# Smoking Gun ?

In every trial based solely on evidence, namely without any confession nor the victim found, every single evidence may be argued about. Any court then but has to judge within the two overall views of the bunch of evidence presented by the both parties in the trial.

In some cases but there are so called “smoking guns” which are evidence which lead with the utmost probability to the offender in question. Obviously looking at the very forensic details, Cuddle Cat may be seen as such a “Smoking Gun”.

This stems from the following forensic facts:

First Question: Can the fact that Cuddle Cat expressed cadaver Odour be compatible with the Abduction Theory?

1. Cuddle Cat was seemingly severely contaminated by Cadaver odour (liquids). From witness statement of the McCann’s it was washed five days after the event. As the scent dogs could easily smell the odour months later still, me must conclude that it was in direct contact with a dead body for an outstanding long time. (Washing destroys large molecules as DNA, as washing agents are made to destroy albumen and other typical ingredients of food. But they do not destroy the more simple molecules of cadaver odour liquids, those but are only washed out in parts.)

2. We know from forensic science cadaver odour to be smelled by extremely sensitive scent dogs even at the dead body itself takes at least about 1 ½ hours after death, in average but about 3 hours least.

3. This time goes much beyond every thinkable time an abductor could have been in the apartment 5A. Which must be seen together with the fact, that Maddie had to hold the toy cuddle cat briefly in her arms to be it contaminated that much the whole time. In the case of an abduction the toy but cannot have been with Maddie for more than ½ hour maximum (if thinking in very much favour to the McCann’s made up timeline), as it was after the event left at the apartment and thus stayed in the possession of the McCann’s.

4. Then the abduction theory can be excluded for sure.

Second Question: Could have been Cuddle Cat be contaminated by any other dead body before the day 3rd of May 2007?

5. In principle not, as the severe contamination implies that the toy was for sure in an intimate contact with a dead body for several hours, and, also it will have smelled bad before washing even for humans. That Maddies preferred cuddle toy was in such a bad condition before her death can be disallowed. The last thing happening could but only be “explained” by another very much implausible artifical construction. A construction never was made even by the McCann’s.

6. Then but we must conclude that the dead body was indeed Maddie.

Third Question: If there was no abductor, who then was responsible for her death?

7. We know the time between the last independent sign of life (17:30, crèche report) and the time alleged for the alarm (22:00) was 4 ½ hours. That means Maddie had to have been dead at about 19:00 clock latest(!).

8. We know from witness statement of Kate Healy McCann, that she alleges to have seen her alive until about 20:30. We know from witness statement of Gerry McCann, that he alleges to have seen her alive until about 21:10. Both testimonies then were just a fabrication of alleged reality.

9. Then the conclusion is that the McCann’s must have been involved in the death of her daughter in some serious way.

To bring it on a summing up point:

IF we agree that Cuddle Cat had Cadaver Odour when examined at 2nd August, THEN we must conclude that the McCann’s are profoundly responsible for the death of Maddie.

The counter argument but is not true: IF we do NOT agree, THEN we just have to go back to an overall view of all evidence.

Another “Smoking Gun” is Maddies DNA in the Renault Scenic hired by the parents three weeks after Maddies disappearence. For further possible “Smoking Guns” see e.g. Some oddities regarding Version 2. Especially Sample 10 regarding “The last Photo” shows that Gerry McCann deliberately faked one of the main evidences. It proves at least that one can hardly believe the claims of the parents in general.