Amaral and the dogs

[Brietta]

What do peeps think about the second alert in the villa video. Possibly to a dining chair?

I don't rate the first 'alert' so who knows what Eddie had taken it into his head to bark at when he was in that corner.

[Carana]

The clothes inspection is even more bizarre, IMO. There are items that he appears to have alerted to (and threw up in the air) which are not on the list (which the PJ had, not Grime), and items he simply nuzzled which are on it.

The very first item that got him excited was the little pair of blue shorts, followed by the little red T-shirt (seen being worn by Sean in at least one photo). The T-shirt is on the list, but not the blue shorts. His reaction to Kate's white top was not the same as his reaction to her trousers. He was very interested in what would appear to be one of G's T-shirts, but that didn't make the list.

Aside from one pair of knickers, there doesn't appear to have been any underwear. Why not? They may well not have been considered relevant for what they were seeking, but then neither was the toddler's outfit. Could underwear have deliberately not been packed in case Eddie gave false alerts?

[ferryman]

Unless you are a professional dog handler I dont think somehow you are in any position to say whether a professional dog handler is mistaken. You can of course say it is your laymans opinion, which is fine

Grime requested that the toy be forensically examined.

It never was.

Why not?

Or, an alternative question: if Grime did recommend that the toy be forensically examined (as he states in his rogatory interview) why was his instruction ignored?

[Carana]

Grime requested that the toy be forensically examined.

It never was.

Why not?

Or, an alternative question: if Grime did recommend that the toy be forensically examined (as he states in his rogatory interview) why was his instruction ignored?

What could it possibly have revealed after Kate had been walking around with it in her hot and sweaty hands for three months and had recently washed it as it had become grubby and smelly? If it had been bagged on 3 May, there might have been something significant on it.

[Benice]

The clothes inspection is even more bizarre, IMO. There are items that he appears to have alerted to (and threw up in the air) which are not on the list (which the PJ had, not Grime), and items he simply nuzzled which are on it.

The very first item that got him excited was the little pair of blue shorts, followed by the little red T-shirt (seen being worn by Sean in at least one photo). The T-shirt is on the list, but not the blue shorts. His reaction to Kate's white top was not the same as his reaction to her trousers. He was very interested in what would appear to be one of G's T-shirts, but that didn't make the list.

Aside from one pair of knickers, there doesn't appear to have been any underwear. Why not? They may well not have been considered relevant for what they were seeking, but then neither was the toddler's outfit. Could underwear have deliberately not been packed in case Eddie gave false alerts?

IIRC Carana - the red t-shirt was listed by the PJ as belonging to Madeleine.   Was that (wishful thinking imo) ever corrected?

I'm still wondering how all the clothes that were contaminated just happened to have been packed in the same box.

I'm also still wondering why Eddie didn't alert to any of that clothing while it was in the villa - but then did after it had been in the possession of the PJ.

It seems to me that 'cherry picking' may have come into the decisions by the PJ on which articles Eddie alerted to.

[ferryman]

IIRC Carana - the red t-shirt was listed by the PJ as belonging to Madeleine.   Was that (wishful thinking imo) ever corrected?

I'm still wondering how all the clothes that were contaminated just happened to have been packed in the same box.

I'm also still wondering why Eddie didn't alert to any of that clothing while it was in the villa - but then did after it had been in the possession of the PJ.

It seems to me that 'cherry picking' may have come into the decisions by the PJ on which articles Eddie alerted to.

It's possible that Madeleine might have worn that tee-shirt at an earlier time (in her life!) but certainly not on that holiday ....

[Carana]

I just don't see the point of it in that instance. I can understand that it could be a useful exercise in certain cases, e.g., Eddie might have been quicker to spot a bag of blood-drenched old clothes that a perp had forgotten about than the police. Then Keela gets wheeled in and confirms blood, which then turns out to show the unexplained presence of a victim's blood / DNA on clothing belonging / known to have been worn by someone who'd denied any contact with the victim. In that case, the person is likely to have some explaining to do...

In this instance, what evidence were they even seeking? Regularly washed family clothes would hardly have revealed anything significant. A dried gooey mess that had seeped into the bottom of a case might have done, I suppose, but would probably not have needed a dog to notice it.

To put it as delicately as possible, it just seems like more of a demonstration of the potential use of the dogs for future cases...

[Benice]

It's possible that Madeleine might have worn that tee-shirt at an earlier time (in her life!) but certainly not on that holiday ....

That's possible  -  but AFAIK Madeleine was very 'girly' and pink was her favourite colour.   I can't see her agreeing to wear what is obviously a boy's tee shirt.

[stephen25000]

That's possible  -  but AFAIK Madeleine was very 'girly' and pink was her favourite colour.   I can't see her agreeing to wear what is obviously a boy's tee shirt.

'Madeleine was very girly'................


How would you know ?

[mercury]

Grime requested that the toy be forensically examined.

It never was.

Why not?

Or, an alternative question: if Grime did recommend that the toy be forensically examined (as he states in his rogatory interview) why was his instruction ignored?

No idea. He says he asked for it to be retained for future tests.What tests is also unclear.

[sadie]

The clothes inspection is even more bizarre, IMO. There are items that he appears to have alerted to (and threw up in the air) which are not on the list (which the PJ had, not Grime), and items he simply nuzzled which are on it.

The very first item that got him excited was the little pair of blue shorts, followed by the little red T-shirt (seen being worn by Sean in at least one photo). The T-shirt is on the list, but not the blue shorts. His reaction to Kate's white top was not the same as his reaction to her trousers. He was very interested in what would appear to be one of G's T-shirts, but that didn't make the list.

Aside from one pair of knickers, there doesn't appear to have been any underwear. Why not? They may well not have been considered relevant for what they were seeking, but then neither was the toddler's outfit. Could underwear have deliberately not been packed in case Eddie gave false alerts?

Eddie had previously been trained to alert to things from living people, like blood and urine.  He could not be untrained.

Two things strike me with that list
1)  The pair of little blue shorts. 
Children have accidents.  Was Eddie alerting to urine from a living human?

2)  Kates trousers. 
Kates scent would have been on the towel, or whatever was given to Eddie as his datum guide (sorry cant remember the correct expression).   He alerts to blood from a living person.   Kate is a woman.   Women lose blood.

I feel sure you get my gist without having to go into it in any more detail.

[John]

Given the passage of time and the way in which the clothes were packed, any lawyer worth his salt would have had the entire fiasco kicked out of court.

[Carana]

Given the passage of time and the way in which the clothes were packed, any lawyer worth his salt would have had the entire fiasco kicked out of court.

In a UK court... but not necessarily in a PT one, unless a defence lawyer could provide reliable counter evidence to prove the contrary. It's not just about raising "reasonable doubt".

[Brietta]

In a UK court... but not necessarily in a PT one, unless a defence lawyer could provide reliable counter evidence to prove the contrary. It's not just about raising "reasonable doubt".

Apart from the fact that the specialist dogs were called in at a considerable remove after the event and the crime scene had been let out to other families, the question is, would the searches have been conducted in the UK in the way they were in Portugal?

That the UK police saw fit to send the PJ instruction manuals after the searches were completed would seem to indicate that they saw shortcomings.

[pegasus]

That's possible  -  but AFAIK Madeleine was very 'girly' and pink was her favourite colour.   I can't see her agreeing to wear what is obviously a boy's tee shirt.

"For ages 2 to 3, height 98cm".
label on the aeroplane red T-shirt. 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VOLUME%20VIIIa_Processo_2110.jpg