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

[Venturi Swirl]

I don't know I tend not to be judgemental, how about you?
I don't think even the Portuguese SC passed judgement on that only on the right to say it or write it down.

The view that the McCanns faked an abduction is very prevalent on this forum, even if only by inference (direct accusation not being permitted of course).  If you quote any of the Tapas' group evidence to support the abduction theory it is declaimed as not independent an therefore not reliable, the clear implication being that subterfuge or fakery is involved, yet this accusation largely passes by without censure.  Therefore I was surprised to read that accusing someone else of faking evidence is "a disgrace", when basically that is the default position of every McCann sceptic re: the McCanns themselves.

[Robittybob1]

I don't know I tend not to be judgemental, how about you?
I don't think even the Portuguese SC passed judgement on that only on the right to say it or write it down.

It is rather difficult to understand how a society would ever find it OK to say "you faked the abduction of your own child" without a shred of evidence.

People have the right to a good name.  If you think I faked the abduction of my own child then prove it and charge me, prove me guilty but don't just defame me.

[barrier]

It is rather difficult to understand how a society would ever find it OK to say "you faked the abduction of your own child" without a shred of evidence.

People have the right to a good name.  If you think I faked the abduction of my own child then prove it and charge me, prove me guilty but don't just defame me.

We're way off topic,but seemingly the Portuguese courts don't view the argument the same way.

[Brietta]

OK then. I think it's disgraceful to say that the PJ faked alerts.

It has never been my opinion that the dog alerts were faked in any way whatsoever.  From first sight of the video I formed an opinion that something was amiss in the thinking of those who set such store by them.

That observation and subsequent reading of what Martin Grime clearly stated regarding the alerts convinced me that ignorance, incompetence and a total lack of understanding ~ not 'faking' or dishonesty ~ was the hallmark of this particular team of PJ inspectors.

Snip
Q:   'In order to establish the accuracy of the dogs' performance with respect to the alerts given when recognizing blood and a body, to what extent are these indications viable in this particular case''

A:   The dogs' alerts are to be considered as an area of interest or possible testing.
When specific and reliable this can only be measured for confirmation.
In this case in particular, where the dogs alerted there was confirmation by positive results from the forensic examinations.
It is the investigators' responsibility to apply the results of the forensic analysis to the suspects, witnesses and crime scenes.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed.
The signals of an alert are only just that.
Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is always a possibility of contamination of odours by transferral.
EVRD does not make a distinction; he responds with a certain behaviour for which he was trained when he recognizes an odour.
He does not identify the reasons for the presence of the odour nor does he identify suspects.
Forensic confirmation and specialized investigation methods will determine the reasons and the suspicions.
In order to undoubtedly affirm there must be a confirmation of the alert signals made by the dog.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm


Absolutely no beating around the bush there but in my opinion an absolute tragedy of fixed ideas which led to ignoring sightings such as Anna Stam's in Amsterdam which she reported to Dutch Police in June 2007.

[Robittybob1]

OK if Grime had made it clear in August 2007  what was expected to confirm an alert what are we to make of any alert that the PJ made no attempt to confirm?

"Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc."

[jassi]

OK if Grime had made it clear in August 2007  what was expected to confirm an alert what are we to make of any alert that the PJ made no attempt to confirm?

"Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc."

Indeed, if death is brought about by a cause other than blunt physical trauma, what forensic evidence might be expected. For example if death had been by drowning ?

[Brietta]

Indeed, if death is brought about by a cause other than blunt physical trauma, what forensic evidence might be expected. For example if death had been by drowning ?

Dogs are capable of finding human remains in water.

[Robittybob1]

Indeed, if death is brought about by a cause other than blunt physical trauma, what forensic evidence might be expected. For example if death had been by drowning ?

Are we talking about clothing, 3 months after the event.  Those clothes would have repeatedly been through the washing machine (in all probability) so what would be the chance of Madeleine's DNA still being on those clothes?
So a DNA test could have theoretically been possible but the other members of the family have the same markers as Madeleine so that might make the whole exercise pointless but it was still attempted for the blood in the lounge and the car.
Even with drowning skin and hair could be rubbed off onto someone carrying the deceased.

I take your comment to apply in a situation where someone found Madeleine had drowned and they took her body back to the apartment, while wondering what to do.  Is that what you meant?

[jassi]

Yes, something like that - maybe posted in wrong thread

[Alice Purjorick]

A bit of LBTR.

https://estudogeral.sib.uc.pt/bitstream/10316/41838/1/Making%20Sense%20of%20the%20Story.pdf

[slartibartfast]

The view that the McCanns faked an abduction is very prevalent on this forum, even if only by inference (direct accusation not being permitted of course).  If you quote any of the Tapas' group evidence to support the abduction theory it is declaimed as not independent an therefore not reliable, the clear implication being that subterfuge or fakery is involved, yet this accusation largely passes by without censure.  Therefore I was surprised to read that accusing someone else of faking evidence is "a disgrace", when basically that is the default position of every McCann sceptic re: the McCanns themselves.

A huge strawman there.

[jassi]

Dogs are capable of finding human remains in water.

That wasn't what I was suggesting, which was what forensic traces might be found if a drowned body had been move from a temporary storage place.

[Venturi Swirl]

A huge strawman there.

In your opinion.  Every word of that post is factual, in my opinion.

[slartibartfast]

In your opinion.  Every word of that post is factual, in my opinion.

You don’t know the default position of every McCann Sceptic. Pretending you do and arguing against that position is a strawman argument.

[Mr Gray]

You don’t know the default position of every McCann Sceptic. Pretending you do and arguing against that position is a strawman argument.

I don't see VS claiming his post represents every sceptic on here... Perhaps you misread it