Amaral and the dogs

[lordpookles]

How do you think it is possible for blood to seep under a cemented tile?  Into the grout possibly, but not underneath.  And No, it was not established as coming from a member of The McCann Family.  Quite the opposite.  No DNA was found from The Family McCann.

This is not a criticism of your post.  Do keep on asking.  But we are all battling past myths.  This is what the likes of me are doing here.

Yeah I went and read the files and was mistaken. No meaningful results were obtained. That was what I was thinking though. If a significant amount of blood was spilled it could possibly leak down between a crack in the grout. This would be apparent I would imagine to anyone investigating the scene. Seems weird they didn't try using luminol in the area.

[stephen25000]

3.10.11 We now deal with the introduction of Martin GRIME and his Enhanced
Victim Recovery Dog (EVRD) to Operation Rectangle. Operation
Haven has established through enquiry with the NPIA, that
Martin GRIME was an ACPO accredited dog handler whilst he was a
serving police officer, but forfeited accreditation upon his retirement in
July 2007. We mentioned that Mr GRIME remains on the ACPO
accredited list of experts though his EVRD is no longer accredited by
ACPO. Whilst Martin GRIME’s original contract to Jersey was for five
days, his actual deployment lasted for 130 days.
3.10.12 The forensic review carried out by    X of the NPIA
questioned the presence of Martin GRIME on site for such a long
time. X , was informed that Martin GRIME had been
acting as a Deputy Crime Scene Manager to Forensic Service
Manager X , at the request of DCO HARPER. The forensic
review noted Martin GRIME’s lack of formal training or qualifications
to perform the role of Deputy Forensic Service Manager and that to
utilise him in this role ‘cannot be recognised as good practice’. The
review also noted that ‘there was concern from some persons
interviewed that too much reliance had been placed on the dogs’. It is
accepted that dogs are ‘presumptive screening assets’ only and that
any alerts or indications they give must be forensically corroborated.
In addition, it is a fact that there were no concise terms of reference
for the deployment of Martin GRIME and his EVRD or his subsequent
use as a search advisor, apparently with the support of
DCO HARPER.
3.10.13 CO POWER himself states ‘the search dog seemed to play a
significant role in determining whether a specific location needed to
be examined further. I am not an expert on dogs or what they do’.
3.10.14 Again, there is a distinct lack of documentary evidence to show any
intrusive supervision of the SIO with regard to the continued search.
This Inquiry concludes that the actions of DCO HARPER and
Martin GRIME went unsupervised for some considerable time. To
Page 116 of 383


Supervision Highly Confidential – Personal Information
CO POWER’s credit, there is an e-mail exchange between him and
DCO HARPER dated 10 May 2008 in which CO POWER raises the
question of the continued use of Martin GRIME and his EVRD. He
says ‘Lenny, it has struck me for some time that he [Mr GRIME] is an
expensive resource who has more than his fair shared of down time’.
DCO HARPER replied in the same e-mail string ‘to be fair to him
though, he hasn’t got much down time as he is also the NPIA search
coordinator and is fully employed’. CO POWER replies ‘Thanks.
Better understood now’. CO POWER does not appear to pursue the
matter further.
3.10.15 However, DCO HARPER’s reply was not factually accurate.
Martin GRIME was neither an NPIA search advisor nor fully
employed. In his statement, Martin GRIME states that ‘I am a Subject
Matter Expert registered with the UK National Policing Improvement
Agency and specialist homicide canine search advisor… I advise
Domestic and International Law enforcement agencies on the
operational deployment of police dogs in the role of homicide
investigation. I develop methods of detecting forensically recoverable
evidence by the use of dogs and facilitate training’. His expertise lay
purely in the use of dogs in searching, not as a 'search co-ordinator'.
3.10.16 OFFICER X notes that during conversation with X, CO POWER
accepted that ‘the dog was ‘probably unreliable’ and that the dog
handler, GRIME, had too much influence over the enquiry, again,
Mr POWER didn’t say how he managed or dealt with that issue’. This
Inquiry has been unable to establish whether CO POWER made any
further attempts to supervise the SIO in this key part of the
investigation.
3.10.17 OFFICER X concludes ‘decisions should be made based on
professional policing judgement and evidence. When you look at the
facts, the excavation and searching of Haut De La Garenne… was
not justified’.


Operation Rectangle

I think you will find the examination of what happened at 'Haut De La Garenne' is far from over ferryman.

[Mr Gray]

Are you experienced in the use of  forensic dogs ?

I don't think any of us are experienced in the use of forensic dogs....

[slartibartfast]

for all the thousands of posts on the dogs...and all the claims re there skills...the bottom linr remains...

Eddie may have alerted to cadaver odour...and then again he may have not...that statement is confirmed by what Grime said

The bottom line is that it is highly likely that Eddie alerted to cadaver odour. It is a matter of probability.

[Mr Gray]

The bottom line is that it is highly likely that Eddie alerted to cadaver odour. It is a matter of probability.

who says it's highly likely....no one in authority....and who is to say what the probability is...your post is simply your opinion based on no proper evidence

[Carew]

Hmmm ... I wouldn't dream of offending you by "suggesting" anything at all pertaining to your posts ... which really rather detracts from broadening the discussion which is a pity.

Right lets get back on track with Mr Amaral and Eddie.

I think we can both agree that Eddie barked ... is that correct?

I have read and understood what Mr Grime had to say about that ... have you?

I have read up on VOCs ... have you?

Will have to leave it there for the moment ... perhaps in the interests of accuracy and to dismiss the chance of "suggestion" getting in the way ... you might like to continue stulted discussion based on question and answer such as the three above and I'll get back to you later.

Why are sceptics incapable of discussion without taking personal slight?  That was rhetorical.

Hmmmmm......It was irrelevant in my view , not offensive.

How about sticking to the point as an idea to "keep on track?"

The point was that the EVRD doesn`t seem to alert non-stop as he would were the alerts triggered by residual scents from the many  aforementioned substances which would probably be present at most sites under investigation..........including those investigated by Eddie.

You seem, in the clip below to regard the ever growing list of substances to which residual scents the EVRD alerts, as "too many distractions"

"I think you are misunderstanding the role of the dogs as just one very valuable tool in the box of tools available to investigators ... or is it your suggestion that if you or a loved one is lying under a collapsed building it would be pointless to send the dogs in to find you because there are too many distractions around?"


So what stops the on duty dog alerting immediately and continuously to residual scents from any or many of the substances on an ever growing list of "distractions" which will be present at most sites ?

[Anna]

Yeah I went and read the files and was mistaken. No meaningful results were obtained. That was what I was thinking though. If a significant amount of blood was spilled it could possibly leak down between a crack in the grout. This would be apparent I would imagine to anyone investigating the scene. Seems weird they didn't try using luminol in the area.

I believe that may have been used to establish what articles and swabs would be sent to the Forensic Lab in the UK
The dogs,( Keela mainly), could detect blood specks, so small that it could not be seen by the naked eye.

[Mr Gray]

Hmmmmm......It was irrelevant in my view , not offensive.

How about sticking to the point as an idea to "keep on track?"

The point was that the EVRD doesn`t seem to alert non-stop as he would were the alerts triggered by residual scents from the many  aforementioned substances which would probably be present at most sites under investigation..........including those investigated by Eddie.

You seem, in the clip below to regard the ever growing list of substances to which residual scents the EVRD alerts, in your view, as "too many distractions"

"I think you are misunderstanding the role of the dogs as just one very valuable tool in the box of tools available to investigators ... or is it your suggestion that if you or a loved one is lying under a collapsed building it would be pointless to send the dogs in to find you because there are too many distractions around?"


So what stops the on duty dog alerting immediately and continuously to residual scents from any or many of the substances on an ever growing list of "distractions" which will be present at most sites ?

we would need to ask an expert.....may be in this situation the dog goes for the strongest scent...the body

plus....do these rescue dogs only react to cadaver odour....and not blood

[Eleanor]

Yeah I went and read the files and was mistaken. No meaningful results were obtained. That was what I was thinking though. If a significant amount of blood was spilled it could possibly leak down between a crack in the grout. This would be apparent I would imagine to anyone investigating the scene. Seems weird they didn't try using luminol in the area.

Luminol wouldn't have helped.  There does appear to have been blood.  But it wasn't McCann blood.

Strangely enough, you appear to be the only Fence Sitter that we have on this Forum.  This is always a good thing.

[slartibartfast]

who says it's highly likely....no one in authority....and who is to say what the probability is...your post is simply your opinion based on no proper evidence

Complete waste of time using sniffer dogs isn't it?  &%+((£

[Eleanor]

The bottom line is that it is highly likely that Eddie alerted to cadaver odour. It is a matter of probability.

Probability is simply not good enough.  Although your definition of probability is vastly different from mine.

[stephen25000]

who says it's highly likely....no one in authority....and who is to say what the probability is...your post is simply your opinion based on no proper evidence

They are trained for a specific purpose.

Perhaps you should look up the Oesterhelweg study 1998.

[slartibartfast]

Probability is simply not good enough.  Although your definition of probability is vastly different from mine.

Yes, I use a mathematical definition.

[Eleanor]

Hmmmmm......It was irrelevant in my view , not offensive.

How about sticking to the point as an idea to "keep on track?"

The point was that the EVRD doesn`t seem to alert non-stop as he would were the alerts triggered by residual scents from the many  aforementioned substances which would probably be present at most sites under investigation..........including those investigated by Eddie.

You seem, in the clip below to regard the ever growing list of substances to which residual scents the EVRD alerts, as "too many distractions"

"I think you are misunderstanding the role of the dogs as just one very valuable tool in the box of tools available to investigators ... or is it your suggestion that if you or a loved one is lying under a collapsed building it would be pointless to send the dogs in to find you because there are too many distractions around?"


So what stops the on duty dog alerting immediately and continuously to residual scents from any or many of the substances on an ever growing list of "distractions" which will be present at most sites ?

Somebody could still be alive under that rubble.  Dogs find them.  Dogs like Eddie.  That's what he was.

[Carew]

we would need to ask an expert.....may be in this situation the dog goes for the strongest scent...the body

Maybe........

If that`s the case, though, a weak residual scent remaining from an actual cadaver after a clean-up could be superseded and missed by the stronger whiff left behind by a nosebleed to which the dog alerts.