Cadaver dogs are unreliable - Eugene Zapata

[G-Unit]

Has anyone defined reliability in this context?
Or are we conflating reliablity and repeatability?

I very much doubt it could be repeatable. Therefore it isn't scientific in the same way as a litmus test, for example.

[Mr Gray]

I very much doubt it could be repeatable. Therefore it isn't scientific in the same way as a litmus test, for example.

It is a, scientific  test.... And it may well be repeatable but there, seems no desire from the canine industry  to carry out scientific  testing....

[Sunny]

It is a, scientific  test.... And it may well be repeatable but there, seems no desire from the canine industry  to carry out scientific  testing....

I assume you accidentally missed putting this was your opinion Davel.

[Mr Gray]

I assume you accidentally missed putting this was your opinion Davel.

If you read the article the author states that she has faced reluctance in repeating... Expanding the tests..

Where are the scientific tests...if the dogs are so good why doesn't the canine industry want to prove it.

[Alice Purjorick]

It is a, scientific  test.... And it may well be repeatable but there, seems no desire from the canine industry  to carry out scientific  testing....

Tell us how you would conduct tests then.

[Mr Gray]

Tell us how you would conduct tests then.

The test described would be a good start and the sort of thing I had already suggested

[Robittybob1]

I very much doubt it could be repeatable. Therefore it isn't scientific in the same way as a litmus test, for example.

Why not?  If there were two cadaver dogs and they both alerted what would you say then?
Maybe there could be two dogs each run by different dog handlers. 

[Robittybob1]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3078300/  Handler beliefs affect scent detection dog outcomes
Lisa Lit,corresponding author1,4 Julie B. Schweitzer,2 and Anita M. Oberbauer3

Stats has never been my best subject.

A reply to the study  "https://swgdog.fiu.edu/news/2012/swgdog-response-to-lit-k9-study/swgdog_response_to_lit_study.pdf   "SWGDOG Membership Commentary on “Handler beliefs affect scent
detection dog outcomes” by L. Lit, J.B. Schweitzer and A.M. Oberbauer. "

[ShiningInLuz]

Just started reading this so haven't formed an opinion yet ... but I thought this pertinent to the discussion.

Page 6
1.1.2 Effectiveness and Limitations
Cadaver dogs have been a forensic tool for over 50 years, but there is little scientific research into their effectiveness and limitations.
Unlike DNA analysis, cadaver dogs have not been scientifically validated and thus, their evidence in court is often viewed with caution
https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/62158/2/02whole.pdf

Looks like one to stack up for my coffee and biscuits at elevenses.   

[Robittybob1]

Looks like one to stack up for my coffee and biscuits at elevenses.   

"elevenses: a short break for light refreshments, usually with tea or coffee, taken at about eleven o'clock in the morning."

Another word for smoko then.

[Alice Purjorick]

The test described would be a good start and the sort of thing I had already suggested

Would you care to elaborate on that. The comment is a bit vague and the tests conducted by Lit have been called into question.

[Mr Gray]

Would you care to elaborate on that. The comment is a bit vague and the tests conducted by Lit have been called into question.

Called into question by whom.... The dog handlers who were caught out


A very well run scientific  study... The only criticism  coming from those who were caught out by it.... The dog handlers

[slartibartfast]

Called into question by whom.... The dog handlers who were caught out


A very well run scientific  study... The only criticism  coming from those who were caught out by it.... The dog handlers

A bit like anyone “caught out” by a dog alert criticising it.

[Mr Gray]

A bit like anyone “caught out” by a dog alert criticising it.

criticising it in what way.......the alerts have no evidential value or reliability,....that isnt criticism its a fact.


What I have noticed is that both Harrison and Grime made their statements in english......so how much did the PJ actually understand them.....I think they genuinely believed that the alerts were reliable re cadaver....a mistake that started their suspicion re the mccanns

[Robittybob1]

criticising it in what way.......the alerts have no evidential value or reliability,....that isnt criticism its a fact.


What I have noticed is that both Harrison and Grime made their statements in english......so how much did the PJ actually understand them.....I think they genuinely believed that the alerts were reliable re cadaver....a mistake that started their suspicion re the mccanns

Can you state there was no cadaver?  How do you place the odds of there being the past presence of a cadaver to their being no past presence of a cadaver?