The collusion that existed between the Foreign Office, No 10 and the McCanns is even today quite astonishing to revisit. In the public domain we were repeatedly told "steps were being taken" to liberate the McCanns from their extended Algarve business trip. It is only now with the release of the Wikileaks cables concerning the McCanns we are at last given an indication as to what those steps that were taken by our elected government on our behalf, actually were.
The "British evidence" that was spoken of in the Wikileaks cables and which was of so much concern to the McCanns but more importantly it now seems to Browns' then government of the day, can only be the cadaverine 'scent' as it was this evidence that was detected by British trained police dogs under the control of Mark Harrison. These dogs were introduced to the case via South Yorkshire Constabulary and it is the evidence from this source which the cable suggests requires 'cooperation'. This could be cooperation to remove or cooperation to reinforce. The wording is ambiguous and may be deliberately so. To this day it has proven to the stickiest piece of evidence against the McCanns and is one which has attracted alot of attention from those who schemed and strove to ensure the McCanns liberty.
Within a year of the date of this cable Clarence Mitchell in a televised interview alluded to 'diplomatic channels' as having being used to save the McCanns from the clutches of the Portuguese police and prosecution for the death of their daughter. Mitchell in that same interview continued on to say that these channels even today were still being used as the McCanns case had provoked issues of 'national security between our two countries'.
How could Mitchell a man who was by than a freelance PR spokesman for Brian Kennedy, one of the McCanns shadowy millionaire backers, and only a private sector employee and ex government confidante have gained access or knowledge of such high level and confidential information? Mitchell can only have had knowledge of such communication if he himself was behind those closed doors, the closed doors of political power and intrigue.
The cadaver dog evidence was and remains to this day the most troublesome artefact of all to expunge from the public record. The FSS had done their job and they had done it well. In one breathe they had identified Maddies’ DNA and in the next provided just enough scientific doubt as to exclude the possibility their evidence could ever be used in a court of law to prosecute the McCanns. The cooperation the FSS demonstrated was exemplary in the extreme. Sir Jeffries the discoverer of DNA cooperated further and went on public record saying he would take the witness box to support the McCanns. Jeffries was interviewed by the BBC again weighed in again on behalf of the McCanns saying he would provide 'imaginative evidence' in the witness box in order to explain how Maddies’ DNA had been detected in the back of the parents hire car.
On the other hand the detected cadaverine was trickier as its presence had been widely reported both here and in Portugal and understanding the dogs indications required no specialist scientific understanding. This evidence was a far more dangerous proposition to tackle for those seeking to exonerate the McCanns of any wrongdoing. The blood, the bodily fluids, the hair or the DNA had by then been dealt either by cooperation or by the threat of the McCanns hiring their own forensic specialists. The cadaverine was common knowledge, and it had been well reported and it was easily understood by all. Put simply the challenge was to then undo what everyone by then already knew, and that was there either was a response from the dog or there wasn't and in turn this either indicated the presence of a dead body or it didn't.
Here is a small snippet of the multitude of reports:
The Times: "The “cadaver dog” is reported in the Portuguese press to have discovered a trace of Madeleine’s body in her bedroom, meaning that she would have been dead in the apartment for at least two hours, which does not fit with official police reports so far".
Looking back over the events of the past 4 years it is now possible to detect the direction in which the cooperation that was employed back in 2007 has shifted the balance of the evidence presented. That cooperation was plainly to remove or minimise evidence that was not helpful to the McCanns. This must be so for had it been other the McCanns would have been charged long ago. The cadaverine remains the final hurdle but it is one that will in time like all the other planks of evidence against the McCann’s ultimately succumb. It will give way to the 'persuasion' Gerry McCann spoke of in 2010 outside a Lisbon courtroom, when describing the need to 'change police officers minds at Portimao', which itself was part of the policy of 'cooperation' the Wiki cable described.
The cooperative approach is still well underway in all regards. It has been reported back in 2010 Martin Grime the dog's expert handler from Portugal had a telephone conversation and in that conversation Grime suggested there was the evidence in the public domain so far concerning the dog's evidence was 'just the press' - (see item above). The implication was the evidence published was somehow unreliable and in need of revision. Grime when openly challenged about this change in approach to the reported facts suggested it was his personal opinion that if the McCanns had kept a dead body in their apartment then they may not have broken any laws.
As time passes it becomes more and more apparent to any commentator on the McCann case that the 'cooperation policy' implemented behind closed doors in 2007 is finally going to succeed after all.
DAVIDiCKE.COM
No comments:
Post a Comment