Wandering Off Topic

[stephen25000]

It has been explained...according to the files the dogs completely ignored the McCanns apartment  before being repeatedly brought back and alerting to areas they had completely ignored...same with the car


Maybe this great alleged skills of the dog made an intelligent member of the Polícia Judiciária, Inspector Paulo Días to ask the following (Relatório de Análise dos primeiros 11 Volumes): "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times

can anyone explain this troubling fact

What is your expertise in the handling of dogs in these situations ?

[Angelo222]

It has been explained...according to the files the dogs completely ignored the McCanns apartment  before being repeatedly brought back and alerting to areas they had completely ignored...same with the car


Maybe this great alleged skills of the dog made an intelligent member of the Polícia Judiciária, Inspector Paulo Días to ask the following (Relatório de Análise dos primeiros 11 Volumes): "If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times

can anyone explain this troubling fact

Strange that isn't quite how Grime tells it.  According to the dog handler Eddie sensed something the moment he was brought to the door of apartment 5a.

You still haven't answered my question, why did the dogs only alert to the McCanns apartment and property?

[Mr Gray]

What is your expertise in the handling of dogs in these situations ?

#what was amarals seeing as he drew all the wrong conclusions

[Mr Gray]

Strange that isn't quite how Grime tells it.  According to the dog handler Eddie sensed something the moment he was brought to the door of apartment 5a.

Grimes opinion....nothing concrete...you cannot ignore what the pj said about the alerts...and you cannot ignore what Harrison said....NO INFERENCE....many people are drawing their own conclusions

[Mr Gray]

What is your expertise in the handling of dogs in these situations ?

what is [ removed goading ] R Hall's experience...making an absolute fool of himself on the phone to SY re the dogs

[Angelo222]

#what was amarals seeing as he drew all the wrong conclusions

That is your opinion, it has by no means been established.

[Angelo222]

Grimes opinion....nothing concrete...you cannot ignore what the pj said about the alerts...and you cannot ignore what Harrison said....NO INFERENCE....many people are drawing their own conclusions

Grime's opinion?  He's the expert or hadn't you realised?

[stephen25000]

what is [ removed goading ] R Hall's experience...making an absolute fool of himself on the phone to SY re the dogs

You do make some strange comments.

[pathfinder73]

"I am convinced that on May 3, 2007, between 21:40 and 22:00, a man, I do not know who yet, opened from outside the window of Madeleine's room, trying to theft, believing that no one was in the apartment, he ran to Madeleine, and took her away. That man (or an accomplice) was seen by Jane Tanner and members of the Smith family."

Heri's theory. The abductor was seen by Jane Tanner after 21:40 and the Smiths at 10. So he believes Jane saw him going one way (much later than she claimed and with long hair!) and the Smiths saw him going another way (now with short hair!). It seems like the aductor didn't know which way he was going and Jane is incredibly unreliable as a witness. He opened the window and ran to Madeleine and took her away (ignoring and running through the twins in their cots I presume). I want to see this reconstruction.

[Benice]

Despite claims and counterclaims regarding the woof woofs, something which has never been explained is why they only alerted to materials and objects which were associated with the McCanns or accommodation occupied by them.  From what I have read in the files, alerts were never recorded elsewhere.

Anyone like to explain this troubling coincidence?

You must have missed a lot of posts Angelo:

Here's one I made earlier on the subject:-

It seems to me that 'time allowed to search' is the obvious discrepancy between searches of anything McCann related - and other searches.

It's plain from the videos that the dogs do not always go in and immediately identify and make a beeline for a place or object that has been contaminated.    If that was the case then surely Eddie would have immediately alerted to Cuddlecat - and Keela would have alerted to the white curtains on her first search - and Eddie would have alerted to the keyfob on his first encounter with the Renault.

The dogs obviously need time.   

The longest time spent on any of the other cars was around 30 seconds - and no alerts were made.   After the same amount of time i.e. 30 seconds was spent on the Renault  -similarly  - no alerts were made.   It was only after being given a lot more time and encouragement regarding the Renault that Eddie finally alerted.     What would have happened if all the other cars had been given the same amount of time and attention?

IMO it's highly likely that other alerts would have occurred, because (as with the apartments) it's hard to believe that no alertable material had ever been deposited in those 9 cars - either in the factory while they were being built - or by their subsequent owners/families/friends.    The same goes for the apartments.

[Angelo222]

"I am convinced that on May 3, 2007, between 21:40 and 22:00, a man, I do not know who yet, opened from outside the window of Madeleine's room, trying to theft, believing that no one was in the apartment, he ran to Madeleine, and took her away. That man (or an accomplice) was seen by Jane Tanner and members of the Smith family."

Heri's theory. The abductor was seen by Jane Tanner after 21:40 and the Smiths at 10. So he believes Jane saw him going one way (much later than she claimed and with long hair!) and the Smiths saw him going another way (now with short hair!). It seems like the aductor didn't know which way he was going and Jane is incredibly unreliable as a witness. He opened the window and ran to Madeleine and took her away (ignoring and running through the twins in their cots I presume). I want to see this reconstruction.

Should be hilarious

[Angelo222]

You must have missed a lot of posts Angelo:

Here's one I made earlier on the subject:-

It seems to me that 'time allowed to search' is the obvious discrepancy between searches of anything McCann related - and other searches.

It's plain from the videos that the dogs do not always go in and immediately identify and make a beeline for a place or object that has been contaminated.    If that was the case then surely Eddie would have immediately alerted to Cuddlecat - and Keela would have alerted to the white curtains on her first search - and Eddie would have alerted to the keyfob on his first encounter with the Renault.

The dogs obviously need time.   

The longest time spent on any of the other cars was around 30 seconds - and no alerts were made.   After the same amount of time i.e. 30 seconds was spent on the Renault  -similarly  - no alerts were made.   It was only after being given a lot more time and encouragement regarding the Renault that Eddie finally alerted.     What would have happened if all the other cars had been given the same amount of time and attention?

IMO it's highly likely that other alerts would have occurred, because (as with the apartments) it's hard to believe that no alertable material had ever been deposited in those 9 cars - either in the factory while they were being built - or by their subsequent owners/families/friends.    The same goes for the apartments.

The dog handler knew from initial responses or in most cases the lack of them whether it was worth pursuing other objects.

[Mr Gray]

The dog handler knew from initial responses or in most cases the lack of them whether it was worth pursuing other objects.

the dogs handlers opinion is not worth a bean as evidence...for very good reasons

[Angelo222]

the dogs handlers opinion is not worth a bean as evidence...for very good reasons

Sorry misread your post.  As proof yes but it is still evidence albeit unreliable at this time.

[Mr Gray]

Sorry misread your post.  As proof yes but it is still evidence albeit unreliable at this time.

Not proof
Not evidence
In fact no inference at all can be made from a them