Amaral and the dogs

[stephen25000]

When did Redwood say anything about Eddie (or Keela)?

So why would he say she could have died in the apartment ?

Magical intuition ?

[Mr Gray]

So why would he say she could have died in the apartment ?

Magical intuition ?

because it's a possibility...why would he say SY are investigating stranger abduction

[Mr Gray]

Sniffer dog Eddie was relieved of his police duties




Share on Twitter



Share on Facebook



Share on Google+






Share by email
 

By Gerard Tubb, Sky News correspondent

Police sniffer dogs used to find missing people and dead bodies "urgently" need better training and monitoring, according to an official report.


The Government's National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) said specialist victim recovery dogs are not trained to approved standards, with no way of gauging their competence.

The NPIA reviewed the use of the specialist sniffer dogs two years ago, but its report has only now surfaced following a request by Sky News.

"There is no consistency in what the dogs can do and how it is done," the report states.

"Furthermore, there is no national standard for accrediting dogs and handlers or record keeping of the success rate they achieve."

The report added the dogs, which are trained to detect the smell of dead bodies, have "the potential to cause complications in an inquiry".

"There is an urgent need to have national policy on their training, accreditation and deployment," it concluded.


The review uses a kidnap investigation to highlight how dogs have tied up valuable police time.

The animals detected human remains in old furniture that had been bought from houses where the owner had died.

The use of victim recovery, or cadaver dogs, has proved to be controversial in a number of high-profile cases in recent years.

A South Yorkshire Police spaniel called Eddie was said to have sniffed out the "scent of death" at the Haut de la Garenne children's home in Jersey and the apartment from which Madeleine McCann disappeared in Portugal.

But in both cases nothing more was found and South Yorkshire Police say Eddie is no longer working with them.


Victim recovery dogs from four different police forces were used during searches for kidnapped schoolgirl Shannon Matthews in Dewsbury in West Yorkshire in 2008.

The dogs found evidence of dead bodies, but officers later discovered the corpses were nothing to do with her disappearance.

"The properties searched contained a high level of second-hand furniture bought from dwellings where someone had died," according to the NPIA report.

"This resulted in numerous indications that required further investigation to confirm whether they were connected to the investigation, or to previous owners of the furniture."

The Association of Chief Police Officers told Sky News it was consulting individual police forces and hoped to have national training standards for the dogs later this year.

[ferryman]

So why would he say she could have died in the apartment ?

Magical intuition ?

Because of reports of break-ins to apartments in the area.

Nothing to do with dogs.

[stephen25000]

Because of reports of break-ins to apartments in the area.

Nothing to do with dogs.

Unfortunately no evidence which will stand up in court of that.

and why would they suspect she's dead ?

and don't forget BHH Freudian slip.

[ferryman]

Unfortunately no evidence which will stand up in court of that.

Eddie's reactions, you mean?

Aside from the word unfortunately, quite right ....

[stephen25000]

Eddie's reactions, you mean?

Aside from the word unfortunately, quite right ....

I was referring to either a break in and/or abduction.

[slartibartfast]

Sniffer dog Eddie was relieved of his police duties




Share on Twitter



Share on Facebook



Share on Google+






Share by email
 

By Gerard Tubb, Sky News correspondent

Police sniffer dogs used to find missing people and dead bodies "urgently" need better training and monitoring, according to an official report.


The Government's National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) said specialist victim recovery dogs are not trained to approved standards, with no way of gauging their competence.

The NPIA reviewed the use of the specialist sniffer dogs two years ago, but its report has only now surfaced following a request by Sky News.

"There is no consistency in what the dogs can do and how it is done," the report states.

"Furthermore, there is no national standard for accrediting dogs and handlers or record keeping of the success rate they achieve."

The report added the dogs, which are trained to detect the smell of dead bodies, have "the potential to cause complications in an inquiry".

"There is an urgent need to have national policy on their training, accreditation and deployment," it concluded.


The review uses a kidnap investigation to highlight how dogs have tied up valuable police time.

The animals detected human remains in old furniture that had been bought from houses where the owner had died.

The use of victim recovery, or cadaver dogs, has proved to be controversial in a number of high-profile cases in recent years.

A South Yorkshire Police spaniel called Eddie was said to have sniffed out the "scent of death" at the Haut de la Garenne children's home in Jersey and the apartment from which Madeleine McCann disappeared in Portugal.

But in both cases nothing more was found and South Yorkshire Police say Eddie is no longer working with them.


Victim recovery dogs from four different police forces were used during searches for kidnapped schoolgirl Shannon Matthews in Dewsbury in West Yorkshire in 2008.

The dogs found evidence of dead bodies, but officers later discovered the corpses were nothing to do with her disappearance.

"The properties searched contained a high level of second-hand furniture bought from dwellings where someone had died," according to the NPIA report.

"This resulted in numerous indications that required further investigation to confirm whether they were connected to the investigation, or to previous owners of the furniture."

The Association of Chief Police Officers told Sky News it was consulting individual police forces and hoped to have national training standards for the dogs later this year.

Abolition of the NPIA

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/98451/fs-nca-npia.pdf

[Brietta]

Nope. It is more logical that SY believe that Madeliene is dead but accept there is a possibility she is alive. There is nothing in their statements that contradict that position.

I am of the opinion they are looking for a live child and hopefully there will be a positive outcome to that.

If it is confirmed however, that Madeleine McCann died in the apartment on 3rd of May ... it is my opinion that it is important that the perpetrator of the crime is found.

I agree with the other posters who think that Eddie and Keela have no bearing on the present inquiries being carried out by the PJ and SY.

[stephen25000]

I am of the opinion they are looking for a live child and hopefully there will be a positive outcome to that.

If it is confirmed however, that Madeleine McCann died in the apartment on 3rd of May ... it is my opinion that it is important that the perpetrator of the crime is found.

I agree with the other posters who think that Eddie and Keela have no bearing on the present inquiries being carried out by the PJ and SY.

In the latter sentence, of course you do. You would not say anything else.

[Carana]

Thanks Carana, I haven't the time to read through loads of threads right now, can't you just describe what is the difference between alleles and markers?
I imagine most people have no idea, and unfortunately scientific explanations don't always help.

The easiest way to think of it is 1 marker = 1 pair of alleles.

Forensic DNA markers represent the specific sites (locations) used by labs to examine bits of genetic code, which are the alleles.

At each of these marker locations, there are two alleles (one comes from mummy and the other from daddy). What's confusing is that "marker" is often used to mean the pair of alleles.

In the UK, they examine 10 marker (locations), i.e. 20 alleles. In PT, they examine 15, i.e., 30 alleles. 


They "measure" each allele and record its "length" (it's actually the number of times the bit of code repeats iteself). However, as the "length" will be within a tiny range of possibilities, even unrelated people will have a number of alleles of identical "length". In isolation, therefore, there is no way of knowing whether Allele A with an identical "length" (e.g. 9) is yours or mine.

Now, remember that there should be two alleles at each marker location. While you and I might share an identical Allele A, it is rarer that we will also share an identical Allele B, although that does happen.

If, at Marker 1, your reading is 7, 9 (the "length" of each of the two alleles) and my reading is also 7, 9, then we happen to share an identical marker.

So, move on to Marker 2. Your reading is 6, 7 and mine is 8, 9. That clearly differentiates us.

The problem arises when the sample is degraded (some of the alleles have gone AWOL) and / or contaminated (alleles from several people). You then get a soup of alleles some of which could be yours or could be mine and some that can't belong to either of us. And, evidently, family members will share far more of them than total strangers. And that was the issue in bootgate.

[Eleanor]

The easiest way to think of it is 1 marker = 1 pair of alleles.

Forensic DNA markers represent the specific sites (locations) used by labs to examine bits of genetic code, which are the alleles.

At each of these marker locations, there are two alleles (one comes from mummy and the other from daddy). What's confusing is that "marker" is often used to mean the pair of alleles.

In the UK, they examine 10 marker (locations), i.e. 20 alleles. In PT, they examine 15, i.e., 30 alleles. 


They "measure" each allele and record its "length" (it's actually the number of times the bit of code repeats iteself). However, as the "length" will be within a tiny range of possibilities, even unrelated people will have a number of alleles of identical "length". In isolation, therefore, there is no way of knowing whether Allele A with an identical "length" (e.g. 9) is yours or mine.

Now, remember that there should be two alleles at each marker location. While you and I might share an identical Allele A, it is rarer that we will also share an identical Allele B, although that does happen.

If, at Marker 1, your reading is 7, 9 (the "length" of each of the two alleles) and my reading is also 7, 9, then we happen to share an identical marker.

So, move on to Marker 2. Your reading is 6, 7 and mine is 8, 9. That clearly differentiates us.

The problem arises when the sample is degraded (some of the alleles have gone AWOL) and / or contaminated (alleles from several people). You then get a soup of alleles some of which could be yours or could be mine and some that can't belong to either of us. And, evidently, family members will share far more of them than total strangers. And that was the issue in bootgate.

Thank you so much for that.  I now feel vaguely able to explain this to someone else.

But how many Markers does any one person's DNA actually have?  Or can it vary?

[stephen25000]

Background reading............

https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/human-genome-shrinks-to-only-19-000-genes-21e2d4d5017e

[Brietta]

In the latter sentence, of course you do. You would not say anything else.

                                                      You've got that wrong Stephen.

If there was evidence to support that Eddie and Keela were as important to the present investigation as some would like them to be ... I would say so.  But there is no danger of that because we have had investigators on the job who are familiar with dogs' ranking in the scheme of things, unlike Mr Amaral.

The 2007 dogs visit confirmed that Madeleine McCann's remains were not in any of the places they searched.  One would have supposed this might have led to renewed vigour in trying to locate her ... unfortunately for Madeleine and fortunately for whoever took her ... that did not happen.

[stephen25000]

                                                      You've got that wrong Stephen.

If there was evidence to support that Eddie and Keela were as important to the present investigation as some would like them to be ... I would say so.  But there is no danger of that because we have had investigators on the job who are familiar with dogs' ranking in the scheme of things, unlike Mr Amaral.

The 2007 dogs visit confirmed that Madeleine McCann's remains were not in any of the places they searched.  One would have supposed this might have led to renewed vigour in trying to locate her ... unfortunately for Madeleine and fortunately for whoever took her ... that did not happen.

No, wrong again.

The dogs alerts in 2007 didn't confirm one way or the other.

Try to be accurate.

Likewise, another forum myth, that Madeleine was not extensively searched for.

She was.