happens.
2007-09-10 09:12:44 · answer #3 · answered by Muriel L 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Apparently it's difficult as the DNA of the whole family is very similar as it all came from the same 2 parents. If it was conclusive then surely they would be facing a real charge now! I hope it's not them as I actually am on their side.
2007-09-10 09:00:28 · answer #4 · answered by fat tart 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think this result arrived today, it's not the same DNA sample result that took the McCanns for questioning. That first one wasn't a 100% match, so they couldn't do more than what they did.
2007-09-10 09:00:31 · answer #5 · answered by Maria 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
if you look at timesonline.co.uk at the article about them:the full details: it says that the police were furious that they could not charge them after the couple's lawyer went to speak with the attorney general. So their lawyer must have dealt with this.
and re: ring of uranus reply: well yes, but why underneath the mats of the boot of all places? And how do you account for the sniffer dog's going crazy reaction near the car, and with cuddly cat, plus her clothes?
2007-09-10 09:12:15 · answer #6 · answered by Prudie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe it was said they were waiting for results to come back from the UK. Maybe they didn't have the results before they let them leave, so they couldn't arrest them.
snetterton, a full dna match has indeed been found. keep up will you? ;)
2007-09-10 09:02:04 · answer #7 · answered by ♥ Mummy ♥ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I heard they were still waiting for another set of results to come back from Birmingham. Specialists have said that DNA can be transferred very easily though. I was surprised to actually see them showing some emotion at last in the statement read out at the airport. Will we ever really know?
2007-09-10 08:58:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
The DNA evidence does not prove what actually happened. It does not prove whether or not the daughter is even dead. It simply gives reason to believe the girl was in the car rented three weeks after her disapearance. Hard to convict if you can't prove death or disposition.
2007-09-10 08:59:47 · answer #9 · answered by toff 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am assuming you are talking about the McCanns.
I don't believe the police would be wise to actually release real facts about an ongoing investigation. Take what you are reading with a grain of salt, unless you are in-the-know.
2007-09-10 08:58:00 · answer #10 · answered by civil_seismic_eng 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋