BTW there is a huge illogical assumption made in this case re timeline (+dog/amaral) IMO.
Don't keep it to yourself, Pegasus, your train of thought is usually of interest and often provokes good discussion. Please tell us what you are thinking re the timeline.
I think there may also be a total irrelevance as to what was where in the apartment at the time when the crime scene photographs were taken with regard to the dog's supposed alerts in relation to Madeleine McCann.
In my opinion they are rendered meaningless in that context for the simple reason the crime scene did not remain undisturbed in the intervening period between the taking of the photographs and the introduction of the cadaver dog.
The crime scene apartment had been in occupation on at least four occasions within that time span by four different families.
We have no idea what contaminants may have been introduced by all or any one of the individuals who were allowed to reside there or what may have been introduced into the apartment after the McCann family's departure from it leading to the dog's confusion.
We have been consistently misinformed that this could only have been cadaver scent emanating from Madeleine; the fact that cross contamination can occur so readily is vastly underplayed.
One only has to think of the smell on one's clothing after spending time in the company of smokers as an example.
Therefore had the dog made the alert in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance the alert could have been attributed to the time of her family's occupation of the apartment.
The whole dog episode is rendered meaningless as this patently was not the case. It served only as a convenient instrument to implicate Madeleine's parents in her disappearance which vies with Ricardo's Delphic dream interpretation for a place in the police handbook on ... "how not to".
