Amaral and the dogs

[mercury]

there is no confirmation of cadaver scent in any location..fact....your problem is that you did not understand what Grime said...fact

There is no such thing as confirmation of remnant cadaverscent in existence...fact

 

All we have is the indication and Grime's confirmation of it...fact

[mercury]

In that case, so does Mark Harrison, who said exactly the same thing ....

No, he did not say cadaver dog alerts are meaningless, you cannot put words into anyone's  mouth to suit

Unconfirmed alerts are not evidence, that is all he said

[ferryman]

No, he did not say cadaver dog alerts are meaningless, you cannot put words into anyone's  mouth to suit

Unconfirmed alerts are not evidence, that is all he said

When cadaver dog alerts lead to evidence that implicates culprits or identifies victims of crime, they are meaningful.

Alerts that are red-herrings are meaningless.

Eddie's alert to the Renault Scenic was meaningless. 

It was to Gerry's blood.

Gerry drove the car and was entitled to.

[pathfinder73]

Grime is on record as stating that Eddie alerted to cuddle-cat.

But only second time of asking.

And while Eddie did react to something within his scent range in the Renault Scenic, that was only after copious direction and re-direction towards a specific target (the car with the stickers in the back).

And we have the record of a PJ officer who expressed puzzlement that Eddie only alerted anywhere after constant direction and re-direction ....

Why did Eddie only pick that toy out which was on her bed? Why not another toy in the villa?  That's why Grime hid it and did the second test and kept the cupboard slightly open at the top and Eddie went up high and then alerted.

[mercury]

When cadaver dog alerts lead to evidence that implicates culprits or identifies victims of crime, they are meaningful.

Alerts that are red-herrings are meaningless.

Eddie's alert to the Renault Scenic was meaningless. 

It was to Gerry's blood.

Gerry drove the car and was entitled to.

The only red herring is your first paragraph, also
Where is the evidence that it was Gerrys blood in the car any more than it was Madeleine's blood in the lving room?Have to go,will catch up tonight

[ferryman]

Why did Eddie only pick that toy out which was on her bed? Why not another toy in the villa?  That's why Grime hid it and did the second test and kept the cupboard slightly open at the top and Eddie went up high and then alerted.

Grime hid the toy because he didn't want a repeat of the fiasco of Eddie playing with it.

Do you seriously think that police dogs attending a crime-scene, ever, should pick stuff up in their mouths?

Seriously?

[Benice]

No, that won't do. A dog either shows interest or it doesn't. It alerts or it doesn't. It alerted in one place only and that is significant.
Unless you are of the Mr Grime is a fraud school of thnking.

Eddie showed the same lack of interest in the Renault after 30 seconds as he did to the other cars.   If it wasn't for the repeated call-backs that would have been an end to it IMO.     It was Martin Grime's behaviour which changed at the Renault - not Eddies.   He did not repeatedly call Eddie back to any other car.

No way do I think MG is a fraud but I do not rule out the possibility of unconscious cueing -  and that is not a slur on MG  - as the handler does not know it is happening.    And it certainly is NOT a crime.

IMO Martin Grime is a brilliant dog trainer, but he is still human and therefore it is not impossible that this may have happened.   
 
This 'job' was under in the world's spotlight and he was about to embark on his own business where Eddie and Keela would be his livelihood.    That must have involved a considerable amount of extra  pressure to make sure that he 'got it right'.         It certainly wasn't just another day at the office for him IMO, which it would have been had he been staying in the police service IMO.

IMO he may have inadvertently and unconsciously over-egged the pudding.

I repeat that is not a crime, but something which does happen.   Tests have proved 'unconscious cueing' to be a fact -  and something which can happen to perfectly decent and honest police dog handlers.

[pathfinder73]

Eddies alerts are meaningless without any corroborating evidence.  There was no corroborating evidence.


And you KNOW IT.



Why do you keep pushing untruths Pfinder.

There was no forensic evidence found in the Kate Prout case but her husband was still convicted of her murder on circumstantial evidence. Eddie's alert changed that case. There are others - Eddie alerting to a killer's diary after he had transferred the scent etc. As soon as the perp has touched a cadaver they can transfer the scent to Cuddle Cat if they pick it up and place it on a bed. And that suggests staging of a crime Sadie.

[G-Unit]

(PJ Inspector Dias)

Was that a yes or a no? Was Grime persuading Eddie to alert in your opinion or not?

[G-Unit]

I would say 100% yes for reasons I have given before...absolutely nothing wrong with that imo

Police dog handlers direct the search, they don't 'persuade' the dogs to alert. 

[ferryman]

Was that a yes or a no? Was Grime persuading Eddie to alert in your opinion or not?

It is for Grime, not me, to explain why he kept directing and re-directing the dog back to one car (the car with find Madeleine stickers plastered all over the back windows).

It is for Grime, not me, to explain why the tours of all other apartments were whistle-stop, and the tour of apartment 5a long-drawn-out and protracted.

It is for Harrison, not me, to explain why he acknowledged the input of Grime and his dogs only in those inspections he recommended.
 
I wish Alfred still had the link to the way bias can influence a handler's judgment and interaction with his dog.

Indeed, in Grime's own profile, he makes reference to that very bias (in respect of other handlers, not himself ....)

[Mr Gray]

There is no such thing as confirmation of remnant cadaverscent in existence...fact

 

All we have is the indication and Grime's confirmation of it...fact

the alerts are unconfirmed...grime has not and cannot confirm them...

[Brietta]

How much time are you talking about? If there is no interest indicated by the dog, there is no interest.Are you saying all other 6 residences must have had cadaverscent contaminant from dead (or live humans as it put across ) but Eddie wasnt given the chance to find it?

Think very carefully about what you are saying here.

How likely is it that in all the residences checked by the dogs, including the Murat villa ... the only place where an individual had shed blood was in the McCann holiday residence?

[Carana]

On the 200 cases / searches saga:


From Grime's personal profile:
In six years operational deployment in over 200 cases the dog has never alerted to meat based foodstuffs.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm


In his report, "200 cases" is modified to state "200 criminal case searches":

In six years of operational deployment in over 200
criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and
specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the
dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

Some people may believe that the use of "cases" is misleadingly implying that the dog had worked on 200 criminal cases; others may believe that the profile was hastily written and the wording wasn't as clear as it could have been.

Whatever the view on that, he was still only talking about meat-based products for human consumption (bacon sandwiches / sausages) and road-kill (e.g., dead hedgehogs, birds, whatever other dead animals one tends to find on the side of a road).

However, over time, numerous sceptics on various forums have exaggerated Eddie's success by stating that he was responsible for over 200 homicide convictions.

Not only should common sense indicate that it is highly unlikely that a dog deployed for six years had helped to secure over 200 convictions, but we know from an FOI that he was only deployed in 37 cases in total.


(...) However, we can provide the following details regarding Victim Search Dog deployments between 2003 and 2007:

As two teams working together: handler Ellis and dog Frankie, with handler Grime and dog Eddie have been deployed on twenty occasions, with the recovery of four bodies.

Working alone, Grime/Eddie have been deployed on seventeen occasions with the recovery of one body and Ellis/Frankie have been deployed on five occasions with the recovery of three bodies, this includes the recovery of two women in one grave.


In the following interview, is Amaral referring to 200 "condemnations" since the use of such dogs had been introduced in the UK / USA, or did he "misunderstand" what Grime actually stated concerning Eddie?

Focus – A newspaper reported that your book could be summed up as “murder, the dog wrote”, given the fact that it was the cadaver odour and the blood that were found that led you to sustain the theory that Madeleine McCann died. What do you actually know beyond the dogs?

Gonçalo Amaral – That comment only reveals the ignorance of the person who wrote it. The technique of residue collection using special dogs like these, CSIs, is usual in England, in the United States and it has already led to more than 200 condemnations. The laboratory where the samples [of blood, cadaver odour and DNA from Maddie] were analyzed has corroborated these experts’ work.

Focus – It has corroborated it, but it does not specify that they belong to Maddie McCann.

G.A. – They can only match that from Madeleine McCann, because the lab had the twins’ DNA and it was not a match. Those are 15 out of 19 markers that match.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/08/i-was-close-to-finding-maddie.html

[stephen25000]

Think very carefully about what you are saying here.

How likely is it that in all the residences checked by the dogs, including the Murat villa ... the only place where an individual had shed blood was in the McCann holiday residence?

Could be a body and there had been no bodies elsewhere.