Should the Germans Have Dropped Their Investigation By Now?

[Venturi Swirl]

I also think it's the one facet that most supporters can't reconcile fully themselves. What's the chances, right? They have to assauge the cognitive dissonance by grasping on to anything remotely congruent....the dogs are mad, the handler told Shep to bark there, they're doctors FFS, Grime and Harrison created this branch of pseudo-science in 2005, the handler is a charlatan, loads of people died there, who's idea was it anyway, rubbish batting average, coconut in Jersey, Pilley case was all circumstantial, the coppers ransacked the place, cross contamination from sea bass and sardines from boozy lunches, they weren't even the right set of pyjamas, dogs are trained on piglets I heard, that's not blood, that could be anyone's blood, the dog could smell sausages, the dog was in heat, the heat was too hot, Harrison was the puppetmaster.....

I'm still sat here on the wall of 5a since last week. Like bird shit.

How do you suppose Operation Grange and the German Investigation manage to reconcile themselves to the dog alerts?  Or are they all part of the same sinister cabal to protect the McCanns at any cost, even their own credibility?

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Why do you need more if the dogs are so great, as everyone here seems determined to prove?

As I said before I would need more. I wouldn't like to see a conviction based purely on a human eye witness statement either, if you believe that dog alerts are unreliable wait till you read up on eye witness evidence.

[The General]

How do you suppose Operation Grange and the German Investigation manage to reconcile themselves to the dog alerts?  Or are they all part of the same sinister cabal to protect the McCanns at any cost, even their own credibility?

It's a great question. Well, the first bit anyway.
I don't know is the answer. At least one of them must have reviewed that evidence and the 'DNA' (I put it in apostrophes for your benefit, neutrality and all that).
I'd like a thorough review of all of it to be honest; root and branch. Gather what's in archive and start again. See what drops out the end of the sausage machine.

[Venturi Swirl]

As I said before I would need more. I wouldn't like to see a conviction based purely on a human eye witness statement either, if you believe that dog alerts are unreliable wait till you read up on eye witness evidence.

You don't need to tell me about the unreliability of eye witness evidence, and as I'm not someone whose been busting a gut claiming it's 99% reliable for the last 13 years I don't know why you even felt the need to bring it up with me.  Surely you view the dog alerts as waaaaay more reliable than rubbishy old human witnesses?  So I don't see why you wouldn't view them as sufficient in and of themselves to bring a conviction.  If there was a body apt5a (and according to the dogs there was) then why not charge the parents?  It's a no brainer, surely?

[Venturi Swirl]

It's a great question. Well, the first bit anyway.
I don't know is the answer. At least one of them must have reviewed that evidence and the 'DNA' (I put it in apostrophes for your benefit, neutrality and all that).
I'd like a thorough review of all of it to be honest; root and branch. Gather what's in archive and start again. See what drops out the end of the sausage machine.

I'm glad you agree it's a good question - see, it's not just us cognitively dissonanced plebs that have been able to park the dog alerts as irrelevant.   Odd, huh?  Must be a reason...

[The General]

Why do you need more if the dogs are so great, as everyone here seems determined to prove?

I think it's been established that the alerts need additional corroboration. But the evidential value is, as you quite rightly point out, great.

[Eleanor]

It's a great question. Well, the first bit anyway.
I don't know is the answer. At least one of them must have reviewed that evidence and the 'DNA' (I put it in apostrophes for your benefit, neutrality and all that).
I'd like a thorough review of all of it to be honest; root and branch. Gather what's in archive and start again. See what drops out the end of the sausage machine.

You can leave O'Connor out of this, although he could find a Cadaver if there is one.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

You don't need to tell me about the unreliability of eye witness evidence, and as I'm not someone whose been busting a gut claiming it's 99% reliable for the last 13 years I don't know why you even felt the need to bring it up with me.  Surely you view the dog alerts as waaaaay more reliable than rubbishy old human witnesses?  So I don't see why you wouldn't view them as sufficient in and of themselves to bring a conviction.  If there was a body apt5a (and according to the dogs there was) then why not charge the parents?  It's a no brainer, surely?

Because as we all know nothing is infallible and 95% correct could be 100% fallible. You need more strings to create a case but you know this already surely?

[The General]

I'm glad you agree it's a good question - see, it's not just us cognitively dissonanced plebs that have been able to park the dog alerts as irrelevant.   Odd, huh?  Must be a reason...

You don't have to be a pleb to be cognitively dissonanced, but it helps.

[The General]

You can leave O'Connor out of this, although he could find a Cadaver if there is one.

My dog can hear the fridge opening from the next postcode.

[jassi]

It's a great question. Well, the first bit anyway.
I don't know is the answer. At least one of them must have reviewed that evidence and the 'DNA' (I put it in apostrophes for your benefit, neutrality and all that).
I'd like a thorough review of all of it to be honest; root and branch. Gather what's in archive and start again. See what drops out the end of the sausage machine.

Sounds a good way of keeping those 4 officers in jobs for a few more years

[Icanhandlethetruth]

You don't need to tell me about the unreliability of eye witness evidence, and as I'm not someone whose been busting a gut claiming it's 99% reliable for the last 13 years I don't know why you even felt the need to bring it up with me.  Surely you view the dog alerts as waaaaay more reliable than rubbishy old human witnesses?  So I don't see why you wouldn't view them as sufficient in and of themselves to bring a conviction.  If there was a body apt5a (and according to the dogs there was) then why not charge the parents?  It's a no brainer, surely?

That begs another question, a lot of people decry the worth of the dog alerts but put a lot of faith in various people (waiters, holidaymakers and such) eyewitness accounts of seeing Madeleine during the week. Bearing in mind your opinion of eye witness accounts don't you find that strange?

[The General]

Sounds a good way of keeping those 4 officers in jobs for a few more years

Can you imagine the morale of those 4 officers right now? When they signed up it was all overtime allthetime, trips to Portugal, Bermuda shorts and flip flops, send the intern out for Costa every morning, unlimited resources being pumped in - you want a laminator? Get two, just in case. Need some of those oversize bulldog clips - get me some! Anyone want any violet coloured ring binders while I'm at Staples? I want an executive office chair - in pleather. I've got RSI, can I have a gel mouse rest. Barbara keeps turning the air conditioning down.
Halcyon days, never setting foot outside unless it was to the airport. Probably had 5 a side every Wednesday night at SoccerZone behind the precinct, bowling and Ben and Jerry's on a Thursday.
Then the double whammy came and the bubble burst. Yes you can have more money, but Jerry has beaten us to the punch, MM's dead now, you've all failed really.....and COVID is about so you'll all have to work from home except you four - yes, you, you, you and you. Put a mask on, sit in separate rooms and watch your careers unravel one HCW pronouncement at a time and pretend to look for a dead person who nobody will ever find and shut up too.

[Brietta]

What a lovely distraction this argument is from the fact that the dog alerts don't appear to have any relevance whatsoever to either the current British or German investigations, both of which are pursuing a theory of stranger abduction.   If the dogs are so reliable, and if their alerts tell us almost certainly that Madeleine died in the apartment why were the parents never charged?

Well spotted VS.  I've been wading through this interminable argument for many pages with still some to go wondering how a dog which apparently caused confusion for some in 2007 has any relevance whatsoever to the thread topic which is ... "Should the Germans Have Dropped Their Investigation By Now?"

Perhaps there will be enlightenment by the time I've waded through up to and beyond page 36 ~ though I doubt it.

[Brietta]

It seems to be popular though doesn't it as it always rears it head up. Go with it, its a discussion forum.

The usual practice is for discussion forums to discuss a particular topic.

This thread has nothing to do with dogs.

The topic is ~ "Should the Germans Have Dropped Their Investigation By Now?"

If you wish to add to the many 'dog' threads already on the forum might I respectfully suggest you start one; it would certainly save me the bother of ruminating the deletion of eight pages of 'off topic' comment; I've never done that many in a oner before so it certainly could be interesting if I can be bothered 😁