Madeleine McCann: British DNA expert warned against evidence

Aug 5 2008

A British scientist warned DNA tests on a sample from Kate and Gerry McCanns’ hire car were inconclusive just days before the couple were made suspects, official police files revealed tonight.

In an email dated September 3 2007 John Lowe, from the major incidents team at the Birmingham-based Forensic Science Service (FSS), said it was impossible to conclude whether the material came from their daughter Madeleine.

Four days later Portuguese detectives named the McCanns “arguidos”, or formal suspects, in the child’s disappearance, citing DNA evidence as grounds for their suspicions.

The revelation came to light after the mammoth police files from the exhaustive inquiry, which lasted over 14 months, were formally made public today.

Journalists were handed DVDs containing copies of thousands of pages of evidence from the case outside the courthouse in the Algarve town of Portimao.

The dossier includes details of the lines of inquiry pursued by detectives, forensic reports, witness statements and transcripts of interviews with the McCanns.

Among the files is the email written by Mr Lowe to Detective Superintendent Stuart Prior, head of the British side of the investigation.

In it the scientist reported that a sample from the boot of the McCanns’ Renault Scenic hire car, which they rented 24 days after Madeleine went missing, contained 15 out of 19 of the young girl’s DNA components.

But he cautioned that this result - based on the controversial “low copy number” DNA analysis technique which uses very small samples - was “too complex for meaningful interpretation or inclusion”.

Mr Lowe wrote: “Let’s look at the question that is being asked: ’Is there DNA from Madeleine 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 - because Madeleine has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeleine merely appears to match the result by chance.”

The expert noted that the components of the missing girl’s DNA profile were not unique to her - in fact some of them were present among FSS scientists, including himself.

He concluded: “We cannot answer the question: is the match genuine, or is it a chance match.”

Mr Lowe also stressed that low copy number analysis could not determine when or how the DNA was deposited, what body fluid it came from and whether a crime was committed.

The email was translated into Portuguese on September 4 2007, the official documents reveal.

The police files were released this afternoon under Portuguese law after the lifting of the period of judicial secrecy in the case.

Lawyers for the McCanns, both 40, from Rothley, Leicestershire, were formally given access to the documents last week.

They are studying them for fresh leads that the couple’s private detectives can follow up in their own search for their daughter.

The McCanns are keen not to give “a running commentary” on their legal team’s trawl through the files, family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said today.

And they are reluctant to respond to questions raised by journalists allowed access to the documents.

Mr Mitchell said: “The Portuguese Attorney General, in his recent statement, made it very clear indeed that there’s absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing by Kate and Gerry in any way, shape or form and journalists should bear that in mind when they examine the police files.

“A lot of this is historical detail drafted by officers who failed to find Madeleine and who quite wrongfully were going down inaccurate lines of supposition and assumption.

“We will not be commenting on any of this.

“Kate and Gerry are no longer arguidos. The Portuguese judicial system has accepted that they were not involved in Madeleine’s disappearance in any way, shape or form and these files should be seen in that context.

“All that matters is the search for Madeleine. Kate and Gerry’s lawyers are continuing to examine all of the information in minute detail and where anything that is relevant to finding Madeleine needs to be done it will be.”

Madeleine was nearly four when she vanished from her family’s holiday apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on May 3 last year as her parents dined with friends nearby.

Despite a huge police investigation and massive coverage in the Portuguese and British media, she has not been found.

On July 21 Portuguese prosecutors announced they were shelving the case, although it can be reopened if credible new evidence comes to light.

At the same time the McCanns and Algarve resident Robert Murat were told they were no longer arguidos in Madeleine’s disappearance.

The police files also reveal that detectives categorically told Mr McCann in interview that Madeleine’s DNA had been found in the hire car.

A friend of Mr McCann said it seemed clear that the Portuguese police were trying to extract a confession from him.

The friend added: “It would appear they were seeking to apply pressure by over-stating the evidence that they had - and frankly it is a scandal.”

Although the questioning on September 7 last year was not recorded, an unidentified police officer took notes which were included in the dossier.

The officer wrote that Mr McCann was told his daughter’s DNA was discovered in the boot of the rented Renault Scenic and behind a sofa in the family’s holiday apartment.

The notes said: “Confronted with the fact that Madeleine’s DNA was gathered from behind the sofa and from the boot of the vehicle, and analysed by a British laboratory, he said he could not explain why this would be.”

This contradicts the FSS expert’s opinion that the sample found in the car could not be definitively linked to the little girl.

Mr Mitchell said: “I can confirm that the Portuguese police put it to Gerry as a fact that Madeleine’s DNA had been found in the apartment and the vehicle, when it is now clear that that was not the case, and that the initial FSS report had said the findings were inconclusive.

“You have to ask what the police were trying to achieve by over-presenting evidence that they did not have, and clearly could not claim to have.”