Is this another example of a potentially crucial error by the VRD handler?

[Mr Gray]

Slartibartfast has already mentioned my earlier cite where Grime's later dogs achieved high 90's in percentage terms in their tests on alerts. I would call that very reliable imo.

You are using a legal term to call the dog alerts unreliable IMO.

read my post above...in what scenario was 90% achieved...without knowing that the figure has no meaning

[slartibartfast]

Slartibartfast has already mentioned my earlier cite where Grime's later dogs achieved high 90's in percentage terms in their tests on alerts. I would call that very reliable imo.

You are using a legal term to call the dog alerts unreliable IMO.

At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range. Stockham testified that dogs have been able to smell the odor of decomposition as soon as 2 hours after a victim's death, or years after a victim's burial.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html

[Mr Gray]

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html

At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range. Stockham testified that dogs have been able to smell the odor of decomposition as soon as 2 hours after a victim's death, or years after a victim's burial.



again....for the 5 th time...what does the 90% figure refer  to...is it body parts...dead pigs remnant scent on tiles...you dont know and therefore we cannot judge the value of that figure...its clear...imo...you just do not understand science and evidence

Lets make it simple.....I recently scored 90% in a maths test...does that qualify me as being competent in maths

[slartibartfast]

At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range. Stockham testified that dogs have been able to smell the odor of decomposition as soon as 2 hours after a victim's death, or years after a victim's burial.



again....for the 5 th time...what does the 90% figure refer  to...is it body parts...dead pigs remnant scent on tiles...you dont know and therefore we cannot judge the value of that figure...its clear...imo...you just do not understand science and evidence

Lets make it simple.....I recently scored 90% in a maths test...does that qualify me as being competent in maths

I have provided the cite, high 90s % accurate.

[Mr Gray]

No you haven’t, you just wish to ignore it.

Thats your opinion again and incorrect..I would like to evaluate it....but to make  a proper evaluation I would need details of the test carried out...you have blindly accepted the figure..imo

[slartibartfast]

Thats your opinion again and incorrect..I would like to evaluate it....but to make  a proper evaluation I would need details of the test carried out...you have blindly accepted the figure..imo

I have accepted expert testing.

[Mr Gray]

I have accepted expert testing.

testing of what exactly...you dont really know...do you

[Venturi Swirl]

Were bodies or body parts used in the tests or was it just about residual scent?

[Mr Gray]

Were bodies or body parts used in the tests or was it just about residual scent?

precisely..

[slartibartfast]

testing of what exactly...you dont really know...do you

If an expert says he has tested something and it is high 90%s accurate it is self explanatory. IMO you are trying to cast uncertainty and doubt onto it.

[Mr Gray]

If an expert says he has tested something and it is high 90%s accurate it is self explanatory. IMO you are trying to cast uncertainty and doubt onto it.

Im asking what he tested....you just say its something...it needs to be a little more precise than that...so what was tested that impresses you so much...the uncertainty is what was tested...which you are trying to ignore

[slartibartfast]

Im asking what he tested....you just say its something...it needs to be a little more precise than that...so what was tested that impresses you so much

I was speaking generally in that post about experts and testing.

[Mr Gray]

I was speaking generally in that post about experts and testing.

experts tell us what was tested...its no good giving a result but not explaining what was tested...taht is worthless and im surprised you cant see that...

you are quoting the results of a test...but dont know what was tested...

[slartibartfast]

experts tell us what was tested...its no good giving a result but not explaining what was tested...taht is worthless and im surprised you cant see that

You asked for a cite, you got a cite. Readers can look up Rex Stockham’s CV and experience and make their own minds up about his veracity.

[Mr Gray]

You asked for a cite, you got a cite. Readers can look up Rex Stockham’s CV and experience and make their own minds up about his veracity.

you quote the results of the test but dont know what was tested.