Author Topic: Amaral and the dogs  (Read 844589 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline LagosBen

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4665 on: August 31, 2015, 06:30:23 PM »
I've also  got lots of experts in my little book who know even more than the recognised professionals. Funny that!

Rather snarky reply.

I happened to be stating the obvious and I never claimed it to be from an expert.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4666 on: August 31, 2015, 06:35:39 PM »
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.

I don't think Edddie does react to the remnant scent of dried blood as dried blood does not produce cadaver odour. He only reacts to the presence of dried blood

Offline carol

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4667 on: August 31, 2015, 06:41:02 PM »
Rather snarky reply.

I happened to be stating the obvious and I never claimed it to be from an expert.

It's not obvious to me . It's not obvious to Kate McCann either. When presented with the alerts on Cuddle Cat she immediately explained it  away by stating that she had previously taken  the child's toy to work with her and that it could have been contaminated there. I think to make such a statement (  which IMO is highly improbable )  she must have felt the dogs were on to something n'est-ce-pas?
« Last Edit: August 31, 2015, 06:43:06 PM by carol »

Offline Eleanor

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4668 on: August 31, 2015, 06:46:04 PM »
It's not obvious to me . It's not obvious to Kate McCann either. When presented with the alerts on Cuddle Cat she immediately explained it  away by stating that she had previously taken  the child's toy to work with her and that it could have been contaminated there. I think to make such a statement (  which IMO is highly improbable )  she must have felt the dogs were on to something n'est-ce-pas?

Do you have proof that Kate ever stated that she took CuddleCat to work with her, and that it must have been contaminated there?

Offline LagosBen

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4669 on: August 31, 2015, 06:46:25 PM »
It's not obvious to me . It's not obvious to Kate McCann either. When presented with the alerts on Cuddle Cat she immediately explained it  away by stating that she had previously taken  the child's toy to work with her and that it could have been contaminated there. I think to make such a statement (  which IMO is highly improbable )  she must have felt the dogs were on to something n'est-ce-pas?

Nonsense.

Offline mercury

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4670 on: August 31, 2015, 07:01:32 PM »
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.

Check MG's rogatory statements. IMO he makes it clear the dog what the dog is trained on, and what he isn't trained on. IIRC you once suggested Eddie may have been reacting to sweat and shed skin cells on the cuddle toy....do you seriously believe if that were even possibly true he wouldn't have been barking at every spot he walked over? As you say, the never ending story.!

Offline Carana

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4671 on: August 31, 2015, 07:04:48 PM »
I don't think Edddie does react to the remnant scent of dried blood as dried blood does not produce cadaver odour. He only reacts to the presence of dried blood


Again, Grime's response to that was somewhat vague. He did say that KEELA would only react if the physical trace of blood was present (even if only to molecular level, which couldn't be proven by forensic tests, etc.).

Where has he stated that Eddie required the physical presence of blood in order to react?

Grime made a somewhat ambiguous statement, which I'd posted just a few days ago...

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4672 on: August 31, 2015, 07:11:53 PM »
I love the idea of Eddie only alerting to the presence of dried blood and not to its remnant scent.
So how does he recognise it as dried blood? Answers on a post card to......................
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Carana

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4673 on: August 31, 2015, 07:13:07 PM »
Check MG's rogatory statements. IMO he makes it clear the dog what the dog is trained on, and what he isn't trained on. IIRC you once suggested Eddie may have been reacting to sweat and shed skin cells on the cuddle toy....do you seriously believe if that were even possibly true he wouldn't have been barking at every spot he walked over? As you say, the never ending story.!

Re sweat and skin cells...

We all perspire. We all shed skin cells. In everyday life, we shower, we sweep, dust, whatever.

But, explain to me the overwhelming pong of a broken limb in a cast. What do you think that that odour is due to? I'm not the only person commenting on the case who came to that conclusion as a possibility.

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4674 on: August 31, 2015, 07:16:09 PM »
Thank you Sadie. I don't come in often as it seems to be the same convos over and over again. %£&)**#
May I ask you if you were in the area at the time Madeleine disappeared?  I can appreciate that a 'local' would be getting a bit fed up by now, so I am curious.
What's up, old man?

Offline Anna

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4675 on: August 31, 2015, 07:16:24 PM »
Check MG's rogatory statements. IMO he makes it clear the dog what the dog is trained on, and what he isn't trained on. IIRC you once suggested Eddie may have been reacting to sweat and shed skin cells on the cuddle toy....do you seriously believe if that were even possibly true he wouldn't have been barking at every spot he walked over? As you say, the never ending story.!

That would be true of course, Mercury. I do believe however that the dog has to be commanded to start working/searching.
Looking at the films MG would clap his hands or say "Find".
“You should not honour men more than truth.”
― Plato

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4676 on: August 31, 2015, 07:18:16 PM »
I love the idea of Eddie only alerting to the presence of dried blood and not to its remnant scent.
So how does he recognise it as dried blood? Answers on a post card to......................

it won't take a post card...remnant scent is just what it says......scent where there is no blood remaining...
I don't think he does for the following reason...
keela only reacts to the physical presence of blood..we are told
if Eddie can detect residual scent of blood when no blood remains then there would be times when Eddie could alert to residual scent of blood....but Keela does not alert as no blood remains. If that was true then it makes the alerts even more ridiculous...if that's possible..



obviously the point being that a PROPER cadaver dog should NOT react to blood...cue Morse

« Last Edit: August 31, 2015, 07:20:25 PM by davel »

Offline mercury

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4677 on: August 31, 2015, 07:21:15 PM »
Re sweat and skin cells...

We all perspire. We all shed skin cells. In everyday life, we shower, we sweep, dust, whatever.

But, explain to me the overwhelming pong of a broken limb in a cast. What do you think that that odour is due to? I'm not the only person commenting on the case who came to that conclusion as a possibility.

The point is the cadaver dog trainer/handler does not give any of these spurious possibilities a single mention..sweat and skin cells! . If they were possibilities he would IMHO, but on the whole would make the whole science of using cadaver detection dogs a mockery and a waste of police time energy and money. Also he has never said the cadaver dog will react to remant scent of blood, saliva, scent, teeth...etc etc

Ps Never smelt a broken limb in a cast, so cannot comment, and never heard of dogs used or trained to detect the misfortunes....or reported to have alerted to them

 @)(++(*

« Last Edit: August 31, 2015, 07:23:26 PM by mercury »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4678 on: August 31, 2015, 07:23:13 PM »
It's not obvious to me . It's not obvious to Kate McCann either. When presented with the alerts on Cuddle Cat she immediately explained it  away by stating that she had previously taken  the child's toy to work with her and that it could have been contaminated there. I think to make such a statement (  which IMO is highly improbable )  she must have felt the dogs were on to something n'est-ce-pas?

there is no evidence that kate said that...what is more revealing is that when Grime was asked if he could confirm that the alert to cuddlecat was definitely an alert to cadaver ...he didn't

Offline mercury

Re: Amaral and the dogs
« Reply #4679 on: August 31, 2015, 07:24:56 PM »
That would be true of course, Mercury. I do believe however that the dog has to be commanded to start working/searching.
Looking at the films MG would clap his hands or say "Find".
Yes, true, but in all his deployments he never once alerted anywhere else, in PDL, surely someone will have shed skin cells! or do they take more than five minutes to find?