UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: John on June 13, 2013, 11:50:14 PM
-
We take another look at why if Madeleine had been abducted and subsequently left somewhere, why did the sniffer dogs fail to find any trace of her?
-
If the body was in an abandoned building or bin, then the dogs would have found her.
-
If the body was in an abandoned building or bin, then the dogs would have found her.
The first dogs brought in where brought in to find a living child not a body.
-
The dogs were brought in to find any scent - any clue - The police by this stage would have been stupid to not to consider that Madeleine could have perhaps be deceased - every one would have that horrible thought at the back of their minds from the get go - your child goes missing in that scenario and then after an hour you cant help but think the worse,
We just keep on coming back to the same old - If the Smith sighting was of Gerry looking for a hiding place then he would have minutes - not hours or days but literarily minutes to dispose of the body - and then the body remain so well hidden that over the next weeks not one dog/ or search got near - until they them moved the body in the hire car - again without anyone noticing a thing
People say that the abduction theory has no evidence therefore didn't happen - but the disposal by Gerry in the timeline that allows the Smith sighting to be correct is just plain daft
-
If the body was in an abandoned building or bin, then the dogs would have found her.
No, they precisely wouldn't have followed that trail. The referent scent they were given was the scent of an alive Madeleine.
Sorry, Faithlilly, I only see now you had answered already. In fact sniffer dogs are trained to avoid cadaver scent.
-
The first dogs that were brought in were public order dogs, with SOME training in tracking, we've been through this before. ALL dogs will react to the scent of a dead animal, you cannot un-train that instinct, same as you cannot un-train male dogs reaction to female dogs in heat.
If someone has managed to un-train dogs in that capacity, I'd like to see some credible links, because that would be sensational.
-
The first dogs that were brought in were public order dogs, with SOME training in tracking, we've been through this before. ALL dogs will react to the scent of a dead animal, you cannot un-train that instinct, same as you cannot un-train male dogs reaction to female dogs in heat.
If someone has managed to un-train dogs in that capacity, I'd like to see some credible links, because that would be sensational.
I'm sure you can supply evidence to back up your claims above Mrs B.
If the dogs brought in alerted to the scent of a dead animal why weren't they drawn to the waste ground on the edge of PDL where, I'm sure, there are many feral animal carcasses ?
-
Think this is at least the THIRD time - Strange that it has to be repeated time & time again, has none of you read the files?
His dog's speciality is patrolling (Maintenance of Public Order) although the dog also has some training in "tracking".
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
ETA Any magical "un-training" natural instincts mentioned by the dog handler in the link above?
-
The first dogs that were brought in were public order dogs, with SOME training in tracking, we've been through this before. ALL dogs will react to the scent of a dead animal, you cannot un-train that instinct, same as you cannot un-train male dogs reaction to female dogs in heat.
If someone has managed to un-train dogs in that capacity, I'd like to see some credible links, because that would be sensational.
It has already be said : Rex is described as a pure sniffer dog (not an air scent dog). He confirmed Numi that "had some training in tracking".
You are very wrong, Mrs B. Read the reports on Eddie and you will see that Eddie was trained to react only to human cadaver scent.
There's nothing sensational in this. If the dogs reacted to whatever they fancy, they would be of no use whatsoever.
-
No, Eddie was NOT only trained to alert to Cadavers. Eddie was also trained to alert to dried blood from LIVE people.
Grime - The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
What you were on about earlier was that the "sniffer dogs" were trained to AVOID cadavers. There is NO such statement from any of the dog handlers in the official files. Or you can now can you go & find a link to prove me wrong.
-
No, Eddie was NOT only trained to alert to Cadavers. Eddie was also trained to alert to dried blood from LIVE people.
Grime - The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
What you were on about earlier was that the "sniffer dogs" were trained to AVOID cadavers. There is NO such statement from any of the dog handlers in the official files. Or you can now can you go & find a link to prove me wrong.
This is not true. After a cataclysm, the first dogs sent are scent air dogs, trained not to react to the scent of death because the priority is to save those who can be saved.
-
No, Eddie was NOT only trained to alert to Cadavers. Eddie was also trained to alert to dried blood from LIVE people.
Grime - The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
8((()*/ This is true
Eddie was NOT only trained to alert to Cadavers. Eddie was also trained to alert to dried blood from LIVE people.
-
This is not true. After a cataclysm, the first dogs sent are scent air dogs, trained not to react to the scent of death because the priority is to save those who can be saved.
LINK please to where it says that the regular sniffer dogs used in PDL were trained to AVOID cadavers. As I said, I cannot see ANY of the dog handlers' mentioning this extraordinary training in the official files.
-
No, Eddie was NOT only trained to alert to Cadavers. Eddie was also trained to alert to dried blood from LIVE people.
Grime - The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
What you were on about earlier was that the "sniffer dogs" were trained to AVOID cadavers. There is NO such statement from any of the dog handlers in the official files. Or you can now can you go & find a link to prove me wrong.
You have yet to prove that the dogs deployed shortly after Madeleine's disappearance tracked anything but live people. Further if Eddie alerts to dried blood yet Keela didn't alert in the McCann's bedroom, what exactly do you think Eddie alerted to if not cadaver ?
-
BUMPED
Link for Mrs B please.
LINK please to where it says that the regular sniffer dogs used in PDL were trained to AVOID cadavers. As I said, I cannot see ANY of the dog handlers' mentioning this extraordinary training in the official files.
-
No, I don't have to prove anything, I'm patiently waiting for a link to PT sniffer dogs being amazingly trained to AVOID cadavers. I'm interested in the technique used.
-
No, I don't have to prove anything, I'm patiently waiting for a link to PT sniffer dogs being amazingly trained to AVOID cadavers. I'm interested in the technique used.
I'm afraid you do, unless of course you can't >@@(*&)
-
I'm waiting for a link from Anne, thanks. And no, I don't have anything to prove, seems you have though, so far you've managed to prove nothing at all.
-
I'm afraid you do, unless of course you can't >@@(*&)
Faith it is no good twisting the words.
Mrs B has asked you to prove about the dogs
Can we have the goods, pls
Sorry Mrs b. This is a duplicate of your post
-
Faith it is no good twisting the words.
Mrs B has asked you to prove about the dogs
Can we have the goods, pls
Yes, but I can't really see that coming. One thing you can count on with the doubters, they have problems providing back up. They are quick to ask, but hardly ever supply any themselves.
-
I'm waiting for a link from Anne, thanks. And no, I don't have anything to prove, seems you have though, so far you've managed to prove nothing at all.
You see Mrs B in the real world, as opposed to McCannland, to maintain any kind of credibility at all, if you claim something is so you must be prepared to back it up with evidence. So far you haven't.
-
Faith it is no good twisting the words.
Mrs B has asked you to prove about the dogs
Can we have the goods, pls
Sorry Mrs b. This is a duplicate of your post
I do so wish you would read things properly sadie. It was Anne who made the claim about the dogs, not myself.
-
Yes, but I can't really see that coming. One thing you can count on with the doubters, they have problems providing back up. They are quick to ask, but hardly ever supply any themselves.
I didn't make the claim as you well know though on a lighter note I see that irony bypass was a great success @)(++(*
-
I have read and I can see that you are supposed to be providing the proof, but it aint forthcoming
Speaks Oceans
-
I have read and I can see that you are supposed to be providing the proof, but it aint forthcoming
Speaks Oceans
Perhaps you need new specs then sadie. 8(>((
There's an old saying that when you're already in a hole, stop digging. You'd be we'll advised to take notice of it 8(0(*
-
LINK please to where it says that the regular sniffer dogs used in PDL were trained to AVOID cadavers. As I said, I cannot see ANY of the dog handlers' mentioning this extraordinary training in the official files.
This training is basic for obvious reasons. I've a lot of scientific articles, I'll find what you want and I promise to send it to you.
-
This training is basic for obvious reasons. I've a lot of scientific articles, I'll find what you want and I promise to send it to you.
Thank you, I've got a dog trainer friend, she'd love to know how to train pooches to AVOID dead things. We currently use the LEAVE command, but that doesn't mean avoid, it means that you train them to listen to the command to LEAVE after they've already sniffed it.
-
Yes, but I can't really see that coming. One thing you can count on with the doubters, they have problems providing back up. They are quick to ask, but hardly ever supply any themselves.
You have to admit, Mrs. B, that I answered your post comparing the "McCann" translation and Astro's one. In order to give my opinion, I had to find the original text and compare. I'm not like you, I'm not at all tidy !
-
We currently use the LEAVE command, but that doesn't mean avoid, it means that you train them to listen to the command to LEAVE after they've already sniffed it.
It's not that. There's only a command to "work/play" (often materialized by a special lead) and at the end an off command.
-
Thank you, I've got a dog trainer friend, she'd love to know how to train pooches to AVOID dead things. We currently use the LEAVE command, but that doesn't mean avoid, it means that you train them to listen to the command to LEAVE after they've already sniffed it.
So now you have Anne's answer perhaps you will give us ours ?
-
You have to admit, Mrs. B, that I answered your post comparing the "McCann" translation and Astro's one. In order to give my opinion, I had to find the original text and compare. I'm not like you, I'm not at all tidy !
I wasn't actually referring to you, Anne. I was thinking about someone is constantly whining about threats to doubters but seems unable to come up with any sort of proof.
-
So now you have Anne's answer perhaps you will give us ours ?
Why? Have you produced a link to where in the files it says that the particular dogs used in PDL had been subjected to this particular training yet? Anne says she'll find some articles which are GENERAL I assume, not dog specific.
Also, when it comes to Eddie, let's just remember a few things - Coconut, 2nd hand furniture, used tissues....there is no way to know WHAT that dog was alerting to. He was simply not reliable.
-
Why? Have you produced a link to where in the files it says that the particular dogs used in PDL had been subjected to this particular training yet? Anne says she'll find some articles which are GENERAL I assume, not dog specific.
Also, when it comes to Eddie, let's just remember a few things - Coconut, 2nd hand furniture, used tissues....there is no way to know WHAT that dog was alerting to. He was simply not reliable.
Shall I spend time finding those articles, Mrs. B ? Haven't you enough living beings to mock? Harrison who all of a sudden was Professor, Sir Martin Grime, Eddie the coconut dog, the unqualifiable Gonçalo Amaral, the intruder hunter Pamela Fenn, Numi the patrol dog who pretended to be a tracker one, Mrs McCann lifting a bin's lid, and one day possibly Madeleine herself asking Mr Oldfied to play the monster, etc.
-
This is not true. After a cataclysm, the first dogs sent are scent air dogs, trained not to react to the scent of death because the priority is to save those who can be saved.
It would be a bit tough if there was a live person underneath a couple of dead bodies, if what you say is true.
Eddie was initially trained for such disasters, so if he was trained to ignore cadavers then how did Martin Grime later teach him to do the opposite?
-
Why? Have you produced a link to where in the files it says that the particular dogs used in PDL had been subjected to this particular training yet? Anne says she'll find some articles which are GENERAL I assume, not dog specific.
Also, when it comes to Eddie, let's just remember a few things - Coconut, 2nd hand furniture, used tissues....there is no way to know WHAT that dog was alerting to. He was simply not reliable.
But we are not talking about Eddie, are we. Mrs B if you can't provide a link please say so.
-
Why? Have you produced a link to where in the files it says that the particular dogs used in PDL had been subjected to this particular training yet? Anne says she'll find some articles which are GENERAL I assume, not dog specific.
Also, when it comes to Eddie, let's just remember a few things - Coconut, 2nd hand furniture, used tissues....there is no way to know WHAT that dog was alerting to. He was simply not reliable.
-
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
In that case, I will bump it again, Stephen
You obviously had your mind shut down and did NOT notice the emboldening I had added
Quote from: Mrs. B on Today at 12:41:56 AM
Why? Have you produced a link to where in the files it says that the particular dogs used in PDL had been subjected to this particular training yet? Anne says she'll find some articles which are GENERAL I assume, not dog specific.
Also, when it comes to Eddie, let's just remember a few things - Coconut, 2nd hand furniture, used tissues....there is no way to know WHAT that dog was alerting to. He was simply not reliable.
@)(++(* He who laughs last, laughs longest !
Maybe I should do a string of laughing faces? No, I will resist
-
In that case, I will bump it again, Stephen
You obviously had your mind shut down and did NOT notice the emboldening I had added
Quote from: Mrs. B on Today at 12:41:56 AM
@)(++(* He who laughs last, laughs longest !
Maybe I should do a string of laughing faces? No, I will resist
What a load of coconuts. 8)-))) 8-)(--)
I've heard all that rubbish a long time ago.
-
What a load of coconuts. 8)-))) 8-)(--)
I've heard all that rubbish a long time ago.
Ah!
Coconuts! Where's Eddie? @)(++(*
-
What a load of coconuts. 8)-))) 8-)(--)
I've heard all that rubbish a long time ago.
Seriously Stephen
Do you have anything to add apart from insults and lightweight comments
I can do that too as you have seen, but I can also [post some heavyweight stuff.
Lets have yours.
Starting with your theory for what happened, using facts rather than myths and hatred
-
Just to re-cap then
The dog brought in to find a living person didn't find anything ?
The dog brought in to find the scent of a dead person did find something ?
-
From Archiving Dispatch
During this night and the following dawn, intensive searches were made by PJ officers, GNR soldiers with sniffer dogs and by members of the public organised in groups, as well as by the parents, groups of friends and employees of the resort.
At 02.00 in the morning following the disappearance two sniffer dogs arrived in Praia da Luz and continued searching until the morning, covering the entire perimeter of the Ocean Club resort, urban area, waste ground and the closest homes, all the possible sites where the girl might be having been searched, the search later being extended to the beach area, the PJ duty officer also requested the GNR to issue an order for all officers who were on patrol to be alert and identify cars and persons that were circulating at that time.
At 08.00 the GNR Search and Rescue sniffer dog team came into action, searches were begun from the resort in the direction of the beach, covering a 2 km area; in Praia da Luz 300m radius searches were made as well searches of abandoned houses, wells and waste land, the radius subsequently being expanded to 600m including the verges of the EN 125 motorway.
Subsequently an attempt was made to reconstruct the route taken by Madeleine by giving the dogs a blanket/towel used by her, but the results were not significant, given that the dogs are more trained for use in rural areas rather than urban or populated areas, the existence of more odours in the air making it impossible for the tracker dog to identify/locate the “target smell”.
Searches were also carried out in two camping parks in Espiche and in Praia da Luz to inspect the bungalows whose occupants had left on the day of the disappearance; the searches were extended to line searches with the help of Portimao GNR soldiers over a larger area, searches having been made of all the vehicles parked in the Praia da Luz car parks. Subsequently, the searches were extended to the villages of Barao de S. Joao, Burgau, Bensafrim and Salema.
States clearly dogs were more trained in searches in rural areas than urban populated areas.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
-
3 dogs followed the same route after smelling Madeleine's blanket/towel. A patrol dog didn't react.
-
Seriously Stephen
Do you have anything to add apart from insults and lightweight comments
I can do that too as you have seen, but I can also [post some heavyweight stuff.
Lets have yours.
Starting with your theory for what happened, using facts rather than myths and hatred
Heavyweight position ?
Not really.
You have a default position and nothing else of any concern.
The Mccanns did nothing wrong, and anyone accusing them of being poor parents, are nasty,nasty people. 8-)(--) 8-)(--)
-
We take another look at why if Madeleine had been abducted and subsequently left somewhere, why did the sniffer dogs fail to find any trace of her?
I think that question can only by answered by someone who is an expert in live personal scent detecting dogs and the situations and facts of this case, all we can do is speculate from amateur understandings
Eta
The questions remain though
Why no dogs picked up any scent in the direction of either alledged carriers that night, tannerman and smithman
Why no dogs picked up anyscent at least down the path and through to the car park if an abductor took her to a car
Why the dogs used on at least two occasions ALL picked up the same scent trail leading out of the apartment and continung to the left and round the block and down the alley, down to the tapas bar entrance and across the street to the car park, a route Gerry said all his three kids took a few days earlier on a morning they were all taking to their nurseries
These dogs picked up her scent only in places she would have been, never in places she shouldnt have been, ergo, she was never in those places
Of course if she was taken on the night of may 3 completely wrapped in a blanket or in a bag the dogs would have found nothing
PS Icab your question was spot on and something to think about, no scent of an alive madeleine anywhere she may have been taken,withthe single proviso above, but the remnant scent of a dead body found by the cadaver dog in the parents room and elsewhere...for anyone to say this is irrelevant is barmy
-
Heavyweight position ?
Not really.
You have a default position and nothing else of any concern.
The Mccanns did nothing wrong, and anyone accusing them of being poor parents, are nasty,nasty people. 8-)(--) 8-)(--)
You guys Nasty nasty people? 8-)(--) 8-)(--)
Well you said it ! @)(++(*
I do have a default position because I have thoroughly investigated over almost 6 years as, I believe, no other person on here has.[with the possible exception of Heris, but I think his investigation has been going on for a shorter period. He is very thorough tho. and understands the language, which I do not.] I can find no way that the Mccanns could have done it or reason why
Stephen, as I have said before, if you wish to convince us of your theory that the Mccanns were responsible in some way, then give us your valid theory. It is no good if it is based on nothing factual tho. You must give facts and a real basis for it to be considered.
-
I do have a default position because I have thoroughly investigated over almost 6 years as, I believe, no other person on here has.
Oooer,LOL, you know how much each person here has or has not investigated or read the files, and you also forget how many times you are completelyand utterly wrong, hardly, miss marple of the mccann case
@)(++(*
bet your mates are happy about that, not....
-
You guys Nasty nasty people? 8-)(--) 8-)(--)
Well you said it ! @)(++(*
I do have a default position because I have thoroughly investigated over almost 6 years as, I believe, no other person on here has.[with the possible exception of Heris, but I think his investigation has been going on for a shorter period. He is very thorough tho. and understands the language, which I do not.] I can find no way that the Mccanns could have done it or reason why
Stephen, as I have said before, if you wish to convince us of your theory that the Mccanns were responsible in some way, then give us your valid theory. It is no good if it is based on nothing factual tho. You must give facts and a real basis for it to be considered.
You clearly don't comprehend irony Sadie.
Your default position won't change because you made up your mind at the start.
I too felt sympathy for the parents of missing children at the start of the case,but when I learned from a friend living there they stayed in the apartment overnight and didn't search, that's when my suspicions started.
She had the audacity in the book to complain no one searched for Madeleine other than them, a blatant lie, one amongst others.
I have seen no evidence of abduction that would stand up in court and contrary to how some of the extreme mccannites think, the Mccanns were never stitched up.
The only indications of what happened to Madeleine were what the dogs showed. True the D.N.A. was inconclusive, but it doesn't mean that it can be disregarded, but that's old news.
The Mccanns claimed abduction from the start, how did they know she hadn't walked out of the apartment ?
After all it was 'unlocked', and there is so much more.
-
You clearly don't comprehend irony Sadie.
Your default position won't change because you made up your mind at the start.
I too felt sympathy for the parents of missing children at the start of the case,but when I learned from a friend living there they stayed in the apartment overnight and didn't search, that's when my suspicions started.
She had the audacity in the book to complain no one searched for Madeleine other than them, a blatant lie, one amongst others.
I have seen no evidence of abduction that would stand up in court and contrary to how some of the extreme mccannites think, the Mccanns were never stitched up.
The only indications of what happened to Madeleine were what the dogs showed. True the D.N.A. was inconclusive, but it doesn't mean that it can be disregarded, but that's old news.
The Mccanns claimed abduction from the start, how did they know she hadn't walked out of the apartment ?
After all it was 'unlocked', and there is so much more.
Where was your friend then Stephen? - in their apartment with them or watching them from outside - to know what they did or didn't do overnight? They were talking to the police until late into the night, Diane Webster who WAS actually with them watched them go out searching. They were also seen by a GNR officer.
While they were out searching they saw no-one else - and because of that they felt they were alone at that particular time - as anyone would in those circumstances. Particulary as the PJ had all left and said they would not be back until after 9.00 the next morning.
Forensic testing of the dogs 'swabs' - revealed no proof whatsoever of any wrongdoing by the McCanns.
-
Where was your friend then Stephen? - in their apartment with them or watching them from outside - to know what they did or didn't do overnight? They were talking to the police until late into the night, Diane Webster who WAS actually with them watched them go out searching. They were also seen by a GNR officer.
While they were out searching they saw no-one else - and because of that they felt they were alone at that particular time - as anyone would in those circumstances. Particulary as the PJ had all left and said they would not be back until after 9.00 the next morning.
Forensic testing of the dogs 'swabs' - revealed no proof whatsoever of any wrongdoing by the McCanns.
You are trying to rewrite history.
It doesn't wash.
Unlike 'cuddlecat'.
-
You are trying to rewrite history.
It doesn't wash.
Unlike 'cuddlecat'.
What history am I trying to rewrite?
-
@ Stephen
"...but when I learned from a friend living there they stayed in the apartment overnight"
I'm curious as well.
A friend with them, watching them that night?
-
@ Stephen
"...but when I learned from a friend living there they stayed in the apartment overnight"
I'm curious as well.
A friend with them, watching them that night?
Nil points on that one.
He searched throughout the night for Madeleine as did many other local people, holidaymakers, etc.
The Mccanns didn't.
Don't bother with an irrelevant reply, just watch the Jane Hill interview.
-
Forensic testing of the dogs 'swabs' - revealed no proof whatsoever of any wrongdoing by the McCanns.
This is trying to rewrite history. How could dogs' "swabs" reveal wrong or right doing by the McCanns ? The blood was in fact in too bad condition to be plainly identified, but enough to determine it wasn't Madeleine's.
What about the cadaver scent Eddie picked up in the flat ?
No forensic, no proof. But the alerts occurred. As Icabodcrane noticed (it was before you arrived on this forum, Benice), what could have pushed Eddie to alert ? Whatever the scent that made Eddie alert, it was only in the 5A and not in the flats occupied by the group or by the McCanns after Madeleine vanished.
And Icabodcrane goes further : if a dog had indicated the presence of explosives in a plane you're intending to flight on, but no bomb had been found, would you embark as invited to by the crew with a "well come on board, there's nothing to fear". Would you ?
-
You clearly don't comprehend irony Sadie.
Your default position won't change because you made up your mind at the start.
I too felt sympathy for the parents of missing children at the start of the case,but when I learned from a friend living there they stayed in the apartment overnight and didn't search, that's when my suspicions started.
She had the audacity in the book to complain no one searched for Madeleine other than them, a blatant lie, one amongst others.
I have seen no evidence of abduction that would stand up in court and contrary to how some of the extreme mccannites think, the Mccanns were never stitched up.
The only indications of what happened to Madeleine were what the dogs showed. True the D.N.A. was inconclusive, but it doesn't mean that it can be disregarded, but that's old news.
The Mccanns claimed abduction from the start, how did they know she hadn't walked out of the apartment ?
After all it was 'unlocked', and there is so much more.
Is that the same friend that told you the McCanns scrubbed the apartment with bleach, Stephen?
-
Now, lets get back on topic, why did the live scenting dogs NOT find madeleines scent except from places she was and NOT from places she shouldnt have been, ie in the directions of tannerman or smithman, is it because she was never there?
-
I think that question can only by answered by someone who is an expert in live personal scent detecting dogs and the situations and facts of this case, all we can do is speculate from amateur understandings
Eta
The questions remain though
Why no dogs picked up any scent in the direction of either alledged carriers that night, tannerman and smithman
Why no dogs picked up anyscent at least down the path and through to the car park if an abductor took her to a car
Why the dogs used on at least two occasions ALL picked up the same scent trail leading out of the apartment and continung to the left and round the block and down the alley, down to the tapas bar entrance and across the street to the car park, a route Gerry said all his three kids took a few days earlier on a morning they were all taking to their nurseries
These dogs picked up her scent only in places she would have been, never in places she shouldnt have been, ergo, she was never in those places
Of course if she was taken on the night of may 3 completely wrapped in a blanket or in a bag the dogs would have found nothing
PS Icab your question was spot on and something to think about, no scent of an alive madeleine anywhere she may have been taken,withthe single proviso above, but the remnant scent of a dead body found by the cadaver dog in the parents room and elsewhere...for anyone to say this is irrelevant is barmy
Bumped
-
Nil points on that one.
He searched throughout the night for Madeleine as did many other local people, holidaymakers, etc.
The Mccanns didn't.
Don't bother with an irrelevant reply, just watch the Jane Hill interview.
Of course, they didn't search throughout the night. They had to be available to try to explain to two different police forces what had happened, via volunteer interpreters, and to try to ensure that action was being taken.
-
Nil points on that one.
He searched throughout the night for Madeleine as did many other local people, holidaymakers, etc.
The Mccanns didn't.
Don't bother with an irrelevant reply, just watch the Jane Hill interview.
If he was searching for Madeleine, how would be know what the McCanns were doing? Did he know the precise whereabouts of all the other people who were searching? How did he know what the McCanns looked like?
Jane Hill doesn't ask Kate whether she ever searched or not. She asked if she hadn't felt she wanted to join in with the searches by the locals, which began in earnest the next morning and continued for many days - it was that period of time she was referring to. Kate's, reply begins with... 'I mean, I did' - which to some people apparently translates as ....'I mean, I didn't'
Jane Hill didn't ask about the hotel staff search procedure - so maybe that didn't happen either in your opinion?
On the 4th May they spent the day at the police station. When they got back hundreds of reporters had arrived. The chances of Kate or Gerry being able to go out and search themselves once that happened was nil. They would have been mobbed on sight.
-
Loving your posts Red.
Very revealing!
you should post more yourself, you only come on here periodically to whinge, NEVER to discuss the case or anything surrounding it, just to slag people off, or target posters, lovely valued contributor arent you? Not, very revealing, yawwnn
?{)(**
Forum readers might be waiting for Your understanding of the sniffer dogs, the subject of thread, care to share? have you even got one?If not why not? And if not, why post on the thread slagging me off? Sweet dreams chuck, very revealing I agree
-
They don't pop up to debate but to run down, to bite. They parasite the thoughts and the assumptions of others in order to avoid to express themselves. They're picky, but don't propose anything. They have a unique obsession : searching, targeting the tiny real or supposed to be errors and play the righters of wrongs of the others' risks. They don't post, they control. They don't go ahead, they're waiting at the corner to preach at. They don't invent, they look out. They are warders. They feed on our thoughts and some seem to be particularly hungry.
-
They don't pop up to debate but to run down, to bite. They parasite the thoughts and the assumptions of others in order to avoid to express themselves. They're picky, but don't propose anything. They have a unique obsession : searching, targeting the tiny real or supposed to be errors and play the righters of wrongs of the others' risks. They don't post, they control. They don't go ahead, they're waiting at the corner to preach at. They don't invent, they look out. They are warders. They feed on our thoughts and some seem to be particularly hungry.
8@??)(
-
Been there and done it.
These days I prefer to read the sceptics and have a laugh at their ridiculous theories being repeated year in, year out.
When will they understand that the McCanns have never been charged with anything and never will be.
Carry on.....
8@??)( Understated and brilliant! ... their ridiculous theories being repeated year in, year out.... to laugh at !
When will they understand that the McCanns have never been charged with anything and never will be.
-
This is trying to rewrite history. How could dogs' "swabs" reveal wrong or right doing by the McCanns ? The blood was in fact in too bad condition to be plainly identified, but enough to determine it wasn't Madeleine's.
What about the cadaver scent Eddie picked up in the flat ?
No forensic, no proof. But the alerts occurred. As Icabodcrane noticed (it was before you arrived on this forum, Benice), what could have pushed Eddie to alert ? Whatever the scent that made Eddie alert, it was only in the 5A and not in the flats occupied by the group or by the McCanns after Madeleine vanished.
And Icabodcrane goes further : if a dog had indicated the presence of explosives in a plane you're intending to flight on, but no bomb had been found, would you embark as invited to by the crew with a "well come on board, there's nothing to fear". Would you ?
Yes Anne the alerts did occur. But what you consistently fail to acknowledge (in Eddie's case) is Martin Grime's assertion that no evidential value can be attributed to those alerts unless they were corroberrated. They were NOT corroberated, therefore they have no value as evidence. The reasons why they cannot be considered as evidence without the essential corroberration have been posted here several times. I cannot believe you have missed them all.
-
Yes Anne the alerts did occur. But what you consistently fail to acknowledge (in Eddie's case) is Martin Grime's assertion that no evidential value can be attributed to those alerts unless they were corroberrated. They were NOT corroberated, therefore they have no value as evidence. The reasons why they cannot be considered as evidence without the essential corroberration have been posted here several times. I cannot believe you have missed them all.
What is this strange and paradoxical need that leads to built continuously a chipboard reality in order to have clear conscience when one vituperates or glorifies ? What deplorable evolution turned us strangers to nuance, to complexity, to shadows and distorted or vague lights, to this part of night in every one, to this offence to manichaeism that intelligence is !
-
What is this strange and paradoxical need that leads to built continuously a chipboard reality in order to have clear conscience when one vituperates or glorifies ? What deplorable evolution turned us strangers to nuance, to complexity, to shadows and distorted or vague lights, to this part of night in every one, to this offence to manichaeism that intelligence is !
Fascinating Anne, but also totally incomprehensible and irrelevant. We are talking about a normal ordinary family who went on holiday and while they were there their child was abducted. Nothing has emerged to prove the McCAnns to be anything other than normal, decent, hardworking people, who were extremely loving parents - having waited years before they finally managed to achieve parenthood. Nothing has ever emerged from the woodwork to say otherwise, and believe you me, if the newspapers could have found something - anything - on them - they would have done so. Their only 'crime' is that they made a human error - for which they and their daughter paid the most dreadful penalty. In six years no-one has been able to come up with a credible theory which puts them in the frame. In the meantime, the abductors(s) are still out there. They must be highly delighted with folk such as yourself.
-
They don't pop up to debate but to run down, to bite. They parasite the thoughts and the assumptions of others in order to avoid to express themselves. They're picky, but don't propose anything. They have a unique obsession : searching, targeting the tiny real or supposed to be errors and play the righters of wrongs of the others' risks. They don't post, they control. They don't go ahead, they're waiting at the corner to preach at. They don't invent, they look out. They are warders. They feed on our thoughts and some seem to be particularly hungry.
This is the entire point. Your thoughts and assumptions amount to what? Speculation, lies and libel. Thoughts and assumptions mean nothing compared to the rule of law. The law asserts the Mccanns are innocent, the evidence does the same.
There is nothing to propose to you. Just the facts.
-
Well said, both Jazzy and Benice.
-
Well said, both Jazzy and Benice.
Thanks Chinagirl, much appreciated. No reply though, no one wants to debate the facts it seems. Dogs don't lie, the finger points, normal people don't put forward points to debate. What facts? The Mccanns are officially innocent, there is no evidence against them. What else is there to say?
-
Thanks Chinagirl, much appreciated. No reply though, no one wants to debate the facts it seems. Dogs don't lie, the finger points, normal people don't put forward points to debate. What facts? The Mccanns are officially innocent, there is no evidence against them. What else is there to say?
the fact that no concrete evidence was found to charge the mccanns does not make them innocent, they maybe, but no official in Portugal has said they are innocent, those are the facts, pls provide the evidence where any official said they are innocent, it just does not exist, the nearest you can get in english terms is they were bailed and released
-
the fact that no concrete evidence was found to charge the mccanns does not make them innocent, they maybe, but no official in Portugal has said they are innocent, those are the facts, pls provide the evidence where any official said they are innocent, it just does not exist, the nearest you can get in english terms is they were bailed and released
Oh! Am I off your ignore list Redblossom?
-
Oh! Am I off your ignore list Redblossom?
Obviously
-
Idiot. You are about to go on mine.
-
Idiot. You are about to go on mine.
Cool by me
But before you go do remind us why the dogs never found madeleines scent in any direction of both bundleman and smithman
-
Please remind me why the Mccanns are free and charged with nothing?
-
What is new to discuss? Where is the new evidence , not already dismissed by the Portugese Attorney General?
-
Please remind me why the Mccanns are free and charged with nothing?
They are presumed innocent, it doesn't mean they are 50% or 70% innocent, they are 100% innocent up to further notice.
Once this is clear in all minds, we can debate and try to understand what happened without having posters claiming they weren't charged, sceptics are insane, etc.
-
Please remind me why the Mccanns are free and charged with nothing?
Irrelevant post as the subject of this thread and the subject of my previous question was about why the dogs found no trail in certain quarteras its ok i understand u have no idea why but no reason to derail
-
Cool by me
But before you go do remind us why the dogs never found madeleines scent in any direction of both bundleman and smithman
I can tell you why.
It was only air scent, and a very little girl held high on a very gusty night.
The dogs came hours later, no scent remaining.
simples
-
I can tell you why.
It doesn't seem you can.
-
I can tell you why.
It was only air scent, and a very little girl held high on a very gusty night.
The dogs came hours later, no scent remaining.
simples
Correct Sadie. The scent dogs would only have been able to follow her trail had she put a foot on the ground.
The fact that they were able to follow a trail out of reception, across the road to the lamp post just goes to show that they were following her scent. Unfortunately it was a trail laid down innocently as she walked to the kiddie club.
-
Correct Sadie. The scent dogs would only have been able to follow her trail had she put a foot on the ground.
The fact that they were able to follow a trail out of reception, across the road to the lamp post just goes to show that they were following her scent. Unfortunately it was a trail laid down innocently as she walked to the kiddie club.
So if Madeleine had woke and wondered, the dogs could have tracked her ?
That's one theory we can lay to rest then
-
No of course you can't, if a prisoner escapes & dogs are sent out to trace his scent but cannot find it, does that mean that the prisoner did not escape? It just means that the dogs failed to trace the scent or the scent may have been too weak. You can't rule out anything on account of DOGS, because there is no such thing as an infallible dog.
-
So if Madeleine had woke and wondered, the dogs could have tracked her ?
That's one theory we can lay to rest then
The "innocent" trail out of reception across the road to the lamp post John is mentioning does not start at the OC reception.
It is imperative, when someone is missing, to bring the sniffer dog at the exact point where the missing person was last seen. No sniffer dog was brought to the OC reception because Madeleine was last seen in the 5A. The 3 dogs brought to the 5A followed the same route and that route was by no way the route Madeleine followed to go the creche.
-
You are quite wrong Anne, John was responding to my post,
I can tell you why.
It was only air scent, and a very little girl held high on a very gusty night.
The dogs came hours later, no scent remaining.
simples
which in turn was responding to Reds post below
But before you go do remind us why the dogs never found madeleines scent in any direction of both bundleman and smithman
So it did start at OC flat 5A
-
Have you a link ?
Yes, I do - (though I'm waiting for you to provide a link to the dogs in PDL having received cadaver AVOIDANCE training, but never mind, eh.)
http://www.cps.gov.uk/london/about_us/our_structure/
-
I'm waiting for you to provide a link to the dogs in PDL having received cadaver AVOIDANCE training, but never mind, eh.)
The snifers dogs of the GNR national school (an army department) are trained like other police snifers dogs, they participate in international sessions, there's nothing specific with them.
Here is an interesting article about air scent dogs, trained to detect generic alive human scent and only that. After the rescue operations, these dogs are taken back home and only then other teams come and deploy sniffer dogs trained to detect human cadaver scent and only that.
These dogs are trained during 18 to 30 months (together with the dog handler) and pass then through a very complex selection process. The training has nothing to do with what people can obtain from their pets. The dog must be capable to concentrate and ignore any other scent, how tempting it can be (part of training of males is "resisting" to oestrus female). Their hearing qualities (more accurate than ours) are developed as well.
For obvious reasons alerting to cadaver scent would mean radical rejection for a candidate to authentic air scent dog.
The article is in French, does it matter ?
http://www.irinnews.org/printreport.aspx?reportid=87837
-
The snifers dogs of the GNR national school (an army department) are trained like other police snifers dogs, they participate in international sessions, there's nothing specific with them.
Here is an interesting article about air scent dogs, trained to detect generic alive human scent and only that. After the rescue operations, these dogs are taken back home and only then other teams come and deploy sniffer dogs trained to detect human cadaver scent and only that.
These dogs are trained during 18 to 30 months (together with the dog handler) and pass then through a very complex selection process. The training has nothing to do with what people can obtain from their pets. The dog must be capable to concentrate and ignore any other scent, how tempting it can be (part of training of males is "resisting" to oestrus female). Their hearing qualities (more accurate than ours) are developed as well.
For obvious reasons alerting to cadaver scent would mean radical rejection for a candidate to authentic air scent dog.
The article is in French, does it matter ?
http://www.irinnews.org/printreport.aspx?reportid=87837
This is the English version of that article.
http://www.irinnews.org/report/87790/how-to-track-the-scent-of-life
-
Once a find is confirmed, the dogs are removed so that the victim can safely be taken out. Because searching is essentially a game, a find is always rewarded – usually with a toy – to ensure the dogs remain motivated.
Zörner said a dog worked for 20 minutes, because "If it works too long the dog loses interest and the work is no longer secure – he can give an indication even when it is not absolutely sure," and then rested for the same amount of time.
-
Thanks, Carana, absent-mindedly I arrived on the French version page having used French keywords and as I saw right on top Haïti, Port au Prince, I didn't even noticed it was a UN article.
I have more technical articles on paper, I'll send later.
-
So if Madeleine had woke and wondered, the dogs could have tracked her ?
That's one theory we can lay to rest then
Exactly so and especially so as she was bare footed!
The dogs were able to follow an older ground scent so they would most definitely have found a fresh one has Madeleine wandered out of that apartment of her own volition.
This again is further evidence of a probable abduction.
-
Exactly so and especially so as she was bare footed!
The dogs were able to follow an older ground scent so they would most definitely have found a fresh one has Madeleine wandered out of that apartment of her own volition.
This again is further evidence of a probable abduction.
What evidence have you of this, John ?
The sniffer dog took, on the 8th, the same route he had taken on the 4th.
-
Correct Sadie. The scent dogs would only have been able to follow her trail had she put a foot on the ground.
The fact that they were able to follow a trail out of reception, across the road to the lamp post just goes to show that they were following her scent. Unfortunately it was a trail laid down innocently as she walked to the kiddie club.
Not much good, when the dogs weren't bought in for more than 24 hours after the abduction
Beginning to follow the track using Rex, from the door of apartment 5 A (the place where the girl had been sleeping) he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area (restaurant, pool and playground). Immediately another attempt at reconstruction was made using the dog Zarus, who, in general terms, ended up following the same route as Rex and having the same behaviour.
It is important to state that this tracking work was carried out in an urban area and more than 24 hours after the girl's disappearance and numerous persons had passed along the path the dogs were tracking. It should also be stated that the path the dogs followed within the resort was practically totally surrounded by walls and the concentration of odours was stronger as they were protected from the wind. The searches finished at about 01.30
-
What evidence have you of this, John ?
The sniffer dog took, on the 8th, the same route he had taken on the 4th.
You only have to look at the routes the dogs took. Reception to Baptista and reception to club.
-
You only have to look at the routes the dogs took. Reception to Baptista and reception to club.
It has already been discussed here, John ;) Baptista is a red herring !
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P3/03_VOLUME_IIIa_Page_830.jpg
-
Where is the evidence that a carried person does not shed skin cells, hair, sweat? Onto the ground where tracking dogs can follow it?
Eta I have read tracker dogs can find a scent quite a few days later too though obviously its always better to use them asap
-
Where is the evidence that a carried person does not shed skin cells, hair, sweat? Onto the ground where tracking dogs can follow it?
Eta I have read tracker dogs can find a scent quite a few days later too though obviously its always better to use them asap
Sniffer dogs can distinguish between body parts' scents. They mix these scents when they're tracking. This is why it wasn't stupid to give the dogs the towel that Madeleine used after her bath. This towel had the mixture of all scents, including the soap, champoo etc.. that composed Madeleine's scent when she disappeared.
Whether a person is carried or not, he/she will lose millions of cells on a certain width which is the trail, "le sentiment" (the feeling) in chasse à cour.
-
Sniffer dogs can distinguish between body parts' scents. They mix these scents when they're tracking. This is why it wasn't stupid to give the dogs the towel that Madeleine used after her bath. This towel had the mixture of all scents, including the soap, champoo etc.. that composed Madeleine's scent when she disappeared.
Whether a person is carried or not, he/she will lose millions of cells on a certain width which is the trail, "le sentiment" (the feeling) in chasse à cour.
It was a gusty night. Madeleine's feet were about 4 ft off the ground. She had just bathed removing any dead skin and little skin was exposed anyway. Her head and hands were lying against bundleman, so would fall onto her own body or bundleman. That leaves two tiny feet, just washed so no dead skin. and it was a gusty night. Sorry you guys but there would be no scent for a ground sniffing dog to follow, Nor with that gusty weather would there be ant scent left for an air sniffing dog.
That is assuming that it was Madeleine. But we have a golden witness to the abduction and we know that Madeleine did NOT go that way anyhow.
The dogs were either following Madeleine's shoe/feet trail from a previous trip or they were following the sweaty smell of the abductor, which had mingled with Madeleine's on the Towel and blanket..
These same dogs followed the same trail, was it? ... a couple on days later.
You are in cloud Coockoo land if you think that a faint air smell would hang around like that.
-
I agree Sadie. I had the same experience with police dogs. It just doesn't happen in practise.
-
It was a gusty night. Madeleine's feet were about 4 ft off the ground. She had just bathed removing any dead skin and little skin was exposed anyway. Her head and hands were lying against bundleman, so would fall onto her own body or bundleman. That leaves two tiny feet, just washed so no dead skin. and it was a gusty night. Sorry you guys but there would be no scent for a ground sniffing dog to follow, Nor with that gusty weather would there be ant scent left for an air sniffing dog.
That is assuming that it was Madeleine. But we have a golden witness to the abduction and we know that Madeleine did NOT go that way anyhow.
The dogs were either following Madeleine's shoe/feet trail from a previous trip or they were following the sweaty smell of the abductor, which had mingled with Madeleine's on the Towel and blanket..
These same dogs followed the same trail, was it? ... a couple on days later.
You are in cloud Coockoo land if you think that a faint air smell would hang around like that.
It was actually, 4 days later, Sadie.
How many others would have walked that route after the 4th. It wasn't cordoned off, was it?
-
It was actually, 4 days later, Sadie.
How many others would have walked that route after the 4th. It wasn't cordoned off, was it?
You are mistaken DCI. There were dogs deployed within hours of Madeleines disappearance.
Armando Augusto Morais
Occupation: GNR Officer
He has been a GNR officer since 1982. He currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.
On 4th May he was called at about 01.15, he arrived at the OC at about 1.55, accompanied by the officer Laçao.
They presented themselves to Sergeant Duarte from the GNR Lagos post and were informed by him of the disappearance of a small girl from the resort. There were other GNR officers present at the scene, but he does not remember their names. There were also PJ officers present.
After having established exactly where the girl had disappeared from, he was given a piece of her clothing by one of his colleagues, whose name he does not remember.
From the door of the apartment, accompanied by his dog, he walked around the entire perimeter of the resort and revised the interior of several of the apartments.
As he did not obtain any results in the area close to the resort, he extended the perimeter of the search to a distance of 1 km.
www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html#gnr9
-
...and from his colleague.
Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão
Occupation: GNR Officer
He has been a GNR officer since 1988. He holds the post of soldier and currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.
On 4th May he was called at about 01h15 when he was asleep at home, requesting him to appear at the Lagos GNR post as a small girl had disappeared. After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02h30.
When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCanns' apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the McCann couple. They just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.
They began searching with the dogs from the main entrance to the apartment, having given the blanket to his dog Numi to smell and begin to search.
The route initially taken was from the front entrance door to the passageway between Blocks 4 and 5, along the corridor and then along the passage that leads past the entrance to the small reception to the resort's swimming pool. After that the whole of the area surrounding the resort was searched.
With regard to the indications transmitted by his dog Numi, he says that at the beginning he was only “a little interested”, he let the dog "get on with it" .
They finished the searches at about 07h00 AM.
www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html#gnr10
-
Cheers for clarifying this Angelo mate. 8((()*/
I don't know why posters continue to put disinformation about concerning the GNR sniffer dogs but one fact is clear and that is they failed to find anything of any consequence at all.
-
You are mistaken DCI. There were dogs deployed within hours of Madeleines disappearance.
Armando Augusto Morais
Occupation: GNR Officer
He has been a GNR officer since 1982. He currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.
On 4th May he was called at about 01.15, he arrived at the OC at about 1.55, accompanied by the officer Laçao.
They presented themselves to Sergeant Duarte from the GNR Lagos post and were informed by him of the disappearance of a small girl from the resort. There were other GNR officers present at the scene, but he does not remember their names. There were also PJ officers present.
After having established exactly where the girl had disappeared from, he was given a piece of her clothing by one of his colleagues, whose name he does not remember.
From the door of the apartment, accompanied by his dog, he walked around the entire perimeter of the resort and revised the interior of several of the apartments.
As he did not obtain any results in the area close to the resort, he extended the perimeter of the search to a distance of 1 km.
www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html#gnr9
If you re read Sadie's post, you will see what I replied to, Angelo!
4 Days later.
On 8th May during the morning four teams returned to search all the areas around Vila, following some indications from local people who had frequently gone to the GNR Command post saying they had seen something suspicious related to the disappearance but no sign of her presence was ever found.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
Also, I didn't say the dogs weren't deployed, but, they weren't deployed from the apartment for more than 24 hours, later.
3517 to 3524 Report of Technical/Scientific Search and Rescue Group
Operation Commander
Major Sequeira
During the afternoon of 4th May, more searches were carried out around Vila da Luz and were extended to a radius of approximately 600 metres, including the surroundings of the EN125 in the stretch closed to P da L.
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).
After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs. For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine.
Beginning to follow the track using Rex, from the door of apartment 5 A (the place where the girl had been sleeping) he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area (restaurant, pool and playground). Immediately another attempt at reconstruction was made using the dog Zarus, who, in general terms, ended up following the same route as Rex and having the same behaviour.
It is important to state that this tracking work was carried out in an urban area and more than 24 hours after the girl's disappearance and numerous persons had passed along the path the dogs were tracking. It should also be stated that the path the dogs followed within the resort was practically totally surrounded by walls and the concentration of odours was stronger as they were protected from the wind. The searches finished at about 01.30
Subject: Report of Searches Related to the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
-
Cheers for clarifying this Angelo mate. 8((()*/
I don't know why posters continue to put disinformation about concerning the GNR sniffer dogs but one fact is clear and that is they failed to find anything of any consequence at all.
Angelo's posts don't concern sniffer dogs, but patrol dogs (one with a bit of training in tracking, the only one who reacted).
-
...and from his colleague.
Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão
Occupation: GNR Officer
He has been a GNR officer since 1988. He holds the post of soldier and currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.
On 4th May he was called at about 01h15 when he was asleep at home, requesting him to appear at the Lagos GNR post as a small girl had disappeared. After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02h30.
When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCanns' apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the McCann couple. They just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.
They began searching with the dogs from the main entrance to the apartment, having given the blanket to his dog Numi to smell and begin to search.
The route initially taken was from the front entrance door to the passageway between Blocks 4 and 5, along the corridor and then along the passage that leads past the entrance to the small reception to the resort's swimming pool. After that the whole of the area surrounding the resort was searched.
With regard to the indications transmitted by his dog Numi, he says that at the beginning he was only “a little interested”, he let the dog "get on with it" .
They finished the searches at about 07h00 AM.
www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html#gnr10
When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCanns' apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the McCann couple. They just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.
Now Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão contradicts Armando Augusto Morais, because you missed this bit off, his statement.
He says that he never entered the apartment which Madeleine disappeared from, he was only in the access corridor to the apartment.
You are mistaken DCI. There were dogs deployed within hours of Madeleines disappearance.
Armando Augusto Morais
Occupation: GNR Officer
He has been a GNR officer since 1982. He currently works in the Portimao Territorial Group, working within the forensics service.
On 4th May he was called at about 01.15, he arrived at the OC at about 1.55, accompanied by the officer Laçao.
They presented themselves to Sergeant Duarte from the GNR Lagos post and were informed by him of the disappearance of a small girl from the resort. There were other GNR officers present at the scene, but he does not remember their names. There were also PJ officers present.
After having established exactly where the girl had disappeared from, he was given a piece of her clothing by one of his colleagues, whose name he does not remember.
From the door of the apartment, accompanied by his dog, he walked around the entire perimeter of the resort and revised the interior of several of the apartments.
As he did not obtain any results in the area close to the resort, he extended the perimeter of the search to a distance of 1 km.
www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html#gnr9
-
Cheers for clarifying this Angelo mate. 8((()*/
I don't know why posters continue to put disinformation about concerning the GNR sniffer dogs but one fact is clear and that is they failed to find anything of any consequence at all.
Nor do I 8((()*/
-
You can call the dogs whatever you want but at the end of the day they all sniff! The GNR wouldn't have brought in two dogs within hours of Madeldines disappearance if they were useless. They failed to follow her trail which is evidence and evidence that she never walked out of that apartment. But then again guys we all know that from the other bits of evidence don't we? @)(++(*
-
Now Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão contradicts Armando Augusto Morais, because you missed this bit off, his statement.
He says that he never entered the apartment which Madeleine disappeared from, he was only in the access corridor to the apartment.
Why on earth would I include an irrelevant comment about where they went in the McCanns apartment?
We are discussing the sniffer dogs on this thread and in particular how effective they were. You corrected Sadie who commented that the night Madeleine disappeared it was cold and windy and the dogs wouldn't have had a chance to scent properly. You claimed it was some 4 days later that the dogs attended.
My post above clearly shows that Sadie was right DCI and that GNR dogs did attend just hours after Maddie was taken so maybe you can apologise to her or at least explain your error.
-
Why on earth would I include an irrelevant comment about where they went in the McCanns apartment?
We are discussing the sniffer dogs on this thread and in particular how effective they were. You corrected Sadie who commented that the night Madeleine disappeared it was cold and windy and the dogs wouldn't have had a chance to scent properly. You claimed it was some 4 days later that the dogs attended.
My post above clearly shows that Sadie was right DCI and that GNR dogs did attend just hours after Maddie was taken so maybe you can apologise to her or at least explain your error.
No apologies needed. No harm done. I said " a couple of days later" because I couldn't remember exactly how many days later ... and I erred on the safe side so as not to upset anyone from the anti camp. Am glad that DCI gave the precise facts. Thanks DCI. Four days later, not a couple of days.. 8((()*/
Thanks for your concern tho' Angelo. Appreciated 8((()*/
-
Why on earth would I include an irrelevant comment about where they went in the McCanns apartment?
We are discussing the sniffer dogs on this thread and in particular how effective they were. You corrected Sadie who commented that the night Madeleine disappeared it was cold and windy and the dogs wouldn't have had a chance to scent properly. You claimed it was some 4 days later that the dogs attended.
My post above clearly shows that Sadie was right DCI and that GNR dogs did attend just hours after Maddie was taken so maybe you can apologise to her or at least explain your error.
One said they didn't go in the apartment, the other said they did, so it was rellevant!
Why do I need to apologise to Sadie?, she seems to know I was correct in my answer to her post. I didn't correct Sadie, I answered her question. Which was "was it? ... a couple on days later"
The error is yours Angelo, you haven't read the posts correctly.
It was a gusty night. Madeleine's feet were about 4 ft off the ground. She had just bathed removing any dead skin and little skin was exposed anyway. Her head and hands were lying against bundleman, so would fall onto her own body or bundleman. That leaves two tiny feet, just washed so no dead skin. and it was a gusty night. Sorry you guys but there would be no scent for a ground sniffing dog to follow, Nor with that gusty weather would there be ant scent left for an air sniffing dog.
That is assuming that it was Madeleine. But we have a golden witness to the abduction and we know that Madeleine did NOT go that way anyhow.
The dogs were either following Madeleine's shoe/feet trail from a previous trip or they were following the sweaty smell of the abductor, which had mingled with Madeleine's on the Towel and blanket..
These same dogs followed the same trail, was it? ... a couple on days later.
You are in cloud Coockoo land if you think that a faint air smell would hang around like that.
My reply to the bold writing
It was actually, 4 days later, Sadie.
How many others would have walked that route after the 4th. It wasn't cordoned off, was it?
From the 4th to the 8th is 4 days, isn't it?
Maybe you should apologise to me 8)><(