Amaral and the dogs

[Mr Gray]

As a result of the alerts was anything found that was sent to FSS for analysis?

So still no answer
What have the alerts told us
What help have they been to the investigation apart from the fact that the best dogs in the world found no evidence Maddie died in the apartment

[ferryman]

I will go with Grime, the man who trained and deployed the dogs. His professional opinion is of value because of his years of experience and his close relationship with the dogs. He tells us what they were trained to find, where they alerted, and what that means in his professional opinion. He quite properly points out that the alerts have no evidential or intelligence reliabilty without supporting evidence, but he's clear about what he thinks  Eddie alerted to. Policemen are very aware of the need for facts and of the dangers of relying on opinion, but he still chose to express his opinion. That suggests confidence in Eddie's abilities.

The tasking for this operation was as per my normal Standard Operating
Procedures. The dogs are deployed as search assets to secure evidence and
locate human remains or Human blood.

The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog
alert indications MUST be corroborated if to establish their findings as
evidence.

Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only
alert indications that may become corroborated are those that the CSI dog
indicated by forensic laboratory analysis.

My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

The wholly unprofessional opinions of a free-lance dog handler.

This is nearer the mark:

However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.

Mark Harrison

And
 
 

 
I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz. (See my second report entitled “NPIA OP TASK Search Doc Beach and Marine”).

Mark Harrison.

Harrison never reached a definitive conclusion about what might have happened to Madeleine.

[Alice Purjorick]

So still no answer
What have the alerts told us
What help have they been to the investigation apart from the fact that the best dogs in the world found no evidence Maddie died in the apartment

When I asked Brietta the same question she answered in the affirmative.
By your body swerve, I take it you agree with her and that the dogs did indeed alert to something that was sent to FSS.

[Angelo222]

I cannot understand why so many posters put so much faith in the dogs. Eddie alerted according to his training but the cause of that alert is not known and might never be known.

[Anna]

When I asked Brietta the same question she answered in the affirmative.
By your body swerve, I take it you agree with her and that the dogs did indeed alert to something that was sent to FSS.

The tiles, grout, plant fragments and curtain were sent to FSS, Alice. Tell us what you are thinking. Don't leave me in suspenders.

[Alice Purjorick]

I cannot understand why so many posters put so much faith in the dogs. Eddie alerted according to his training but the cause of that alert is not known and might never be known.

This is so but does not sit well with the supporters.
The thrust of the FSS report was that nothing could be ruled in and nothing could be ruled out ie it might be or it might not be. The dogs alerts contributed to this. It is far from the "dogs is crap there ain't no evidence to suggest blah de bloody dah.........." we are regaled with every hour on the hour as it were!  The FSS were going to play a straight bat as at that time the efficacy of the LCN technique was beginning to be called into question.

[ferryman]

This is so but does not sit well with the supporters.
The thrust of the FSS report was that nothing could be ruled in and nothing could be ruled out ie it might be or it might not be. The dogs alerts contributed to this. It is far from the "dogs is crap there ain't no evidence to suggest blah de bloody dah.........." we are regaled with every hour on the hour as it were!  The FSS were going to play a straight bat as at that time the efficacy of the LCN technique was beginning to be called into question.

Not sure anyone's suggested that.

There might have been one or two (justly!) withering remarks about the dog-handling, though ...

[Alice Purjorick]

The tiles, grout, plant fragments and curtain were sent to FSS, Alice. Tell us what you are thinking. Don't leave me in suspenders.

My thoughts are what the dogs did or didn't do was superseded by anything they turned up that was sent for analysis and reported on by the FSS. The dog was a specialist coarse screening tool nothing more nothing less.
As a result the FSS appear to have said "we can't say it is nor can we say it isn't" which will have a different significance depending upon whether you are The Courts or The Cops.

[Mr Gray]

My thoughts are what the dogs did or didn't do was superseded by anything they turned up that was sent for analysis and reported on by the FSS. The dog was a specialist coarse screening tool nothing more nothing less.
As a result the FSS appear to have said "we can't say it is nor can we say it isn't" which will have a different significance depending upon whether you are The Courts or The Cops.

the important point there is why the FSS said that......looking at the wording they were asked a specific question.... did the retrieved sample come from Maddie. Their answer was it was impossible to say as the sample was so poor

[Mr Gray]

When I asked Brietta the same question she answered in the affirmative.
By your body swerve, I take it you agree with her and that the dogs did indeed alert to something that was sent to FSS.

absolutely and the sample told us nothing...so in effect the dog's alert told us nothing

[Anna]

My thoughts are what the dogs did or didn't do was superseded by anything they turned up that was sent for analysis and reported on by the FSS. The dog was a specialist coarse screening tool nothing more nothing less.
As a result the FSS appear to have said "we can't say it is nor can we say it isn't" which will have a different significance depending upon whether you are The Courts or The Cops.

Thank you Alice.
So FSS said this about the tiles which showed blood of several people?
I believe the curtain and plant had a negative result for blood or body fluids.
They cant test for Cadaver scent , so you are absolutely correct........Nobody can possibly know whether the alerts were true or false...There is no corroborating evidence  either way.

[Angelo222]

Another fact which has always bothered me is why Eddie only alerted in 5a and not the other properties?

[pegasus]

absolutely and the sample told us nothing...so in effect the dog's alert told us nothing

So if you had to write a short summary of the case, can we assume the dogs would not get a mention?

[Angelo222]

absolutely and the sample told us nothing...so in effect the dog's alert told us nothing

It has certainly raised many questions though some of which even Gerry McCann felt he had to answer.

[Mr Gray]

This is so but does not sit well with the supporters.
The thrust of the FSS report was that nothing could be ruled in and nothing could be ruled out ie it might be or it might not be. The dogs alerts contributed to this. It is far from the "dogs is crap there ain't no evidence to suggest blah de bloody dah.........." we are regaled with every hour on the hour as it were!  The FSS were going to play a straight bat as at that time the efficacy of the LCN technique was beginning to be called into question.

It's sits very well with the supporters. The FSS said the sample could have come from just about anyone so could not exclude maddie...plus...so what if Maddie's dna was found in the car...what would that tell us...nothing again.
What we have on the net is non scientists trying to interpret scientific results. The LCN technique has never been questioned...it's the interpretation of the results that is questionable.
Using lcn dna my dna could be found in hundreds of places I had never been...do posters understand that