Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?

[Venturi Swirl]

I am sorry you feel patronised, not sure why you do. The investigators would surely look at the probabilities that a pig carcass was present at any time compared to a person who is missing. Its all evidence.

.  A pig carcass need no have been present though need it?  What about, for example, shoes that had been walked through an abbatoir, a shirt that had been worn by a butcher, trousers worn by a farmer, a t-shirt that had been worn by a chef making some culinary delicacy invloving pig blood or skin?  The possibilities for cross-contamination are even greater than from human cadaver (which could also be transferred from those in the medical profession, morgue workers, law enforcement etc) and so basically making the alerts worthless without forensic corroboration.  I feel patronised because you are claiming superior understanding of the paragraph of Grime’s paper I highlighted  based on your reading of the entire paper, but I think I fully grasped what Grime was saying in that section thank you, all without your supposedly greater insight.  You have not been able to shine a light on anything that I misunderstood or altered the meaning of, have you?

[Venturi Swirl]

That would be for the investigators to weigh up and decide what they believed the source to be.

And if they were unable to, what then?

[G-Unit]

I’m sorry but an alert by a cadaver dog trained to find dead humans that might have actually been an alert triggered by a dead pig cannot be considered reliable, no matter how you choose to read it. Otherwise you have simply comfirmed thst my original reading of the paper was absolutely correct.

I think such an alert in a farmyard might be difficult to interpret, less so in an apartment.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

.  A pig carcass need no have been present though need it?  What about, for example, shoes that had been walked through an abbatoir, a shirt that had been worn by a butcher, trousers worn by a farmer, a t-shirt that had been worn by a chef making some culinary delicacy invloving pig blood or skin?  The possibilities for cross-contamination are even greater than from human cadaver (which could also be transferred from those in the medical profession, morgue workers, law enforcement etc) and so basically making the alerts worthless without forensic corroboration.  I feel patronised because you are claiming superior understanding of the paragraph of Grime’s paper I highlighted  based on your reading of the entire paper, but I think I fully grasped what Grime was saying in that section thank you, all without your supposedly greater insight.  You have not been able to shine a light on anything that I misunderstood or altered the meaning of, have you?

You have not been able to shine a light on anything that I misunderstood or altered the meaning of, have you?

I thought I wouldn't.

[Venturi Swirl]

How could an investigator dcide that Eddie alerted to a an odour left be a,garment contaminated by exposure to pig cadaver odour and not to human cadaver odour?  Both odours could have been present or neither, or just one of those?  On what basis does the investigator decide?

[Venturi Swirl]

You have not been able to shine a light on anything that I misunderstood or altered the meaning of, have you?

I thought I wouldn't.

OK, try again - what have I misunderstood? What have I misrepresented?

[Venturi Swirl]

I think such an alert in a farmyard might be difficult to interpret, less so in an apartment.

So in your opinion the only possible location for pig cadaver odour to linger is in a farmyard is it?

[Icanhandlethetruth]

And if they were unable to, what then?

If there was significant doubt by the handler then they wouldn't use the evidence I would suggest.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

It's not an admission I've stated it several times Herrison hasn't given a further opinion.. Prof Casella has... And he is dismissive of uncorroborated alerts

Could you link me to Harrisons statement regarding evidence. Is it in the PJ files?

[Venturi Swirl]

If there was significant doubt by the handler then they wouldn't use the evidence I would suggest.

How would a handler know whether the dog was alerting to pig or human cadaver?  Do the dogs give an extra wink and a wag when it’s human?

[Icanhandlethetruth]

How would a handler know whether the dog was alerting to pig or human cadaver?  Do the dogs give an extra wink and a wag when it’s human?

I am not a dog handler so I don't know. I think it would as G-Unit says the location of the alert would make it more likely in the opinion of the dog handler to be human rather than pig .All these cases that hear dog evidence, the people who are the victims have never re-appeared after a court case as far as I am aware. Perhaps you know of a case?

[Mr Gray]

Could you link me to Harrisons statement regarding evidence. Is it in the PJ files?

Yes the files

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Yes the files

Which file?

[Venturi Swirl]

I am not a dog handler so I don't know. I think it would as G-Unit says the location of the alert would make it more likely in the opinion of the dog handler to be human rather than pig .All these cases that hear dog evidence, the people who are the victims have never re-appeared after a court case as far as I am aware. Perhaps you know of a case?

I’m sorry but that just won’t do.  You have claimed “investigators”,would decide what the dog alerted to, then you say it’s down to the handler to decide if it was human cadaver or pig products?  It’s all very inexact isn’t it, and well unreliable, when there isn’t a shred of evidence to back it up isn’t it?  Going back to my original point, Grime seems to have acknowledged that dogs trained on pigs and humans cannot be relied upon to be giving correct alerts to human cadavers, and IMO it’s likely that since PdL, prosecutions involvimg dog evidence have involved dogs trained solely on human cadavers, not a mixture of both humans and pigs, in order to make that particular line of defence redundant.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I’m sorry but that just won’t do.  You have claimed “investigators”,would decide what the dog alerted to, then you say it’s down to the handler to decide if it was human cadaver or pig products?  It’s all very inexact isn’t it, and well unreliable, when there isn’t a shred of evidence to back it up isn’t it?  Going back to my original point, Grime seems to have acknowledged that dogs trained on pigs and humans cannot be relied upon to be giving correct alerts to human cadavers, and IMO it’s likely that since PdL, prosecutions involvimg dog evidence have involved dogs trained solely on human cadavers, not a mixture of both humans and pigs, in order to make that particular line of defence redundant.

"prosecutions involvimg dog evidence have involved dogs trained solely on human cadavers, not a mixture of both humans and pigs, in order to make that particular line of defence redundant."

If you had read all of Mr Grime's white paper you would know this isn't true or indeed possible.