Amaral and the dogs

[Jean-Pierre]

Was there any indication in the forensic reports to suggest that the "underlying material" could be other than human in origin?

Is it from the forensic reports that the idea of pigs could have originated ?

Was simply exploring ideas as to reasons for the dog alerts.  Nothing that could have related to a cadaver was found at the sites.  And nothing was found and analysed that could show that Madeleine was dead.  So this line of enquiry would seem to be a dead end.

The flower bed alerts could possibly have resulted from a fish, blood and bone type of fertiliser, where the dried blood component is a by product of slaughterhouses.  If Eddie alerts to dried blood, and to rotting rig, would he alert to dried pig blood?  I don't know the answer to that but it would seem to be logical.

 

[Lace]

*snip*

"There were no alert indications from the remaining properties. I did however
 see the dog search in the kitchen waste bins. These contained meat
 foodstuffs including pork and did not result in any false alert response. "


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

The thing is Carew pig blood could  have been used in the fertiliser on the garden,   could be Eddie doesn't alert to cooked lamb chops etc. as the blood could have been cooked out or different when cooked who knows,  yet he alerted to a piece of pork that had been soaked in petrol and burnt.

[Carew]

Was simply exploring ideas as to reasons for the dog alerts.  Nothing that could have related to a cadaver was found at the sites.  And nothing was found and analysed that could show that Madeleine was dead.  So this line of enquiry would seem to be a dead end.

The flower bed alerts could possibly have resulted from a fish, blood and bone type of fertiliser, where the dried blood component is a by product of slaughterhouses.  If Eddie alerts to dried blood, and to rotting rig, would he alert to dried pig blood?  I don't know the answer to that but it would seem to be logical.

Let`s hope no-one ever gets bumped off or disappears from a fertiliser factory, then.

Seriously though, unless anything can be found and analysed to add weight to the explored ideas and with no "fertiliser alerts" from other sites searched they have no more value than the "cadaver of the missing person" idea.

[Carew]

The thing is Carew pig blood could  have been used in the fertiliser on the garden,   could be Eddie doesn't alert to cooked lamb chops etc. as the blood could have been cooked out or different when cooked who knows,  yet he alerted to a piece of pork that had been soaked in petrol and burnt.

Alerts all over the place could then have been possible since tracking through from the outside spaces/gardens would occur everywhere.

[G-Unit]

Good point 

If thgey are so alike that he cannot distinguish between human and pig remains, Eddie would be likely to alert to fresh blood of pigs as he does to human fresh blood,

He could differentiate between human and animal blood and he was trained using mostly human cadaver odour.

EVRD used to be trained using swine (pigs) as their odour is the closest to that of humans. But most of the time, however, the dog was trained using the odour of a human cadaver. Operationally, the dog has ignored large amounts of animal remains/bones when locating human decomposition.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm

Dog's noses can tell the difference;

The dog's olfactory system is so highly developed that it continues to be efficient at cellular level:
Distinguish human blood from other species where the chemical constituent parts are identical.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

[ferryman]

He could differentiate between human and animal blood and he was trained using mostly human cadaver odour.

Simply not true ...

[G-Unit]

He could differentiate between human and animal blood and he was trained using mostly human cadaver odour.

Simply not true ...

Cite?

[ferryman]

Cite?

Dear [name deleted],

With regard to your request in relation to:

"1. Can you confirm that the cadaver dog "Eddie", formerly a police dog under
dog handler and dog instructor Martin Grime, now retired from your force, was
sent to America to be trained on human cadavers and be upgraded to "enhanced"
victim recovery dog?

2. Can you confirm that South Yorkshire Police uses, or has used, an American
device for trapping scents, a "Scent Transfer Unit" or "STU100" in the
training of its cadaver dogs?"

RESPONSE

1. South Yorkshire Police holds information which would tend to confirm this part of your request. This information is contained within the anual Personal Development Review of retired PC GRIME for the year 2005/2006 and states at various points,

"(PC GRIMES) has deployed police dog 'Eddie' to train on human remains in the US. This training has been valuable as it is not possible to utilise human remains in the UK. A full report from the F.B.I. to document his training and operational deployments whilst in America remains pending"

"Deployments have been on a national scale and a recent visit to the F.B.I. in America has created some income generation potential in terms of training."

"Complete sponsored visit to FBI to educate on C.S.I. Dog capabilities - Achieved"

2. From enquiries I have made it would appear that South Yorkshire Police have not deployed or used a device known as a 'Scent Transfer Unit' or 'STU100' within Force either operationally or for evaluation. However the Force does hold information that would indicate that Mr GRIME, whilst serving with this Force IN 2006, did utilise such a device whilst engageD in another Force area. A section of a statement apparently made but not signed by Mr GRIME reads: -

" I developed the training of the E.V.R.D. to include the screening of scent pads taken from motor vehicles by a ST 100 Scent Tranference Unit.

The unit is designed in a two main-part design. The main body is a battery operated electrical device that draws air in at to the front and exhausts through the rear. Ther is no 're-circulation' of air within the unit. The second main part is a 'grilled' hood that fits to the main body. A sterile gauze pad is fitted into the hood. When operated the ST 100 draws air through the hood and the sterile gauze pad and exhausts through ports to the rear. 'Scent' is trapped in the gauze, which may then be stored for use within scent discrimination exercises.

The ST 100 unit is cleaned following use in such a manner that no residual scent is apparent. This is checked by control measures where the dog is allowed to search a given area where the S100 is secreted. Any response by the dog would suggest contamination. Tests have shown that the decontamination procedures are effective in this case with the dog NOT alerting to the device when completed.

Use of the ST100 is recommended when subject vehicles, property, clothing, premises are to be forensically protected from contamination by the dog, and for covert deployment. At all other times best practice would be for the dog to be given direct access.

Operational use of the STU 100 is in a developmental stage"

If you are unhappy with the way your request for information has been handled, you can request a review by following the advice contained in the separate notice attached to this correspondence:

If you remain dissatisfied with the handling of your request or complaint, you have a right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at:
The Information Commissioner's Office,
Wycliffe House,
Water Lane,
Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Telephone: 08456 306060 or 01625 545745
Website: www.ico.gov.uk
There is no charge for making an appeal.

Yours sincerely

___________________________

The follow-up quetion:

__________________________-

Freedom of Information Request - Reference No:20110231

REQUEST

[Following a response to request 20110186]

Can I ask, did that FBI report described as 'pending' turn up?

RESPONSE

SYP did not receive a report, therefore there is `no information held'.

[ferryman]

If you want further independent corroboration, take a look at contemporaneous reports of Grime's (proven and undisputed!) trip to the States in the New Year 2006.

Two points to note: first, an absence (no reference to Eddie, then unknown outside police circles); second, the cited reason for the trip, so that Keela could assist the FBI in two murder enquiries ...

By Karen McVeigh HER detective work is unsurpassed, her dedication to duty during some of Britain’s most challenging murder cases unfailing. Keela, a 16-month-old springer spaniel, has become such an asset to South Yorkshire Police that she now earns more than the chief constable. Her sense of smell, so keen that she can sniff traces of blood on weapons that have been scrubbed after attacks, has her so much in demand by forces up and down the country that she is hired out at £530 a day, plus expenses. Thought to be the only one of her kind, the crime scenes dog earns nearly £200,000 a year. Her daily rate, ten times that of ordinary police dogs, puts her on more than the chief constable, Meredydd Hughes, who picks up £129,963. Keela’s considerable talent in uncovering minute pieces of evidence that can later be confirmed by forensic tests has put her in the forefront of detective work across Britain. She was drafted in to help after the stabbing of the young mother, Abigail Witchalls, in Surrey, and has been involved in high- profile cases across 17 forces, from Devon and Cornwall to Strathclyde. She has already helped to apprehend a murderer after sniffing out blood on a knife. PC John Ellis, her handler, said that police sent for Keela when the scenes of crime squad failed to find what they were looking for. “She can detect minute quantities of blood that cannot be seen with the human eye,” he said. “She is used at scenes where someone has tried to clean it up. If blood has seeped into the tiles behind a bath where a body has been, she can find it.” The spaniel can sniff out blood in clothes after they have been washed repeatedly in biological washing powder, and can detect microscopic amounts on weapons that have been scrubbed and washed. When faced with a “clean” crime scene, Mr Ellis and PC Martin Grimes, Keela’s other handler, will first send in Frankie, a border collie, and Eddie, another springer spaniel, to pick up any general scent. Then they wheel in the big gun. “We take Keela in and she will find the minutest traces of blood,” Mr Ellis said. “It’s not like looking for a needle in a haystack any more. The other two dogs will find the haystack and Keela will find the needle.” While the other dogs bark, Keela has been trained to freeze and pinpoint the area with her nose. Mr Ellis said Keela’s “perfect temperament” and enthusiasm made her a great asset. “We thought we would get one or two deployments a year, but things have just snowballed. Obviously when we are called in by other forces they are charged a fee and it’s quite funny to think she can earn more than the chief constable.” Mr Hughes showed there were no hard feelings. The chief constable said: “Keela’s training gives the force an edge when it comes to forensic investigation which we should recognise and use more often.” Mr Ellis and Mr Grimes came up with a special training regime to focus on Keela’s remarkable skills. It has proved so successful that the FBI has inquired about it. “The FBI is very interested in how we work because they don’t have this sort of facility in-house and they are looking at setting up their own unit,” Mr Ellis said. Paul Ruffell, of K9 Solutions, a security firm specialising in dog units, said he was amazed at Keela’s abilities. “I’ve been working in this business for 25 years and I’ve never heard anything like it,” he said. - See more at: http://dogsdontlie.com/main/2005/12/on-scent-of-success-sniffer-dog-keela-earns-more-than-her-chief-constable/#sthash.UEbKL21C.dpuf

[Alice Purjorick]

that isn't residual scent......
I do have a good idea.........outside in wind a nd rain I can't see residual scent lasting 3 months

Check all the documents.
"You can't see" ?
We are supposed to take that as an authoritative statement?
It would seem merely to be another unsubstantiated opinion.

[stephen25000]

Check all the documents.
"You can't see" ?
We are supposed to take that as an authoritative statement?
It would seem merely to be another unsubstantiated opinion.

He has a lot of opinions. *&*%£

[Lace]

He could differentiate between human and animal blood and he was trained using mostly human cadaver odour.

EVRD used to be trained using swine (pigs) as their odour is the closest to that of humans. But most of the time, however, the dog was trained using the odour of a human cadaver. Operationally, the dog has ignored large amounts of animal remains/bones when locating human decomposition.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm

Dog's noses can tell the difference;

The dog's olfactory system is so highly developed that it continues to be efficient at cellular level:
Distinguish human blood from other species where the chemical constituent parts are identical.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

Why does Grime say in a report I posted a snip of earlier that they can't train the dogs to distinguish between pig and human remains?

[Lace]

G unit this is a snip of a report by Martin Grime

 In my role as advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States. These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I introduced decomposing pig cadavers into training assessments 100 % of the animals alerted to the medium. (The products were obtained from whole piglet cadaver not processed food for human consumption). The result from scientific experiments and research to date is suggestive that the scent of human and pig decomposing material is so similar that we are unable to 'train' the dog to distinguish between the two. That is not to say that this may not be possible in the future.





     

[ferryman]

G unit this is a snip of a report by Martin Grime

 In my role as advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States. These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I introduced decomposing pig cadavers into training assessments 100 % of the animals alerted to the medium. (The products were obtained from whole piglet cadaver not processed food for human consumption). The result from scientific experiments and research to date is suggestive that the scent of human and pig decomposing material is so similar that we are unable to 'train' the dog to distinguish between the two. That is not to say that this may not be possible in the future.





   

Yes.

Training in England (and in some States of America) is conducted using exclusively pig cadavers and pig cadaver scents.

I don't think human blood, either, is used in the training of cadaver dogs.

Clearly, if dogs could differentiate human cadaver scent from swine cadaver-scent, the pig would not be an effective training medium.

Pigs are an effective training medium ....

[stephen25000]

Now once more, when did the forensic report stipulate the finding of ANY PIG RESIDUES ?