Amaral and the dogs

[Mr Gray]

Well, lots of opinions given but the fact remains experienced dog Eddie alerted in an empty bedroom and his experienced trainer and handler said the alert was suggestive of an alert to cadaver scent contamination, or the smell of a dead human body. Clearly we can't smell this odour until it has developed further, but dogs can and do. Eddie had alerted to this scent before, so Grime should know an alert when he sees it.

Some have said the dog was tired, or was alerting to other things, or was 'clearing his nose'(?), or his handler was cuing him. He was taken to a lot of locations, however, and alerted only to items belonging to the McCanns.

It isn't admissible evidence, so why try to discredit the dog and his handler?

the whole point is that eddie repeatedly did not alert before being called back several times and imo almost being forced to alert...

[Alfred R Jones]

Well, lots of opinions given but the fact remains experienced dog Eddie alerted in an empty bedroom and his experienced trainer and handler said the alert was suggestive of an alert to cadaver scent contamination, or the smell of a dead human body. Clearly we can't smell this odour until it has developed further, but dogs can and do. Eddie had alerted to this scent before, so Grime should know an alert when he sees it.

Some have said the dog was tired, or was alerting to other things, or was 'clearing his nose'(?), or his handler was cuing him. He was taken to a lot of locations, however, and alerted only to items belonging to the McCanns.

It isn't admissible evidence, so why try to discredit the dog and his handler?

Maybe for the same reason that you take every opportunity to discredit the McCanns?  Just a thought...

[G-Unit]

Maybe for the same reason that you take every opportunity to discredit the McCanns?  Just a thought...

I don't. Only in the minds of those who think that pointing out inconsistencies in their story is discrediting them.

[stephen25000]

The work of the dogs is a fascinating subject about which there is a myriad of unbiased information available.  Mr Grime's being one of the expert opinions available to us through the medium of his statements in the files.
So enlightenment lies not with me but just a read away ~ I recommend it to you.

It was misunderstanding of the dogs capabilities which led Mr Amaral down the wrong path;  I get the impression that he didn't take expert advice when it was on hand ... anyone know if he met and spoke with Mr Grime after the dogs had been out on the job?

Mr. Grime is not a forensic scientist.

Did you think he was ?

[Mr Gray]

no one in authority takes the alerts seriously

[Brietta]

no one in authority takes the alerts seriously

They weren't taken seriously at the time because they had no evidential value ... nothing has changed in the interim.

[Mr Gray]

They weren't taken seriously at the time because they had no evidential value ... nothing has changed in the interim.

I would say that after the statement by the pj grime has lost a lot of credibility

[Admin]

Any further disruption of this thread will have consequences!

Admin

[carlymichelle]

my opinion is  if keela and eddies alerts  didnt mean anything   mcann supporters wouldnt  even be worred about them but they are so???....

[ferryman]

my opinion is  if keela and eddies alerts  didnt mean anything   mcann supporters wouldnt  even be worred about them but they are so???....

What else (does the theory that the McCannsdunit) rest on?

[Alfred R Jones]

I don't. Only in the minds of those who think that pointing out inconsistencies in their story is discrediting them.

Erm...yes, I do, just as pointing out inconsistencies in the dog alerts you would interpret as discrediting them.

[G-Unit]

Erm...yes, I do, just as pointing out inconsistencies in the dog alerts you would interpret as discrediting them.

The 'inconsistencies' in the dog alerts are in the eye of the beholder. They are opinions. The inconsistencies in the McCann's stories are documented. They are facts.

[Alfred R Jones]

The 'inconsistencies' in the dog alerts are in the eye of the beholder. They are opinions. The inconsistencies in the McCann's stories are documented. They are facts.

what difference doesnit make?  You still use them to continually discredit the objects of your contempt.  Why do you do this when, subject to the most intense scrutiny, the McCanns have been found guilt of no crime?   It is sheer hypocrisy to lambast one set of people for criticising Grime and the dogs whilst having no issue whatsoever with another set of people picking holes in the McCanns and their friends day in, day out.

[ferryman]

The 'inconsistencies' in the dog alerts are in the eye of the beholder. They are opinions. The inconsistencies in the McCann's stories are documented. They are facts.

It is in the eye of hard evidence, not the beholder, that Eddie could only "detect" a scent on cuddle-cat after it was hidden in a cupboard, not while he could play with it.

It is in the eye of hard evidence that clothing that, apparently, yielded no scent in the villa became scent-laden in the gym.

There is no logical or coherent reason why clothing should have been inspected at all, let alone twice.

By comparison, heated debate about whether the McCanns entered the villa through the "front" door or the "back" door really pales into insignificance ....

[G-Unit]

what difference doesnit make?  You still use them to continually discredit the objects of your contempt.  Why do you do this when, subject to the most intense scrutiny, the McCanns have been found guilt of no crime?   It is sheer hypocrisy to lambast one set of people for criticising Grime and the dogs whilst having no issue whatsoever with another set of people picking holes in the McCanns and their friends day in, day out.

There is a huge difference between criticism based on opinion and inconsistencies which are recorded and factual.

The McCanns have not been found guilty of any crime, true. They would have to be charged and tried for that to happen. Even so, they were made arguidos and that didn't happen just because a couple of dogs alerted, there were other reasons too.

Finally, I would be grateful if you would leave analysis of my motives and character out of the debate. I don't accuse you of character defects because it's meaningless, I don't know you and you don't know me.