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: Angelo222 on March 30, 2014, 03:23:53 PM
-
I thought best to post this observation separately so that members can respond.
Cadaver contaminants and cadaver scent must not be confused. The former is matter and can last for years while the latter is a scent and dispenses within hours.
If KM for example brought contaminated clothing with her from the UK (unlikely imo) then it was contaminant and not scent as some posters have wrongly stated.
I was going to suggest that the terms cadaver, cadaver contaminant, cadaverine and cadaver scent are explained. Anyone offer?
-
I was going to suggest that the terms cadaver, cadaver contaminant, cadaverine and cadaver scent are explained. Anyone offer?
The 'cadaver scent' is actually an array of scents that vary through time, reflecting the various stages of decomposition of a cadaver (and the scents it emits).
Cadaverine is a component of the cadaver scent, also present in the substances of living people, specifically semen or urine.
Cadaver contaminant is where cadaver from a body comes into contact with another surface or object and cross-transfers the scent to that surface or body.
-
This subject is worthy of its own thread given its significance to many other topics.
-
This subject is worthy of its own thread given its significance to many other topics.
As Eddie would react to human remains and body fluids including (dried) blood from a living person...
What's the definition of cadaver scent? I had a minor accident a few weeks ago involving a toe and there was blood everywhere. I mopped most of it up, but only found a few remaining traces a day later. I'm not dead as far as I'm aware, but Eddie and Keela would have reacted.
-
As Eddie would react to human remains and body fluids including (dried) blood from a living person...
What's the definition of cadaver scent? I had a minor accident a few weeks ago involving a toe and there was blood everywhere. I mopped most of it up, but only found a few remaining traces a day later. I'm not dead as far as I'm aware, but Eddie and Keela would have reacted.
If I understand serendipity correctly, Eddie would have reacted to blood only where cadaver scent was also present.
I may have misunderstood.
But if I have understood correctly, I am far from convinced.
The dog is trained to react to blood by being introduced to blood, as a discrete scent, and being rewarded for reacting to it.
That would mean the dog would react to blood, as a scent in its own right.
-
If I understand serendipity correctly, Eddie would have reacted to blood only where cadaver scent was also present.
I may have misunderstood.
But if I have understood correctly, I am far from convinced.
The dog is trained to react to blood by being introduced to blood, as a discrete scent, and being rewarded for reacting to it.
That would mean the dog would react to blood, as a scent in its own right.
You know that for a fact, or are you just guessing ?
-
The 'cadaver scent' is actually an array of scents that vary through time, reflecting the various stages of decomposition of a cadaver (and the scents it emits).
Cadaverine is a component of the cadaver scent, also present in the substances of living people, specifically semen or urine.
Cadaver contaminant is where cadaver from a body comes into contact with another surface or object and cross-transfers the scent to that surface or body.
It would have been so much clearer, IMO, if Grime had referred to human decomposition scent as opposed to cadaver scent.
-
If I understand serendipity correctly, Eddie would have reacted to blood only where cadaver scent was also present.
I may have misunderstood.
But if I have understood correctly, I am far from convinced.
The dog is trained to react to blood by being introduced to blood, as a discrete scent, and being rewarded for reacting to it.
That would mean the dog would react to blood, as a scent in its own right.
I believe that Serendipity said that Eddie and Keela both react to blood, but Eddie also reacts to cadaver, hence the need to use both dogs in tandem.
If I recall correctly, Serendipity did say that Eddie would only react to semen,urine etc if it also contained blood. That could be where the confusion arose?
-
As Eddie would react to human remains and body fluids including (dried) blood from a living person...
What's the definition of cadaver scent? I had a minor accident a few weeks ago involving a toe and there was blood everywhere. I mopped most of it up, but only found a few remaining traces a day later. I'm not dead as far as I'm aware, but Eddie and Keela would have reacted.
Assuming no one disappeared in your house and you are here to say what happened, I don't think anyone would worry about alerting dogs.
-
If I understand serendipity correctly, Eddie would have reacted to blood only where cadaver scent was also present.
I may have misunderstood.
But if I have understood correctly, I am far from convinced.
The dog is trained to react to blood by being introduced to blood, as a discrete scent, and being rewarded for reacting to it.
That would mean the dog would react to blood, as a scent in its own right.
That's not what Grime says...grime says eddie reacts to dried blood from a living person..if serendipity said eddie only reacts to blood when cadaver scent is present then my suspicion she is making it up as she goes along is confirmed
-
I believe that Serendipity said that Eddie and Keela both react to blood, but Eddie also reacts to cadaver, hence the need to use both dogs in tandem.
If I recall correctly, Serendipity did say that Eddie would only react to semen,urine etc if it also contained blood. That could be where the confusion arose?
There is no confusion.
Eddie and Keela react to blood.
Eddie will react to blood (as a discrete scent) or to cadaver scent (as a discrete scent)
Where blood and cadaver scent combine, Eddie will again react.
Keela will not react to cadaver scent.
The weak link in the Eddie-and-Keela combination was always the fact that both dogs react to blood.
I'm fairly certain that in the Keela-and-Morse combination, Morse does not react to blood ...
And Dave ...
I'm with you on that.
-
There is no confusion.
Eddie and Keela react to blood.
Eddie will react to blood (as a discrete scent) or to cadaver scent (as a discrete scent)
Where blood and cadaver scent combine, Eddie will again react.
Keela will not react to cadaver scent.
The weak link in the Eddie-and-Keela combination was always the fact that both dogs react to blood.
I'm fairly certain that in the Keela-and-Morse combination, Morse does not react to blood ...
And Dave ...
I'm with you on that.
So if you are not confused and do understand how the dogs work, what was the point of your previous post?
-
So if you are not confused and do understand how the dogs work, what was the point of your previous post?
The true position is clear.
Serendipity's position is not (at least to me)
-
The true position is clear.
Serendipity's position is not (at least to me)
Could you link to where Serendipity claimed that Eddie only reacted to blood when cadaver was also present please?
That is not how I remember the post. As I stated above, I recall that s/he said that both dogs would only react to semen and urine if blood was also present, which is why I was wondering if that was where your apparent confusion arose from.
-
Could you link to where Serendipity claimed that Eddie only reacted to blood when cadaver was also present please?
That is not how I remember the post. As I stated above, I recall that s/he said that both dogs would only react to semen and urine if blood was also present, which is why I was wondering if that was where your apparent confusion arose from.
could you post a link to support your claim that the dogs have never been wrong
-
If I understand serendipity correctly, Eddie would have reacted to blood only where cadaver scent was also present.
I may have misunderstood.
But if I have understood correctly, I am far from convinced.
The dog is trained to react to blood by being introduced to blood, as a discrete scent, and being rewarded for reacting to it.
That would mean the dog would react to blood, as a scent in its own right.
8-)(--) Yes you've misunderstood everything. Ain't that a surprise. Keela comes in next to confirm if it's blood. If Keela alerts it's blood. If she doesn't work it out genius.
-
Could you link to where Serendipity claimed that Eddie only reacted to blood when cadaver was also present please?
That is not how I remember the post. As I stated above, I recall that s/he said that both dogs would only react to semen and urine if blood was also present, which is why I was wondering if that was where your apparent confusion arose from.
Gilet:
I have now managed to locate a video containing the comments from Martin Grime that I referred to above.
Both Eddie and Keela were deployed in Apartment 5A.
Grime indicates that the alert by the Cadaver dog cannot be attached to a precise location. He states that though the dog alerted in the corner the source of the scent could in fact be anywhere in the room.
I am certain that were that statement to be introduced in court it would make a very interesting discussion point because it is known that Keela alerted within a few metres of that same room and lawyers would want scientific evidence from Grime that there was no possibility that Keela's alert could not have been of the same scent source.
Where Keela alerted blood was in fact found, though it was never linked to the McCanns.
I cannot see that any court could allow the alert by Eddie a few metres away from where blood was found to stand as cadaver odour when Eddie also alerts to blood and Grime states that the precise source of Eddie's alerts cannot be determined.
See here for the comment at 23:15.
Serendipity:
You clearly missed the part where Keela did not alert by the wardrobe then? How many times does it have to be spelled out to you? Eddie was trained to detect cadaver scent and blood whereas Keela was only trained to detect blood so that throws your theory completely out of the window.
Pathfinder:
Why was Keela deployed first in the gym?
-
Gilet:
I have now managed to locate a video containing the comments from Martin Grime that I referred to above.
Both Eddie and Keela were deployed in Apartment 5A.
Grime indicates that the alert by the Cadaver dog cannot be attached to a precise location. He states that though the dog alerted in the corner the source of the scent could in fact be anywhere in the room.
I am certain that were that statement to be introduced in court it would make a very interesting discussion point because it is known that Keela alerted within a few metres of that same room and lawyers would want scientific evidence from Grime that there was no possibility that Keela's alert could not have been of the same scent source.
Where Keela alerted blood was in fact found, though it was never linked to the McCanns.
I cannot see that any court could allow the alert by Eddie a few metres away from where blood was found to stand as cadaver odour when Eddie also alerts to blood and Grime states that the precise source of Eddie's alerts cannot be determined.
See here for the comment at 23:15.
Serendipity:
You clearly missed the part where Keela did not alert by the wardrobe then? How many times does it have to be spelled out to you? Eddie was trained to detect cadaver scent and blood whereas Keela was only trained to detect blood so that throws your theory completely out of the window.
Pathfinder:
Why was Keela deployed first in the gym?
Firstly, thank you for finding the post, secondly, the post contradicts what you previously stated.
-
Keela did the clothes first in the gym because if she alerts for blood it's a waste of time Eddie searching next unless it's not blood.
-
Keela did the clothes first in the gym because if she alerts for blood it's a waste of time Eddie searching next unless it's not blood.
So why was Eddie deployed after Keela didn't alert?
-
Lovely doggy pic, Cariad.
Seems appropriate given the preponderance of canine themed threads...
-
So why was Eddie deployed after Keela didn't alert?
To see if they were cadaver contaminated ofcourse.
-
Firstly, thank you for finding the post, secondly, the post contradicts what you previously stated.
Keela didn't alert but Eddie did.
Fair comment.
-
To see if they were cadaver contaminated ofcourse.
Nope.
Nothing was sent for forensic analysis because uncorroborated dog alerts are not allowed as evidence in English courts.
And indeed, suppose they had found Madeleine's blood on any of the clothes.
So what?
Madeleine sat on mummy's or daddy's knee, gets a nose bleed, transfers a little drop onto the adult's clothing.
Are you going to bang anyone away in jail for 25 years for that?
-
Nope.
Nothing was sent for forensic analysis because uncorroborated dog alerts are not allowed as evidence in English courts.
And indeed, suppose they had found Madeleine's blood on any of the clothes.
So what?
Madeleine sat on mummy's or daddy's knee, gets a nose bleed, transfers a little drop onto the adult's clothing.
Are you going to bang anyone away in jail for 25 years for that?
A brief reminder, if needed ferryman.
This case has nothing to do with this court's.
The crime occurred in Portugal.
Also, if needed arguido status can be reinstated for up to 20 years after the initial period.
-
Nope.
Nothing was sent for forensic analysis because uncorroborated dog alerts are not allowed as evidence in English courts.
And indeed, suppose they had found Madeleine's blood on any of the clothes.
So what?
Madeleine sat on mummy's or daddy's knee, gets a nose bleed, transfers a little drop onto the adult's clothing.
Are you going to bang anyone away in jail for 25 years for that?
Those alerts are to be corroborated with other evidence e.g. if they positively ID Smithman then those alerts will be corroborated.
-
A brief reminder, if needed ferryman.
This case has nothing to do with this court's.
The crime occurred in Portugal.
Also, if needed arguido status can be reinstated for up to 20 years after the initial period.
Don't get your hopes up too high ...
-
Don't get your hopes up too high ...
No worries on that score, are there ? 8)--))
-
A brief reminder, if needed ferryman.
This case has nothing to do with this court's.
The crime occurred in Portugal.
Also, if needed arguido status can be reinstated for up to 20 years after the initial period.
20 years...so we could still hear a lot more about amarals time as head of the Portuguese inquisition
-
Lovely doggy pic, Cariad.
Seems appropriate given the preponderance of canine themed threads...
Thank you Sherlock. He doesn't look like that any more though. For a start he's about 8 stone now @)(++(*
He was a beautiful puppy though.
-
If I understand serendipity correctly, Eddie would have reacted to blood only where cadaver scent was also present.
I may have misunderstood.
But if I have understood correctly, I am far from convinced.
The dog is trained to react to blood by being introduced to blood, as a discrete scent, and being rewarded for reacting to it.
That would mean the dog would react to blood, as a scent in its own right.
Yes you have misunderstood yet again Ferryman. I have NEVER said that. This is what is what I have ALWAYS said:
Eddie was trained as follows:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
'The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.'
And Keela - source http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
'The dog that alerts to human blood is trained exclusively for this purpose, and includes its components, plasma, red cells, white cells and platelets. Given the nature of the training, the dog will not alert to urine, saliva, semen sweat, nasal secretion, vaginal secretion or human skin unless these are mixed with blood.'
Eddie and Keela were used in tandem as a failsafe method to eliminate any chance of false positives. Eddie's original training was to human blood and latterly and mostly to cadaver scent using pigs and human cadavers and Keela purely to detect human blood. That's why the dogs were used in tandem.
Ergo Eddie would be sent in first to a location as part of an investigation to check and if he alerted then Keela was sent in to see if she also alerted. If Keela also alerted then the alert was to blood as that is all that Keela is trained to detect. If she did not alert too then Eddie was alerting to cadaver scent.
I've seen a few posts about body fluids today which are misunderstood by Garana and others. When Martin states :
''Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.RD.) will search for and locate human remains and body fluids including blood to very small samples in any environment or terrain'
He is talking about the fluid which are produced by the body as it breaks down and liquefies and NOT urine, saliva and semen etc/
The dogs alert to two things and two things only. Eddie was trained to alert to blood and cadaver scent and Keela to blood. They would never alert to to urine, semen and faeces etc unless they were mixed with blood.
Also recent claims that Eddie's alert to the wardrobe was due to volatile organic compounds produced by the blood specks found beneath the tiles behind the sofa is frankly ridiculous and I have yet to top laughing.
When Martin Grime states that the scent source can be in a different place to where it can end up, he IS referring to cadaver scent, not blood.
There were no blood alerts in that room! Keela DID NOT alert.
'What we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn't a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner. But *strong indication and I would say its positive for things that he is trained to find, which will be part of a separate debrief.'
*Note my asterix and bolding above - Eddie was trained to alert to blood, and trained to alert to cadaver scent.
The text below is taken from: EDDIE & KEELA MARTIN GRIMES REPORT http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
'CADAVER SCENT
The odour target of cadaver is scientifically explained through 'volatile organic
compounds' that in a certain configuration are received by the dog as a
receptor. Recognition then gives a conditioned response 'ALERT'.'
This document explains all about bodies and volatile organic compounds, scent cones and pooling
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WTXuc7BjA-QC&pg=PA16&lpg=PA16&dq=scent+cone+cadaver+dogs&source=bl&ots=XREMMLEHza&sig=byZDj6-I1NNSu4UVt29qwhm9JAY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q7c2U4yFFeev0QXMzoHYDw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=scent%20c
Eddie was not trained using cadaverine during his cadaver training but was trained on pigs and human cadavers.
Research from March 2013 blows the myth that Eddie possibly alerted to urine, bad breath, semen or other substances out of the water.
The following is sourced from https://ir.library.dc-uoit.ca/bitstream/10155/315/1/Stadler_Sonja.pdf and is further supported here http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0039005
Cadaverine and putrescine are products of amino acid breakdown and were previously thought to be the main contributors of decomposition odour. It was also beleived that these volatile compounds are a target for cadaver dogs. However research into the VOCs produced by pig and human decomposition was UNABLE to identify these two diamines. This casts doubt on the importance of putrescine and cadaverine as key components in decomposition odour.
And on that note, I am off to enjoy the rest of my Sunday evening.
-
'Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.R.D.) will search for and
locate human remains and body fluids including blood in any environment or
terrain.
(...)
'Keela' The Crime Scene Investigation (C.S.I.) dog will search for and locate
exclusively human blood.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
'Taking into account the signals of CSI, could the dog alert to other biological fluids''
The dog that alerts to human blood is trained exclusively for this purpose, and includes its components, plasma, red cells, white cells and platelets. Given the nature of the training, the dog will not alert to urine, saliva, semen sweat, nasal secretion, vaginal secretion or human skin unless these are mixed with blood.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
'Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.R.D.) will search for and
locate human remains and body fluids including blood in any environment or
terrain.
(...)
'Keela' The Crime Scene Investigation (C.S.I.) dog will search for and locate
exclusively human blood.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
'Taking into account the signals of CSI, could the dog alert to other biological fluids''
The dog that alerts to human blood is trained exclusively for this purpose, and includes its components, plasma, red cells, white cells and platelets. Given the nature of the training, the dog will not alert to urine, saliva, semen sweat, nasal secretion, vaginal secretion or human skin unless these are mixed with blood.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
seems serendipity getting a bit confused
-
I don't know who is getting confused, but where does Grime state that blood is the only fluid from a living person that Eddie would react to?
I don't find any such clarification in his personal profile, report, nor in his answers to the rogatory questions.
-
They [Eddie and Keela] would never alert to to urine, semen and faeces etc unless they were mixed with blood.
The principal constituent of pseudo-scents is cadaverine, also contained in urine and semen.
Grime says Eddie will not react to pseudo-scents.
So what scent was that sample pair of pants 'perfumed' with that Grime was asked to task Eddie to find in the Sam Parker case?
"...We also saw video played in the courtroom to demonstrate how another dog, Eddie, found a sample pair of pants hidden in the Walker County Jail that was perfumed with a cadaver scent. Eddie is an English Springer Spaniel belonging to Martin Grime, a world-renown forensic K-9 expert based in the United Kingdom.
http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=1001.85;wap2
-
I posted one of the links that Serendipity has just posted two days ago somewhere on one of these moving threads. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0039005
What I had found interesting is Fig 4. Only 20 of the hundreds of VOCs are released within the so-called fresh period which is between 1-4 days.
How many and which would be released within a PMI of only 1.5 hours that would still be discernible 3 months later in the absence of an identifiable porous material in the uncontrolled environment of an apartment which had been occupied and aired by a multitude of families until being locked up one week prior to the inspection?
-
I posted one of the links that Serendipity has just posted two days ago somewhere on one of these moving threads. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0039005
What I had found interesting is Fig 4. Only 20 of the hundreds of VOCs are released within the so-called fresh period which is between 1-4 days.
How many and which would be released within a PMI of only 1.5 hours that would still be discernible 3 months later in the absence of an identifiable porous material in the uncontrolled environment of an apartment which had been occupied and aired by a multitude of families until being locked up one week prior to the inspection?
don't forget the alert in the flower bed...wind..rain
-
I posted one of the links that Serendipity has just posted two days ago somewhere on one of these moving threads. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0039005
What I had found interesting is Fig 4. Only 20 of the hundreds of VOCs are released within the so-called fresh period which is between 1-4 days.
How many and which would be released within a PMI of only 1.5 hours that would still be discernible 3 months later in the absence of an identifiable porous material in the uncontrolled environment of an apartment which had been occupied and aired by a multitude of families until being locked up one week prior to the inspection?
Excellent question.
Even more so, how would any of those volatile compounds have lingered long enough to have to have been discernible in the flower garden, exposed to all the elements, where Madeleine (if she rested there at all) would have been for a still shorter period of time ...
You beat me to the punch, Dave ...
-
don't forget the alert in the flower bed...wind..rain
The hypothesis was worth checking... but nothing was found.
-
I've seen a few posts about body fluids today which are misunderstood by Garana and others. When Martin states :
''Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.RD.) will search for and locate human remains and body fluids including blood to very small samples in any environment or terrain'
He is talking about the fluid which are produced by the body as it breaks down and liquefies and NOT urine, saliva and semen etc/
The dogs alert to two things and two things only. Eddie was trained to alert to blood and cadaver scent and Keela to blood. They would never alert to to urine, semen and faeces etc unless they were mixed with blood.
"and body fluids including blood"
He does not distinguish between blood which may be from a living human being and other body fluids.
In the answers to the rogatory questions, he was only asked about blood.
'The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
The bit that seems to be missed is the dogs do not react to fresh blood. Alerts will only be made to dried blood.
"In order for the dog to locate the source the blood must have 'dried' in situ. Any 'wetting' once dried will not affect the dog's abilities. Blood that is subjected to dilution by precipitation or other substantial water source prior to drying will soak into the ground or other absorbent material. This may dilute the scent to an unacceptable level for accurate location."
www.eddieandkeela.blogspot.co.uk/2008/08/martin-grime-report-to-pj-mccann-case.html
-
At the end of the day still two questions? How did it get in situ?? And how did the CSI miss it?
And now we're at the end of the day. Boa Noite
How do what get in situ? And what did the CSI miss?
There was no forensically confirmed blood in 5A, nor in the Scenic for that matter. We're assuming that there was behind the sofa, on the key card and in the boot because that's all the Keela is trained to detect. One or all may have been, but there's no confirmation of that.
-
With all respect Carana that I understand but for me one of the key questions is if there were to have been any presence of blood in Apartment 5A how did the CSI team apparently miss it?
I apologize if I'm sounding somewhat pedantic on this issue but picking up on any trace of blood is one of the paramount jobs of any CSI team.
As it is if there were any presence on the key-card why not on the door-handle, the steering wheel, the gear lever, the brake, the dashboard, the driver seat, etc?
Ah. I see what you mean about the car. Keela only reacted to the boot (and the key card). A bit odd.
-
Ah. I see what you mean about the car. Keela only reacted to the boot (and the key card). A bit odd.
Eddie didn't sniff the seal around the boot or go in it from watching the footage. The key card was buried in a sand bucket that was hidden on the far side of the car park and Eddie found it and alerted to confirm. The question is did he find it buried under sand to confirm that it was cadaver contaminated aswell as blood? I would think so but it's a question for Martin Grime to confirm.
"At 04h50, a new inspection was performed by Eddy on the parking level -4 where the above car
key was concealed in an area far distant from the vehicle.
At 04h51, it was verified that the dog 'marked' the area of a sandbox [bucket of sand] of the Fire
System where the car key had been concealed beneath the sand."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm)
-
http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2014-03-31/homan-remains-found-at-golf-course/
Woofers from South Wales Police were deployed today.
-
Serendipity says in reply #30 that, "Eddie was not trained using cadaverine during his cadaver training but was trained on pigs and human cadavers."
Dogs are trained using human remains in the USA, but use of human remains for training purposes is illegal in Europe.
When and where did Eddie receive training using human remains?
-
Serendipity says in reply #30 that, "Eddie was not trained using cadaverine during his cadaver training but was trained on pigs and human cadavers."
Dogs are trained using human remains in the USA, but use of human remains for training purposes is illegal in Europe.
When and where did Eddie receive training using human remains?
"The use of human remains
for the purpose of training dogs in the U.K. is not acceptable at this point in time. The
dog has however considerable experience in operational recovery of human remains
and evidential forensic material and has trained exclusively using human remains in
the U.S.A"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
-
"The use of human remains
for the purpose of training dogs in the U.K. is not acceptable at this point in time. The
dog has however considerable experience in operational recovery of human remains
and evidential forensic material and has trained exclusively using human remains in
the U.S.A"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
I believe the first (and only) time Eddie went to America was after Grime retired, for the Sam Parker case ....
http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/t1945-poacher-s-view-on-grime-and-the-dogs
-
I believe the first (and only) time Eddie went to America was after Grime retired, for the Sam Parker case ....
http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/t1945-poacher-s-view-on-grime-and-the-dogs
He has additionally trained exclusively using
human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Ferryman, I've supplied Mr Grime's own words in a legal document. You've posted a link to a forum.
As source's go, mine is considerably better than yours 8(0(*
-
It must be pointed out that the posts on some obscure forum by this Poacher, who by the way claimed to have worked alongside Martin Grime, must be treated as uncorroborated forum speculation. Some of the claims are quite libellous and should not be repeated here.
Maybe Serendipity would address the claims and put the record straight once and for all.
-
It must be pointed out that the posts on some obscure forum by this Poacher, who by the way claimed to have worked alongside Martin Grime, must be treated as uncorroborated forum speculation. Some of the claims are quite libellous and should not be repeated here.
Maybe Serendipity would address the claims and put the record straight once and for all.
Martin first took the dogs out to the FBI Body Farm in 2005. The body farm only uses human remains.
Not about much at the moment as not too well but will catch up with other threads in the next few days :)
-
Martin first took the dogs out to the FBI Body Farm in 2005. The body farm only uses human remains.
Not about much at the moment as not too well but will catch up with other threads in the next few days :)
Thank you for replying Serendipity. For far too long Martin has been denied an opportunity to put the record straight. The claims that he never took dogs to the USA are malicious fabrications. Can you please confirm which dog or dogs made the trip with Martin?
Sorry to hear you are not well, hope you feel better soon.
-
Poacher was slightly out in estimating the number of deployments as 80.
The true number is 37
-
Martin first took the dogs out to the FBI Body Farm in 2005. The body farm only uses human remains.
Not about much at the moment as not too well but will catch up with other threads in the next few days :)
I think it is worth taking a look at whatever it is that singles out Eddie’s skills, considering the emphasis on his status as an EVRD.
A quick search gives training standards and certification expected for dogs in the USA, where the use of human body parts has been customary for many years.
When was certification introduced?
If it was prior to 2005 it should be easy enough to confirm Eddie’s enhanced status with sight of a copy of his certificate.
Published on 10 Jan 2013
Cadaver dog Murphy during a training exercise. Murphy was trained by Joe Blake at Joe Blake's School of Professional Dog Training. Murphy is commissioned by Trace Missing Persons Ireland, to carry out searches for Ireland's missing people. Trainer Joe Blake has over 25 years experience working with dogs he Certified in the USA and is well established among the professional sectors including Law Enforcement Agencies. Patch was trained in the USA and holds the NNDDA Certification. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swXcuiLdte8
http://www.uspcak9.com/certification/grounds-certification-cadaver.pdf
http://barksar.org/NNDDA_cert.pdf
-
Thank you for replying Serendipity. For far too long Martin has been denied an opportunity to put the record straight. The claims that he never took dogs to the USA are malicious fabrications. Can you please confirm which dog or dogs made the trip with Martin?
Sorry to hear you are not well, hope you feel better soon.
Thanks John, I'm getting ocular migraines which make reading the screen difficult due to a very wacky kaleidoscope effect across my vision. They come and go making it difficult to post often at the mo but hopefully will be gone soon :) Martin took both dogs over to the US.
-
Doesn't matter where they trained if Grime says in an official statement to the police that their alerts have no evidential value
-
Thanks John, I'm getting ocular migraines which make reading the screen difficult due to a very wacky kaleidoscope effect across my vision. They come and go making it difficult to post often at the mo but hopefully will be gone soon :) Martin took both dogs over to the US.
So sorry to hear you are out of sorts Serendipity, I sometimes get the same thing especially when Sadie is pushing her Moroccan fantasy.
-
So sorry to hear you are out of sorts Serendipity, I sometimes get the same thing especially when Sadie is pushing her Moroccan fantasy.
It's not a fantasy. Maddie was sold for 100 grand.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3799.msg142951#msg142951
-
Doesn't matter where they trained if Grime says in an official statement to the police that their alerts have no evidential value
That elusive evidential value might just come home to roost yet. Never say never eh??? @)(++(*
-
It's not a fantasy. Maddie was sold for 100 grand.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3799.msg142951#msg142951
The Daily Retard?? @)(++(* 8@??)(
-
That elusive evidential value might just come home to roost yet. Never say never eh??? @)(++(*
I think tic toc is the term you are looking for
-
I think tic toc is the term you are looking for
That's the one.
Who knows what might yet crawl out from under one of the stones so far left unturned.
-
As we know the dog alerts mean nothing at all unless evidence is found which can be led in a court case.
As a complete amateur who knew nothing about cadaver dogs, I ripped the videos of the dogs to shreds in my mind the first time I saw them. Subsequent viewing reinforced that initial reaction, and I have often wondered how they would fare in an open court with an experienced lawyer taking them apart frame by frame.
In 1988 the DNA fingerprint was first admitted as evidence in court in the case of Florida v. Tommy Lee Andrews. http://education.llnl.gov/bep/socsci/11/tEvi.html
Elaine Doyle was murdered before DNA evidence was available for use in court and the contamination of crime scenes was less of an issue.
But that hasn’t stopped the defence team using such alleged mismanagement of the crime scene as part of their case.
A competent defence would in my opinion demolish any evidence collected from 5a, particularly at a remove of three months and when the subsequent occupancy is taken into consideration.
THE SCOTSMAN
Elaine Doyle muder hunt ‘hampered’ by blanket
by BRIAN HORNE
Updated on the 03 April
2014 00:08 Published 02/04/2014 17:44
AN ATTEMPT to hide a dead schoolgirl’s naked body from prying eyes was a “potentially catastrophic blunder”, a murder trial has heard.
Elaine Doyle, 16, was found in a lane near her Greenock home more than 27 years ago.
The jury at the High Court in Edinburgh heard the strangled girl was covered with a blanket from a police car before being taken to the mortuary.
Retired detective inspector James Goldie, 76, yesterday vehemently denied he had covered the teenager’s body. “I am desperate to tell you I did not at any time cover the body,” he said.
Mr Goldie also insisted that he had not ordered anyone else to cover Elaine.
Defence QC Donald Findlay described the action as “a humanitarian thought”.
But the lawyer added: “That was a potentially catastrophic blunder by police at the scene.”
Mr Goldie replied: “I agree.”
Mr Findlay added: “It could have blown apart any chance there was of tracking down the real killer of Elaine Doyle.”
Mr Goldie was shown a number of statements he made during the long-running murder hunt. In June 2012 he told detectives that he had been informed residents in a building were looking over the scene.
Two men were also approaching the scene in a lane leading to lock-up garages.
Mr Goldie’s statement continued: “I told him – it was a young male officer – to go to tell the residents to move back into the house. He walked a few yards then turned to say he had some blankets in his panda car so I told him to place them on the garden side [fence] to hide the view of the body.”
Mr Findlay said the jury would hear “100 per cent guaranteed gold-plated evidence” that a blanket had covered the girl. He added: “Somebody should have the guts, the honesty, the integrity to come forward and say, ‘This was my fault’.”
On trial is John Docherty, 49, now of Dunoon, who denies murder. He claims that at the time he is alleged to have stripped and strangled the teenager, he was at home with his parents, who are no longer alive.
Docherty has also lodged a special defence of incrimination suggesting the culprit might be among a list of 41 names taken from files of the police investigation into the murder.
Mr Goldie agreed that police had a responsibility to ensure an innocent person was not wrongly incriminated or accused by corrupted evidence.
Mr Findlay said that whatever the motive was, covering the body was a mistake.
“Not only might it have removed evidence which might point to the guilty person, it might lead to evidence being brought into the crime scene which pointed to an innocent person.”
“Possibly,” agreed Mr Goldie.
The trial continues.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/elaine-doyle-muder-hunt-hampered-by-blanket-1-3362376