McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[G-Unit]

Yes, but AFAIK the concept of "human remains" (or even animal remains within a dog's training parameters) doesn't necessarily mean that someone died.

For some reason, every thread ends up arguing about the dogs.

My post was in answer to a claim that Eddie was trained as a VRD, meaning he was trained to detect just blood. That's not how VRD's are trained.

[Venturi Swirl]

My post was in answer to a claim that Eddie was trained as a VRD, meaning he was trained to detect just blood. That's not how VRD's are trained.

they are trained to detect blood and other bodily fluids though, which can come from a living or dead person.  Look what happened in Jersey.   

[Carana]

My post was in answer to a claim that Eddie was trained as a VRD, meaning he was trained to detect just blood. That's not how VRD's are trained.

That's not my understanding either.

[Mr Gray]

In the context of a civil trial.

You asked  a question...i gave the answer. In cases of balance between 8 and 10 the ECHR sees the veracity of the claims as important. Amarals claims have little veracity. ......unless the ECHR simply accepted the proven facts...as proven facts...which they obviosly did...but they wer elittle more tahn lies

[Carana]

they are trained to detect blood and other bodily fluids though, which can come from a living or dead person.  Look what happened in Jersey.

Yes, thinking of the recent earthquakes in terms of my understanding: a Search & Recovery dog would alert if it detects a living human. A VRD might also alert to the same area, if, for example, a concrete block had chopped off the finger of a victim who was still alive. Both alerts could be correct.

In the absence of any tangible evidence, the dog may or may not be correct and could be correct but that the scent has nothing to do with an alleged crime.

[Carana]

How has this descended into yet another dog thread? On the other hand, they all seem to...

[Mr Gray]

How has this descended into yet another dog thread? On the other hand, they all seem to...

Quite simply because according to Almeida who wrote the interim report...the dog alerts which according to the experts had no evidential value and  from which no inference should be drawn.. were the main evidence against the McCanns

[Brietta]

How has this descended into yet another dog thread? On the other hand, they all seem to...

I think the dogs are an essential part of the mythology which took us on the direct path to the ECHR.  I don't think the journey was as a result of malice, more of complete misunderstanding of their role.

They do get affected by the work they do just as they can be fooled by human intervention.  This is why in the absence of their indications leading to a positive result, their work can only ever be considered as intel.

In the McCann case - there are people who just will not accept that.  Which is why as long as vitriol continues to be poured on the McCanns - "the dogs" will always have their day.

Snip
Dr. Cynthia Otto, the director of the Penn Vet Working Dog Center in Philadelphia who looked after the dogs at ground zero, said the that, for the most part, the dogs’ injuries were only “very minor” — cuts and scrapes on their paw pads, legs and bellies, mainly, as well as fatigue and heat exhaustion

The bigger challenge, she said, was the frustration of searching for hours and not finding anyone. When the dogs began to get discouraged and lose their motivation to search, handlers had to stage “mock finds” so the dogs could feel successful.

“When they train, they don’t search for hours without finding anybody,” she said in a recent phone conversation.

“You need to remind the dogs every so often that they do get to win.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/30/arts/design/the-dogs-of-9-11.html

[Carana]

Quite simply because according to Almeida who wrote the interim report...the dog alerts which according to the experts had no evidential value and  from which no inference should be drawn.. were the main evidence against the McCanns

But the ECtHR case had nothing to do with assessing what the dogs may - or may not - have alerted to.

[Mr Gray]

But the ECtHR case had nothing to do with assessing what the dogs may - or may not - have alerted to.

I've already pointed that out..the ECHR just look at the facts in the court case.,.as the alerts were confirmed...that's what they based their judgement on
For the umpteenth time ..I'm interested in how the confirmed alerts became proven facts..when they aren't...no one has come close to an answer

[G-Unit]

I think the dogs are an essential part of the mythology which took us on the direct path to the ECHR.  I don't think the journey was as a result of malice, more of complete misunderstanding of their role.

They do get affected by the work they do just as they can be fooled by human intervention.  This is why in the absence of their indications leading to a positive result, their work can only ever be considered as intel.

In the McCann case - there are people who just will not accept that.  Which is why as long as vitriol continues to be poured on the McCanns - "the dogs" will always have their day.

Snip
Dr. Cynthia Otto, the director of the Penn Vet Working Dog Center in Philadelphia who looked after the dogs at ground zero, said the that, for the most part, the dogs’ injuries were only “very minor” — cuts and scrapes on their paw pads, legs and bellies, mainly, as well as fatigue and heat exhaustion

The bigger challenge, she said, was the frustration of searching for hours and not finding anyone. When the dogs began to get discouraged and lose their motivation to search, handlers had to stage “mock finds” so the dogs could feel successful.

“When they train, they don’t search for hours without finding anybody,” she said in a recent phone conversation.

“You need to remind the dogs every so often that they do get to win.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/30/arts/design/the-dogs-of-9-11.html

Dr. Cynthia was, of course, discussing search and rescue dogs, which detect living rather than dead people.

[Eleanor]

Dr. Cynthia was, of course, discussing search and rescue dogs, which detect living rather than dead people.

Can these two types of dogs tell the difference?  Absolutely brilliant if they can.

[G-Unit]

I've already pointed that out..the ECHR just look at the facts in the court case.,.as the alerts were confirmed...that's what they based their judgement on
For the umpteenth time ..I'm interested in how the confirmed alerts became proven facts..when they aren't...no one has come close to an answer

It's been answered, but you seem unable to understand.

[Mr Gray]

It's been answered, but you seem unable to understand.

It hasnt....you need to learn the diffference between a fact and your opinion .... thats a good placet to start. if you think it has then point me to the answer...you wont be able to because it has not been answerred

[G-Unit]

Can these two types of dogs tell the difference?  Absolutely brilliant if they can.

People's sense of smell is vastly inferior to that of a dog's. It takes days before people can detect the scent of a dead body, but once detected it's not going to be mistaken for the scent of a living person. Just like humans, dogs can detect the difference but much quicker after death than a human can.