Author Topic: Amaral and the dogs  (Read 845006 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LagosBen

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4650 on: August 31, 2015, 03:52:43 PM »
not according to the PJ ...the dogs totally ignored things several times before "alerting"...that isn't the way I have seen any scent dogs working

Brings me back to this.

"surely if a corpse had been in that apartment or anywhere close to either McCann or their clothes" -  the dogs would have reacted strongly.

I don't believe there was a corpse. I believe the child was taken.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4651 on: August 31, 2015, 04:03:25 PM »
Brings me back to this.

"surely if a corpse had been in that apartment or anywhere close to either McCann or their clothes" -  the dogs would have reacted strongly.

I don't believe there was a corpse. I believe the child was taken.

I totally agree

Offline Eleanor

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4652 on: August 31, 2015, 04:17:40 PM »
Brings me back to this.

"surely if a corpse had been in that apartment or anywhere close to either McCann or their clothes" -  the dogs would have reacted strongly.

I don't believe there was a corpse. I believe the child was taken.

You are not alone.

Offline carol

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4653 on: August 31, 2015, 04:27:50 PM »
I thought that their training was thorough and their noses were very sensitive so no coaxing would be needed.

I've also  got lots of experts in my little book who know even more than the recognised professionals. Funny that!

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4654 on: August 31, 2015, 04:32:09 PM »
I've also  got lots of experts in my little book who know even more than the recognised professionals. Funny that!

Im sorry to say I think you are slightly befuddled

Offline carol

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4655 on: August 31, 2015, 04:37:07 PM »
Im sorry to say I think you are slightly befuddled

Well YOU would wouldn't you? I'm sorry to say I think YOU  are slightly biased.
When the 'do it yourself experts'  think they know more than the recognised professionals I can't help but smile. ?{)(**

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4656 on: August 31, 2015, 04:43:51 PM »
Well YOU would wouldn't you? I'm sorry to say I think YOU  are slightly biased.
When the 'do it yourself experts'  think they know more than the recognised professionals I can't help but smile. ?{)(**

Grime and Harrison are the experts and I see nothing in their statements that convinces me there was a cadaver in the apartment

Offline misty

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4657 on: August 31, 2015, 05:24:09 PM »
Well YOU would wouldn't you? I'm sorry to say I think YOU  are slightly biased.
When the 'do it yourself experts'  think they know more than the recognised professionals I can't help but smile. ?{)(**

Perhaps an expert second opinion would have been useful. Sadly, to the best of my knowledge, no expert second opinion has been forthcoming from the world of EVRD trainers/handlers to support Grime's interpretation of his dogs' alerts in Luz.

Offline Brietta

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4658 on: August 31, 2015, 05:27:32 PM »
Brings me back to this.

"surely if a corpse had been in that apartment or anywhere close to either McCann or their clothes" -  the dogs would have reacted strongly.

I don't believe there was a corpse. I believe the child was taken.

You won't get an argument from me on that assessment which I think is spot on.  We also seem to be in accord with the present investigations being conducted by the PJ and SY.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Carana

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4659 on: August 31, 2015, 05:41:07 PM »
If you read my post  you'll see that is exactly what my suspects do   in my little detective novel. The alarm  is raised on the evening of the 3rd. The body is transported during the afternoon of the 3rd. After all the 'accident' has  in reality happened on the 2/3 rd.

Why, when, where and how? And then where?

Offline sadie

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4660 on: August 31, 2015, 05:55:15 PM »
Brings me back to this.

"surely if a corpse had been in that apartment or anywhere close to either McCann or their clothes" -  the dogs would have reacted strongly.

I don't believe there was a corpse. I believe the child was taken.

Me too.   

Welcome back Ben.  Hope you keep well.

Offline misty

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4661 on: August 31, 2015, 06:05:25 PM »
Brings me back to this.

"surely if a corpse had been in that apartment or anywhere close to either McCann or their clothes" -  the dogs would have reacted strongly.

I don't believe there was a corpse. I believe the child was taken.

I agree - otherwise there would be no need for a scapegoat for the biggest muck-up on the planet.

Offline mercury

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4662 on: August 31, 2015, 06:08:16 PM »
Are you referring to me when you say blood is a ridiculous as a remnant scent?    I remind you it was a forensic scientist who said that.

No, I wasn't referring to you, I was referring to the fact that AFAIAW cadaver dogs can alert to the remnant scent of decomposed human tissue after death, not the remnant scent of fluids from living people, which are not items used to train these dogs.

Offline LagosBen

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4663 on: August 31, 2015, 06:28:35 PM »
Me too.   

Welcome back Ben.  Hope you keep well.

Thank you Sadie. I don't come in often as it seems to be the same convos over and over again. %£&)**#

Offline Carana

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4664 on: August 31, 2015, 06:29:11 PM »
No, I wasn't referring to you, I was referring to the fact that AFAIAW cadaver dogs can alert to the remnant scent of decomposed human tissue after death, not the remnant scent of fluids from living people, which are not items used to train these dogs.

But that's part of what this never-ending argument is about.

Eddie would alert to dried blood from a living person. Why? Because it was a decomposing human substance.

There is nothing in the PJ files, nor from what I've read in the Jersey reports that would substantiate that Eddie wouldn't react to other decomposing fluids of a living person.

What Grime HAS said is that KEELA wouldn't react to semen, urine or faeces unless blood was present.

He never said anything of that nature about Eddie that I've seen.